The Room has a 35% critics rating which is ridiculous (20% too high). It must not be rated as a movie, but as a conversation piece.
I thought mine would be Eyes Wide Shut, but I see it has a Tomatometer reading of 74%. I think this is a movie with a far better critic score than Internet score.
I enjoyed Green Hornet (2011), though it is not going to win any awards. It is rated at 43%.
*Jennifer’s Body *at 42%.
*Ginger Snaps *has a rating of 89%! I am not having good luck what guessing will have a low Tomatometer reading.
*Southland Tales *has a rating of 36%. On a scale of 1 to 100, I would personally rate this movie as yellow, or possible the scent of compost.
I don’t follow movies on Rotten Tomatoes, so not sure if they got good scores or bad, but a lot of my friends and co-workers disliked both Hancock and Battle for LA, and I enjoyed both movies.
I liked Hudson Hawk as well, so I guess that is probably the lowest score of a movie I liked.
XT, go to the Internet Movie Database. Enter the movie you want the score for. Click on External Reviews. Click on Rotten Tomatoes. This will give you the score.
Equilibrium is at 38%. I like it, while simultaneously recognizing that it’s trash.
I don’t know if it’s the lowest, but I like Xanadu, with a 39% rating.
I know. I was just trying to establish a base level of reviews to have. I know Star Trek and Oscar are not obscure; we just don’t have an adequate sampling of their reviews.
Sorry. I almost feel a hostility from you about it. I just wanted to point out a level of reviews to count.
In some ways this is a bit circular, since (especially in the last several years) I tend not to go out of my way to see movies with exceptionally low RT scores. I’ll see a lot of them on TV five years down the road, but even then I won’t be paying 100% attention. My wife does have a thing for Bad Jason Statham Movies, and there are a couple in the ~40% range that I’d describe as “eminently watchable” - Parker, Homefront, etc.
I tried the IMDB Advanced Search thing too, and mostly it just reminded me that there are a lot of bad movies out there, even if you’re limiting it to films that get released in theaters.
Ok. Hancock got a 42% which I assume is bad. Battle for Los Angeles got a 35%, so presumably that’s worse. 
I thought The Number 23 was okay: 8% Critics, 56% Audience.
And I REALLY liked Aeon Flux: 10% Critics, 39% Audience. I don’t know why that one got shit on so badly.
Not quite as critically un-acclaimed, but The Thirteenth Floor is one of my favorites: 29% Critics, 64% Audience.
But it looks like the one that takes the cake is Movie 43: 4% Critics, 24% Audience. I would never argue it being a good film (it’s just a series of skits), but it was so bizarre that I found it hilarious.
I would like to watch movies with you all the time. Seen Blood of Heroes a million times.
I’ll watch Battlefield: Earth (3%) if it’s on TV.
Harlem Nights gets a 21% rating which I think is shameful for all the comedic talent piled into that movie. It’s funny the whole way through and I’ve been a fan since long before I could even understand half the jokes.
Seems to be The Lone Ranger and Chappie, tied at 31%. 51 & 55% for the audience, respectively.
I’ve always thought Little Nicky was enjoyable and occasionally clever. Rotten Tomatoes disagrees to the tune of 22%.
I’m going to declare Oscar my choice. Panned when it came out, I got to see it on TV and thought it was really funny.
Dude, Where’s My Car? got an 18%, and while that doesn’t beat my previous mention of A Thousand Words (0%), it’s still notably low. I love Dude.
The first movie that came to mind, was Toy Story. Rotten Tomatoes scored Toy Story & Toy Story 2 at 100%, Toy Story 3 at 99% & Toy Story of terror at 92%. Toy Story 3 was better than 1 & 2…it should get a 150% at best.
Definitely “Oscar”, also. I thought it was hilarious, and the comedic timing was perfect.
As for the movie I loved that Rotten Tomatoes hated: 13% Oscar (1991).