This browser is supported only in Windows 10 and above.


Fun With Slate’s Hollywood Career-O-Matic

Fun With Slate’s Hollywood Career-O-Matic (photo)

Posted by on

I’m good at my job because I’m eternally curious about the world of movies. And I’m bad at my job because I’m eternally curious about the world of movies. Once I find something about movies online, it’s kind of hard to stop looking at it. My doctor calls it “Internet addiction.” I call it my “mutant power.” We agree to disagree.

Today my obsessive tendencies have me playing with a new web page from Slate called The Hollywood Career-O-Matic. Basically Christopher Beam and Jeremy Singer-Vine used the movie review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes to compile sets of data about working Hollywood actors and directors. When you enter a name into the Career-O-Matic, seen above, it spits out a line graph charting the ups and downs of that filmmaker’s critical reception over time. By moving the mouse over the points on the graph, you get pop-ups of the names of the movies, their release date, and their Rotten Tomatoes score. It’s a fun, user-friendly way to access the scope of a filmmaker’s career and to see, in an instant, what someone’s best and worst reviewed movies were (Michael Bay’s best? “The Rock.” His worst? “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.”).

But it gets much more interesting from there because you can plug more than one name into the Career-O-Matic, and compare two or more filmmakers’ careers side-by-side. For example, the graph above was actually the very first one I plugged into the Career-O-Matic: Arnold Schwarzenegger vs. Sylvester Stallone.


The results aren’t perfect; the Career-O-Matic doesn’t filter out cameos (something that would be apprecaited in a C-O-M 2.0), which means Schwarzenegger’s second best received picture is “Dave,” which he is barely in. And the database only goes back to 1985; meaning Arnold is spared the unflattering comparison of “Hercules in New York” versus “Rocky.” But it is still fascinating to compare these peers’ work in this way. The best reviewed picture either ever made during this period is “Terminator 2: Judgment Day;” while the highest score Stallone’s received came for his voice only, as an animated bug in “Antz.” It’s also interesting to observe how both of their careers cratered simultaneously in the mid- and late-90s, suggesting shifts in public taste for action films, and how they’ve enjoyed a slight resurgence in the last half-decade, suggesting a certain nostalgia for their style of films.

Okay, so I got the obvious out of the way. What’s next? How about this one:


Director versus director, brother versus brother, Ridley and Tony Scott. Again, we’re limited by our data starting in 1985 (meaning no “Alien,” “Blade Runner,” or “The Hunger”) but we do see similar gradual downward trajectories in both cases. At least until recently; it does seem the reevaluation of Tony Scott as something of a phantom auteur by certain artier sects of the critical community has begun to seep into criticism at large. While three out of Ridley’s last four films have been amongst the worst reviewed of his career (and the fourth, the dreadful “American Gangster,” received an impossibly generous score of 79), Tony’s stock is on the rise: after bottoming out with “Domino,” he rebounded with “Deja Vu” (which is inexplicably absent from his graph) and “The Taking of Pelham One Two Three,” then scored his best reviewed movie in fifteen years with last year’s “Unstoppable.” The numbers are so close between them I’m not sure who comes out on top. Someone get these two to dual it out in a vicious battle of slaps to determine the winner.

All right, one more before I lose all day to this thing.


Here we’ve got arguably the two biggest names in American independent film since the early 1990s, Quentin Tarantino and Steven Soderbergh. Clearly, Tarantino takes the match in terms of average score; other than the dark spot on his directorial career that is the anthology “Four Rooms,” Tarantino doesn’t have a film to his name that rates less than a 60. Soderbergh has a lot more critical flops (and his own poorly received anthology, “Eros”) but he’s also got a lot more movies, period. As you can see from the long stretch between dots on his green line, in the six years between Tarantino’s “Jackie Brown” and “Kill Bill: Volume 1,” Soderbergh made seven movies, including “Traffic,” “Eric Brockavich,” and “Ocean’s Eleven.” Also, it’s kind of surprising that the highest rated Tarantino movie isn’t “Pulp Fiction;” it’s “Reservoir Dogs.” I don’t know anyone who prefers the latter above the former, but that’s not necessarily the way Rotten Tomatoes works. They chart consensus, not passion.

I could go on and on with this thing. And I want to. But I’ll leave it here for now. It’s time for you to play with the Career-O-Matic for yourself. I’d love to hear some more comparisons in the comments section; maybe we can do a follow-up post later of the most interesting ones.

Got a good combination for the Hollywood Career-O-Matic? Tell us about it in the comments below or on Twitter or Facebook!

Watch More

The Best Of The Last

Portlandia Goes Out With A Bang

Posted by on

The end is near. In mere days Portlandia wraps up its final season, and oh what a season it’s been. Lucky for you, you can watch the entire season right now right here and on the IFC app, including this free episode courtesy of Subaru.

But now, let’s take a moment to look back at some of the new classics Fred and Carrie have so thoughtfully bestowed upon us. (We’ll be looking back through tear-blurred eyes, but you do you.)

Couples Dinner

It’s not that being single sucks, it’s that you suck if you’re single.

Cancel it!

A sketch for anyone who has cancelled more appointments than they’ve kept. Which is everyone.

Forgotten America

This one’s a “Serial” killer…everything both right and wrong about true crime podcasts.

Wedding Planners

The only bad wedding is a boring wedding.

Disaster Hut

It’s only the end of the world if your doomsday kit doesn’t include rosé.

Catch up on Portlandia’s final episodes on demand and at

Watch More

Your Portlandia Personality Test

The New Portlandia Webseries Is Going Your Way

Posted by on

Carrie and Fred understand that although we have so much in common, we’re each so beautifully unique and different. To help us navigate those differences, Portlandia has found an easy and honest way to embrace our special selves in the form of a progressive new traffic system: a specific lane for every kind of driver. It’s all in honor of the show’s 8th and final season, and it’s all presented by Subaru.

Ready to find out who you really are? Match your personality to a lane and hop on the expressway to self-understanding.

Lane 10: Trucks Piled With Junk

Your junk is falling out of your trunk. Shake a tail light, people — this lane is for you.

Lane 33: Twins

You’re like a Gemini, but waaaay more pedestrian. Maybe you and a friend just wear the same outfits a lot. Who cares, it’s just twinning enough to make you feel special.

Lane 27: Broken Windows

Bad luck follows you around and everyone knows it. Your proverbial seat is always damp from proverbial rain. Is this the universe telling you to swallow your pride? Yes.

Lane 69: Filthy Cars

You’re all about convenience. Getting your car washed while you drive is a no-brainer.

Lane 43: Newly Divorced Singles

It’s been a while since you’ve driven alone, and you don’t know the rules of the road anymore. What’s too fast? What’s too slow? Are you sending the right signals? Don’t worry, the breakdown lane is nearby if you need it.

Still can’t find a lane to match your personality? Check out all the videos here. And see the final season of Portlandia this spring on IFC.

Watch More

Last-Minute Holiday Gift Guide

Hits from the '80s are on repeat all Christmas Eve and Day on IFC.

Posted by on
GIFs via Giphy, Photos via The Everett Collection

Watch More