The media and the public really didn't expect Ye Wei's response to the long article to be so sharp, he seemed to be reasonable, and he had an extra shield, David Merrick.

Teacher Grace Essie, who taught Ye Wei, laughed and sighed, a typical VIY prank! The object of the trick was about to go crazy, and he could justifiably excuse himself: "I'm letting you see what it means to be misleading!" And since the 50-year-old David Merrick is praised as a classic, it still really deceived the audience for six months, and the 18-year-old I didn't lie to anyone, but I just blackened myself in one day, by the way, why is it not good to see you make a fool?"

Everyone naturally noticed the humor in his writing, and the most intriguing was undoubtedly the passages ridiculing popular sports movies, and fans annotated him on the comment board:

"An old man" is obviously referring to "Million Dollar Baby", which is also a "coach-player" movie, the coach of this kind of movie is generally a down-and-out problem loser, and the "old black man coach who spent time in Shawshank Prison" is not Morgan Freeman, who else can he be, he plays God in the fantasy comedy "The Impostor", smiling, not scary at all.

Freeman is also one of the two boxing coaches in "Million Dollar Baby" who taught the heroine boxing (Oscar for Best Supporting Actor), the other being Clint Eastwood (Oscar nomination for Best Actor), and "white wool beard" is supposed to refer to him. Ye Wei called their coaching duo "pandas", half black and half white.

TAKING AN OSCAR FOR BEST PICTURE REPRESENTS THE PROLIFERATION OF POLITICALLY CORRECT SPORTS FILMS, THIS HOMOPHONIC JOKE FROM COACH TO GUCCI, PRADA TO PANDA IS IRONIC. Many movie fans hit LOL, not only humorously, but also made a wise response to the main doubts in the film critic industry, which cannot be said to be unreasonable.

There is also a confident "film critics will praise me twice more in the year", the media know that this is it, and it can be used as a news statement! Today, a voice just criticized Ye Wei for not filming "Winter Bones" well, and spent all his time on making trouble, and he dared to say such crazy things in "Soul Surfer", which he messed up like this.

But Ye Wei seems to be deliberately expanding his attention, and after a self-directed prank, this war of words has involved more people, and it has also been on the Google News hot search list. used to be an ordinary film review controversy, but now it has developed into entertainment gossip.

The film critics who have been slammed are probably trembling with anger. Lou Ramnick doesn't know about others, he himself is really angry, he has scolded so many filmmakers, and for the first time, he was tricked, as if he really committed some stupid, shameless boy!

Owen Graeberman, who has been teased repeatedly, couldn't be in a better mood, 47 years old, an important member of the New York Film Critics Association (film critics in more than 30 mainstream New York publications), Ye Wei was not born when he started writing film reviews.

Before waiting for any reaction from the film critics, Ye Wei simultaneously updated an article titled "It's Time to Review Film Critics", indicating that the media is welcome to reprint.

The fans laughed excitedly when they saw it, this is VIY's killing! The media was also in an uproar, and this time it was not only Graeberman who made a fool of himself:

[For a long time, filmmakers have only been scored by film critics, and the audience can only watch whether they give a thumbs up or a middle finger.

So which film critic should we believe? Who is the most reliable film critic? Who is the worst? Who is the advertising machine, who is the mediocre, who is the most "film cold", who is the most enthusiastic, who is the most vicious, who is the most clichéd, and who is the most fair and strict, whose film critics still adhere to the honor of film critics?

To get to the bottom of these questions, our team worked around the clock over the weekend to find out some interesting results by using real data from Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes, and analyzing it with critics. Since the film critics have worked hard but few people have paid attention to them, we have prepared some trophies to reward them. Who's going to win the Dumbest Film Critics Award? It's time to judge them!]

Ye Wei's team targeted the 50 most influential film critics who are still active in the public eye, all of whom are members of the North American Broadcast Film Critics Association (the BFCA Awards are one of the most important Oscar vanes in recent years), and Sean Edward and his ilk have been ignored as usual.

The team roughly divides a movie as GOOD or BAD with Metacritic's 60 scores, so as to find out the 200 good films and 200 bad films from 1996 to 2006, that is, the last ten years, and all 50 film critics have seen 50 of them, only a lot more.

