I dislike him because he makes awful movies. Period!

Why the web hates Ratner
Across the entertainment landscape of the Internet, perhaps no director is so reviled as Brett Ratner. The bloggers, it seems really, really hate him. And while they gleefully admit to hating lots of people, their most searing venom tends to be reserved for Ratner.
Defamer has described him as a “preternaturally hacky” director (we can’t print what Defamer’s readers like to call him in the comments section.) And Suicide Girls’ entertainment blogger Kevin Seccia is planning to file a post called “Brett Ratner: Please Kill Yourself” imminently.
Which left us wondering why. Surely the world of entertainment is rife with loathsome people, ruining franchises, destroying beloved characters. What has Mr. Ratner done to upset the fanboys and film loving bloggers so deeply?
There was, of course only one way to find out. Ask the entertainment bloggers themselves. So The Los Angeles Times sent out a mass email to a few of our favorite web folks and asked them the simple question. “Why does the web hate Brett?”
Here’s what they had to say.
Chris Thilk,
“The net hates Brett Ratner because he symbolizes everything that’s slick and soulless about Hollywood right now. So much of the net is devoted toward celebrating films that are off the beaten path and feature original voices and brave performances. Ratner, on the other hand, is all about style with absolutely no substance. He’s like a frat boy with a $150 million budget. The net, on the other hand, is all about sending people down the Long Tail toward more worthwhile, artistic films. He’s everything the net has set out to protect people from. And to add insult to injury his movies often make decent cash, which just infuriates people.”
Jeffrey Wells,
“Because he gets paid too much and laid too much for being, at best, a passable but mediocre director. It’s not that he’s greatly hated — Michael Bay and McG have been much more deeply despised. Last week’s Ratner-bash came in response to Scott Foundas’ L.A. Weekly piece that argued that Ratner is a serious director who’s worthy of respect. That’s what caused the big outburst. Ratner’s a likable guy, all in all.
Erik Davis,
“Apart from the fact that he’s one casting session away from an appearance on Dateline’s To Catch a Predator series, the guy’s films are all style and no substance. When he stops using scripts to get himself laid, and starts using them as the first step toward a compelling motion picture, perhaps “The Web” will like him more. But seeing as his smile is creepier than his take on Hannibal Lecter, I’d say most folks aren’t very optimistic.”
Kevin Seccia,
“I think they hate Brett because, for whatever reason, people enjoy movies that are well made… and Brett has yet to bother catering to that. Also, I think when you’re the least interesting person in the room… and this room also contains Paris Hilton, the last thing you should be doing is putting your vision’ on screen.
I mean, he accomplishes more in less time. It took him one movie to undo what Brian Singer accomplished in 2.”
Berge Garabedian,
“I don’t personally hate him myself (‘The Family Man’ is actually one of my favorite movies), but the sense is that he comes from a rich background (i.e. he’s spoiled), doesn’t really know all that much about movies (started as a rap-music video director, I believe) and messed up the ‘X-MEN’ franchise with part 3 — although in his defense, the producers who hurried the project were more to blame for that, in my humble opinion. He also seems to be known more for partying and nailing hot chicks than directing, which probably bothers some as well…hehehe. I’d say that he’s more of a so-so director who’s caught some damn lucky breaks, it seems.”
Dave Davis, (too)
“This isn’t necessarily my own opinion (not completely), but I think the general perception is that his success is unjustified — he seems to have skated on minimal talent, an abundance of luck, and being a very slick talker to the people in the business who matter. Some people are probably annoyed by his socialite behavior and a few bonehead statements he’s made to the press (and more than a few rumors about his aloof filmmaking process and extracurricular activities), while he has yet to develop any real visual style to define himself as a director. That said, I wouldn’t mind being him for a few days.”