That review has a rating higher than "splat." I doubt that it will be added to the official rotten tomato collectivist list of critical reviews.

A splat? Its a long series of splats about minor technical issues and comparisons to Part 1, starting with the author saying he has "a lack of personal interest" which is a cover for his true intent in his anti-free-market brainwashed state. He goes on to state that he didnt review Part !, but doesn't make clear if he ever watched part I although many of his comments are comparisons to part I. Are any of these comments from personal experience, or is he just parroting other reviews without even seeing Part !? Furthermore, would any potential viewer outside a hollywood insider care about the authors opinion on minor technical issues? Derogatory Comments having nothing to do with the film itself, but much to do with the authors personal views -never underestimate the power of a wealthy producer -It’s time for me to bite the bullet. -“Part II” has been constructed with a noticeable lack of money - “Atlas Shrugged” is a political story and a slightly goofy one at that - Whatever relevance the material had in its publication year of 1957 is largely diluted now - the world’s overpopulation woes posing a great challenge to Rand’s construction of objectivism - Mathis wearing a series of cleavage-boosting outfits - Lillian is reimagined as a dominatrix-type Based on the commentary I'd have expected one star, but the author, being a selfless looter is charitable and donates a star to the needy.