According to their personal average score on Metacritic, they are compared with Metacritic's average rating of film critics, average audience rating, and average audience likability on Rotten Tomatoes, which are divided into good, bad, and comprehensive, which gives a reference result of how well their film reviews are written.

For example, a film critic has rated 100 good movies with an average score of 80 points, and has rated 100 bad movies with an average score of 65 points and a comprehensive score of 72.5 points. And the three comparison items are 65 points, 68 points and 70 points, which means that this film critic, who is 2.5 points higher than the most avid Rotten Tomatoes user, is talking nonsense every day, or he is used to getting high before scoring and writing reviews, in short, any Rotten Tomatoes user knows better than him how to distinguish the good and bad of a movie, and any sentence is more objective and critical than his film reviews.

Ye Wei wrote in the article: "The more sample movies the more illustrative the problem, I wanted to count at least 500 per person, and only 100 were due to time constraints, but it is already in line with science, and it will be necessary to complete it in the future." He also said that Roger Albert was not among the 50 critics, because Albert, who had won the Pulitzer Prize, would not compete with his peers for these awards, but would still publish Albert's review.

The results are laid out at a glance in the horizontal bar chart, and the media public is amazed that Irving Graeberman is in the top spot, and his average rating for each item is higher than that of his peers and the general audience, and not a little higher...... The good score is 90.6, the poor score is 73.09, and the overall score is 81.45, which is 16.3% higher than its peers (the poor score is even 24.3% higher)!

Ye Wei commented: "Owen, it's you again! But why aren't we surprised at all? Probably this is the style of "Entertainment Weekly", although we don't know what it is. Perhaps because of the lack of competition, Owen's brain was worn out, and in the process of statistics, we found out that he gave "Justice Strikers" a B+, "It wouldn't be surprising if Simpson could continue to rise after hanging up her super-shorts", Jessica Simpson, be optimistic about your super-shorts, someone is making up their minds. Owen also rated "Lord of Dogtown" A, "a rare youth rebellion myth", and the bigger myth is actually that they all have higher ratings than B in "Goodfellas". We will ignore C's "Little Sunshine Beauty", after all, this kind of example will not surprise Owen here. Owen, take it, the fool's film critic award, you have to be. 】

Fans laughed and some people went to check, and it was true, "Goodfellas" and LMS, the two Oscar-nominated films for Best Picture, scored 96% and 97%, 97% and 95% respectively on Rotten Tomatoes, and Graeberman gave B and C. Ye Wei quoted his film review sentence "It-will-be-no-surprise-if-Simpson's-star-keeps-rising-long-after-she-has-hung-up-her-short-shorts." It was there that Graeberman originally intended to praise Simpson for acting well, and he didn't have to be sexy to be an actor, and he laughed to death when VIY explained it.

Many people suddenly understood why Ye Wei grabbed Graeberman to make jokes, it turned out that he already had an inside story, no wonder he disliked his praise for "Soul Surfer" A.

This award is not only the winner of the review, but also all the surprisingly high film critics. Ye Wei continued to present the award with his vicious words, and the second place in the fool's place went to Steve Purcell of the Tampa Bay Times, who lost by only a narrow margin, 16% higher than his peers and 7.8% higher than the audience.

[With the highest rating of 74, no one can beat Steve's perseverance in praising bad movies, and he praised "Blue Passion" as "a carnival!" Considering he lives in the sweltering heat of Tampa Bay, it was indeed a carnival. At times, he makes some unbelievable moves, commenting that "Children of Men" is "a well-thought-out gunfight adventure film, and it's well made." "Then it was rated B. It may not be his fault that he is not clear-headed, it is just that it is too hot. 】

Purcell also gave SS a B-, and although he praised it as "quite interestingly bright and encouraging", he "as a critic is going to complain about its flaws".

In third place went Lisa Schwarzbaum, another film critic at Entertainment Weekly, with a 12.7 percent higher score than her peers.

