My argument was more than just a 46% Metascore. Not only do the D Plus (35% to 39%) on Rotten Tomatoes and the 46% (C Neutral) Metascore not stand it out enough to compete with much worse films, but it has more B's than D's on Metacritic, Plusses and Minuses notwithstanding. Remember, that implies that besides the critics who didn't mind Snatched, most of them actually liked it, and hardly any disliked it.
Honestly, I think Dun-Ida's just picking on the most average films every month because his or her outlook on terrible vs forgivable films conveniently happens to be inverted from the consensus. All I've gotten from his or her post is he or she just saying the performance or the script or whatever element sucked with nothing more than rudimentary regard for why they were inferior.
To oiram: Snatched has slumped once again in approval ratings with pro critics and absolutely plunged with common audiences, so I'm considering it as a middle runner for the RAZZIES and my annual worst films list.
To Dun-Ida: The only reasons Attack of the Clones swept the RAZZIE semifinals in '002 when so few other films with neutral reviews could manage that since then were because of the botched romance between Anakin and Padme which apparently didn't bother critics that badly, and for being in the shadow of The Empire Strikes Back.
I just saw it. For your consideration: Worst Screenplay. Oh, and maybe:
-Worst Actress for Amy Schumer nor for Goldie Hawn.
-Worst Supporting Actor for Óscar Jaenada nor for Bashir Salahuddin.
-Worst Supporting Actress for Wanda Sykes.
-Worst Screen Couple for Schumer and Hawn.