The All-Time 100 BERRY Worst??

ROTTEN TOMATOES HAS LONG BEEN ONE of OUR BERRY FAVORITE WEB SITES, BUT THEIR RECENTLY COMPILED LIST of WHAT THEY CALL "THE 100 WORST-REVIEWED FILMS of ALL TIME" (LINK) HAS LOTS of PROBLEMS. WHY DO THEY INCLUDE DIRECT-to-VIDEO TITLES? WHY ISN'T THERE ANYTHING EARLIER THAN ABOUT 1997 LISTED? WHY ARE SO MANY FREDDIE PRINZE MOVIES INCLUDED? AND, MOST IMPORTANTLY of ALL, WHY DO THEY SO OFTEN IGNORE THEIR OWN USUAL RANKING SYSTEM? (EXAMPLE: ZOOM HAD a 2% APPROVAL RATING as a 2006 RELEASE, YET DOESN'T MAKE THEIR TOP 10).

FEEL FREE to POST YOUR THOUGHTS, DISAGREEMENTS, WHAT-EVERs BELOW. AS for US, WE LIKE THE IDEA...BUT WE'RE NOT THAT THRILLED WITH ITS EXECUTION...

HALLE: "How did I end up at the tail end of the litter box??"

SHARON: "Ha! Ha! I finally beat you...You're only #100, and I'm ranked #69..." 

HALLE: "Well, at least your NUMBER is appropriate!"

How can Rotten Tomatoes claim this is an "All Time" list, when there's literally nothing older than 1999 included? And the fact that several of this year's movies made the list undermines my faith in the memory span of RT's critics: How can "Because I Said So" be included, but nothing by Ed Wood, Irwin Allen or any other pre-1990 film-makers? And who cares if their choice as #1 got the worst reviews ever if almost NO ONE has actually seen it??

I used to be a big fan of RT, but the list is so poorly compiled, ranked and presented, it makes me question my loyalty to the site...