The Bright Red Line This Critic Won’t Cross

Hollywood in Toto began as the “Right Take on Entertainment.” ’nuff said.

There were still certain rules in place from the beginning – nearly 12 years ago.

• No gossipy fluff – Justin Bieber’s new tattoo is shocking!
• No rumors – This actor could be the next 007!
• And, most importantly, no attacks on a star’s physical appearance

Yes, Michael Moore doesn’t have a slender build. I’ll leave it that. I’ve still been highly critical of him in large and small ways. I never insulted his size, wardrobe or similar elements.

That was never the plan. And it won’t change anytime soon.

Of course, some stars and starlets are more appealing than others. Some dress down for roles, or scruffy themselves up for this reason or that.

It’s not my job to judge them. More specifically, it’s not appropriate to include those descriptions in a movie review.

That got a critic in hot water just a few years ago. A Variety critic claimed that Carey Mulligan may not have been alluring enough to play the lead in “Promising Young Woman.” Said critic publicly apologized.

So did Variety.

Now, another Variety critic is catching heat for his review. Veteran Owen Gleiberman scorched “Supergirl,” saying it was one of the worst scripts in recent memory.

That hyperbole got called out, but the bigger issue to me is how he described the film’s heroine, played by Milly Alcock. The star looked like “Kristy McNichol crossed with the Feral Kid from ‘The Road Warrior.'”

That’s not a compliment. It’s also unkind and unnecessary. The Feral Kid was presented as odd and physically different.

The comment also doesn’t shed any light on the film or Alcock’s performance.

It’s just … mean.

Gleiberman remains an excellent critic, even if his Trump Derangement Syndrome occasionally gets the better of him. That “Supergirl” review is not his finest hour.

Critics in toto should review the films, not the actors’ on-screen appeal.