12 Sci-Fis With Bafflingly Low Rotten Tomatoes Scores

Shane Black made the best Predator movie. End of story.

Mars Attacks Rotten Tomatoes
Warner Bros.

In a perfect world, critic scores and evaluations wouldn't matter. If you watch a film and truly enjoy it, it wouldn't harm your movie-watching experience if cinema snobs and professional critics had a different opinion.

But sometimes a score really gets to you; you're amazed by the consensus that a film you loved is bad or not as well received as you'd thought. Are you seeing something they're not? Or is your standard of a good film considerably lower than others?

The answer is neither, and some films just resonate in different ways to other people. In the world of science-fiction, the element of creativity is extended and what we see on screens scratches an itch you wouldn't normally get from a period piece or a contemporary thriller.

There are some films that haven't been watched in a long time, that are remembered fondly (or at least not as poorly) that were really disliked by critics. Scoring low definitely doesn't mean a film is bad. So much now are movies looked back and enjoyed ironically, but then there are some that carried a certain charm to them that they just had to be universally liked?

Yet they weren't, and it's weird to see.

With that in mind, let's take a look at twelve science-fiction films that carry surprisingly low scores on Rotten Tomatoes.

12. The Matrix Revolutions - 35% Score

Mars Attacks Rotten Tomatoes
Warner Bros.

Right out the gate, this one!

The Matrix Trilogy didn't exactly conclude the way fans hoped, and it could be argued the back to back sequels weren't necessary to begin with, but for what it's worth the Wachowski's did put thought into the movies; it's just a shame they cared about aspects that fans of the films didn't.

Between Reloaded and Revolutions, the latter is the better film and while it can be a bit cringing to watch at times, knowing it has a 35% scoring on Rotten Tomatoes feels a little vindictive from the critics. Perhaps they were still soured from the messy second film, and Revolutions came out far too soon?

Admittedly, there are legitimate complaints to be had about the movie; the Neo vs Smith fight amounts to a live-action rip of Dragonball Z (except we can't see half of what's going on in this film) and 75% of the machine invasion of Zion is presented with characters the audience genuinely doesn't care about.

But behind that is the symbolism and metaphors the Wachowskis set up from the very first film. They don't pay off on a first watch and need to be revisited to fully appreciate what was foreshadowed.


I overthink a lot of things. Will talk about pretty much anything for a great length of time. I'm obsessed with General Slocum from the 2002 Spider-Man film. I have questions that were never answered in that entire trilogy!