ScreenRantReviews 116

I thought ScreenRant was fairly okay before, but at least as it exists today, it is of fairly dubious quality content at the very best. Many of its articles these days are nothing but: "It's wrong to think of this character or that character as anything but villainous" or "These moments in these movies are not acceptable today".

Dozens of users on sites such as Reddit have also highlighted the apparently low quality of ScreenRant articles nowadays, and how unconfirmed rumors and poorly sourced fan theories are often used to write articles to generate more views -- or which actors on some TV shows have a worse reputation than others (one article mentioned how "it has been said" by certain seemingly unnamed peoples that an actress "can be rude" at conventions). A bit ironic that so many writers at a site who constantly write about things being "offensive" do not seem to hesitate when viciously attacking, labeling or smearing other individuals quite regularly.

With all due respect, from my personal impression, some of their articles seem more like high school girls' high-strung social media rants rather than truly legitimate and valid criticism of any piece of art or entertainment. Please, for the sake of us all, do a little better, ScreenRant, and try to re-evaluate and improve your standards.

They hire just about anyone. Just saw a link on Google titles "write for us". Clicked on it and it's your name, phone number, and email with OPTIONAL boxes to state your merit and any ideas you'd have once hired. Every single topic, whether it be videogames, anime, MBTI, cars, celebrities -- you name it -- is completely off and very obviously not researched. If you want anything accurate, don't go to them. Sites such as The Gamer, EuroGamer, Polygon, Forbes, etc., are also highly inaccurate. ScreenRant seems to be the most inaccurate and the most consistently inaccurate.

The formula is: Dc comics negative highlights generate clicks for the Marvel fans and for the DC fans... and the random ones.

Marvel Comics negative highlights generate clicks only from the MArvel fans and the random ones. No Dc fans.

So i will drop any generical negative angle for any DC productions and garantee my internet cash! That´s it.

It´s just a fanboy Marvel site to proliferate any fake news and speculation only for the clickbait sake. If no conflits comes around, if the nerdsphere is in peace with complete satisfaction for all the productions that come with us... this site will genereta enough negative buzz for no marvel studios productions just for the sake to generete conflit... stay relevant... and more clicks.

I used to work for Screen Rant, so I have first hand experience witnessing their decline. From the standpoint of the reader, the site actually has solid news coverage, attracting exclusive interviews with big name celebs like The Rock. What ruins Screen Rant is that their news coverage isn't popular enough to sustain them, so in the last few years they turned to doing listicles to boost the clicks they get. And to their credit, the plan was successful. But the problem is, the listicles have now become the focus of the site, and the news has taken a backseat.

As someone who wrote for them, I can tell you that the editors don't care what the readers think. They advised us writers on numerous occasions to just not read the comments so we wouldn't have to see negative feedback. If you criticize them, the editors dismiss you as a baseless hater.

Screen Rant has continued to struggle even with their listicles, so they've slowly ramped up the workload for the writers, and delved into sleazier topics to get attention. It's not uncommon to now see articles about sexualized superheroes, celebrity drug scandals, and other tabloid quality writing. It doesn't even pay well anymore since they have repeatedly slashed the pay for writers. At this point, I'm glad I'm gone from there because the whole vibe behind the scenes is that Screen Rant is a sinking ship.

There are so many better news sites out there, so support them instead. Don't give your attention to Screen Rant now that they have devolved into shameless clickbait. They are unprofessional and not worth your time.

Screen Rant was a great source of news and review for a long time. I think that when Vic sold the site that's when it became click-bait garbage. The writers somehow think throwaway sentences from impromptu interviews count as news, and they've been called out for making mountains out of molehills. Most recently I remember James Gunn criticized them for misrepresenting a quote of his about Guardians of the Galaxy 2, where the "journalist" in question wrote an article for a shocking headline but ultimately betraying the trust of the filmmaker, a filmmaker that screen rant's editors claim to enjoy.

Speaking of, even the lead editor of the last 7+ years recently left the company. Could it be that the new owners are more interested in clicks than quality? That'd be a shame, because it used to be the opposite. Now Screen Rant pumps out crap like opinion lists and quizzes. The occasional movie review slips through, but usually their reviews are out of touch. For example, when Iron Fist was released on Netflix, Screen Rant easily put out more than ten articles on why Iron Fist was so bad and no one liked it, even though their comments section was full of readers who claimed they DID in fact like Iron Fist. Sadly, the truth about Screen Rant lies in their comments section, as long are allowed to post. After calling out perhaps one too many writers/editors for wrong facts or misrepresentation, my comments are automatically marked as spam. There's no spam, I'm not pasting links or soliciting business. I'm merely sharing my opinion and knowledge. The old Screen Rant loved their fanbase interaction, but now it's some sort of totalitarian regime. So I say so long Screen Rant. Good luck with the clicks.

I agree with Maverick O.'s review stating ScreenRant blatantly clickbaits its headlines, copy/pastes stories without an editor's eye, and censors comments it does not like. This morning I pointed out two clickbaiting headlines titles that were outright lies. SR deleted my (and others') posts, as well as a comment I left about how doing so was pretty shady. I'm now apparently banned from commenting because SR is incapable of receiving criticism. They lost a reader because of that.