On Monday, Rotten Tomatoes publicists were in full spin mode, insisting the gap for “Melania” scores—between the film’s 99% audience rating and its paltry 7% critics score—was not the biggest discrepancy in the aggregate’s history. Sure, because if you squint really hard, 99 minus 7 is just… a rounding error?
However, now RT is admitting that, yes, the 92-point difference is indeed the widest ever recorded for a movie. Are we shocked? These discrepancies continuously happen with films aimed at conservative audiences. That 2024 “Reagan” movie starring Dennis Quaid? 18% critics score, but 98% audience.
However, “Melania” is one for the history books—or at least Rotten Tomatoes footnotes—a film beloved by ticket buyers, most of whom voted for Trump, and reviled by critics, most of whom didn’t. It is officially the champion of extreme rating disparities.
Truly, a historic accomplishment.
Is it any wonder Amazon/MGM refused to screen “Melania” for critics? Press had to buy a ticket on opening day to review it. Quite honestly, is it possible for anyone to evaluate “Melania” with complete objectivity? One look at the lone four reviews on RT, and they all come from conservative-minded outlets: The London Evening Standard, The Epoch Times, The Standard, and The New Republic.
Those who bought a ticket got exactly what they expected, fully ready to embrace the doc, and critics had their knives sharpened the minute this project was announced—the result is something akin to a social experiment in mass schadenfreude.
Now, is “Melania” a good documentary? I wouldn’t know, and I have no interest in seeing it in theaters—maybe I’ll catch it when it hits streaming. At this point, though, it doesn’t really feel like a proper film; it comes across more as a vanity project aimed at female MAGA supporters curious enough about the first lady to buy a ticket.