[It is precisely because of Lisa's presence that Owen does not seem so embarrassed in his work unit, they are like The Green Hornet and Kato.] Under Irving's leadership, Lisa has tried her best to be picky at Entertainment Weekly, but people always love it, Lisa is definitely a big fan of Britney Spears, and she used "Crossing the Country Road" with B+ praise and reviews for "Britney Spears was sent to the big screen safe and sound, and our favorite 20-year-old superstar girl is on the highway to fame." "This 2002 teen movie was supposed to make Britney a movie star, but we haven't seen Britney's second movie so far, maybe it was a car accident. (Don't get me wrong, I'm also a big fan of Britney, oh baby.) ）】

The followers were dumbfounded by Ye Wei's out-of-tune jokes, and even Xiao Tiantian ridiculed him, which is really cheap! It is rumored that he and Justin Timberlake are good friends......

Sure enough, it's an epic war of words! VIY fans don't care who he jokes about, this is really a carnival!

VIY attacked almost all mainstream film critics with a well-founded group of mouths, and the explosive firepower was completely overwhelming.

There is no difference in reviews, two film critics in the Los Angeles Times, Kenneth Turan who praised SS "Gangbusters" ranked in the middle of the no danger, only 4.1% higher than his peers, and Becky Sharkey, who has not rated SS but has scolded "Carrie" as a "great shame", she ranked fifth, with a rating of 10.7% higher than her peers and 4.3% lower than the audience, with limited credibility.

[Betsy Sharkey is an enigmatic character, and in her years of writing for the Chicago Tribune, she praised a lot of bad movies, such as "Scream 3", which even Irving Greyman criticized as "the only thing this movie kills is your time", as a masterpiece. We don't know exactly why Becky screamed, but it's safe to assume that it had nothing to do with the horror. By the way, she also often praises some low-rated romantic comedies to the sky. 】

Everyone can see that Ye Wei is satirizing Sharky for not understanding horror films, and seizing the opportunity to vent his anger for "Carrie".

After judging these brilliant foolish film critics, it's mediocre film critics. Stephen King posted an article in 2004 to bombard the mediocrity of a group of film critics such as Richard Corlis, and the bad movies have been evaluated steadily. The person who won the most mediocre film critic this time was none other than Time Magazine's Collis, whose rating was the closest to the public, with several values differing by less than 0.1.

[Incredibly accurate, it is about Corlis's psychological grasp of the ordinary audience, and he is a mirror of the American people. So Corlis's film review is no different from the strangers you hear talking about in the cinema, or even asking a random child in kindergarten what they think, like my 5-year-old sister, who would also say that Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was a "great movie". If you ask Owen to comment, "the only thing you get from reading Corlis's article is a waste of time", and there is a waste of paper. 】

USA Today's Claudia Pugh with 0.2 percent and The Hollywood Reporter's Kirk Hornick followed with a narrow 0.3 percent second and third place. Their film reviews are also all in the style of safety first, and they are almost all nonsense.

Both gave SS a 2/4 of the median, saying good on the one hand but it should be better, and its religious tone prevented them from playing good reviews.

["Ye Wei's humor is in the wrong place, and his irrational attitude makes people speechless. In a film critic controversy, Pugh said. Now in the face of cold data, I don't know how Pugh feels? She seems to understand reason as mediocrity, and it is difficult to find super shorts from her film reviews, not for nothing, she praised "Farm Madness" as "a sweet, gentle, and funny film that warmly entertains young audiences", and I happened to have seen this comedy that was scolded by the film critics, how can I say it...... Pugh also gave the highly-rated "Christmas Elves" a two-star rating, "not annoying but too sweet like syrup." ”】

[When Hornett gave bad reviews to the likes of "Moulin Rouge," "The Pianist," "Frida," and "The Secret Life of the Dentist," "The film lacks specific personal moments that bring the audience into the story and identify with the characters." He said of "The Pianist". But Hornett has a knack for getting the rating back from the pile of bad movies, and after watching "Spicy Baby," which Schwarzbaum rated D and Pugh scored 1.5/4, "It may be junk food for high blood sugar, but the inspirational team of rising young actress Britney Murphy and big-fledged Dakota Fanning will make you forget about those dangerous sweeteners." "No wonder I don't like dentists. 】