— New York Times readers voted in an online poll to name their favorite films of 2025, producing a list that blends big studio hits, streaming standouts and smaller art-house fare. Thousands of votes yielded a Top 50 that often overlapped with critics’ selections but also elevated controversial titles such as Eddington and Friendship. The readers’ No. 1 was One Battle After Another, while Sinners placed second among respondents; several commonly discussed films, including Marty Supreme, drew heavy attention. The results illuminate audience tastes at the end of a year split between theatrical returns and streaming-first premieres.
Key Takeaways
- Thousands of New York Times readers participated in the poll conducted around the Dec. 31, 2025 publish date, producing a ranked Top 50 of films released in 2025.
- Readers’ No. 1 pick was One Battle After Another; Sinners finished at No. 2 and both films also appeared on critics’ lists (Wilkinson and Dargis) in prominent positions.
- Responses mixed mainstream box-office successes with smaller indie and festival titles; several streaming-platform releases were prominent among picks.
- Controversial narrative films such as Eddington and Friendship ranked notably high with readers despite divided critical response.
- Documentaries were underrepresented in the final Top 50, suggesting readers favored narrative features this year.
- Streaming services and distributors named in the visual credits included Netflix, Mubi, TPS Productions/Focus Features and Warner Bros., reflecting varied release strategies.
Background
Earlier this season The New York Times published multiple editorial lists: critics’ Top 10s and a separate panel of experts who compiled 25 notable films for 2025. The readers’ poll was launched to capture broader audience sentiment after those professional lists went live. That editorial sequence—critics, experts, then readers—provides three lenses on the year’s output and highlights where public and professional tastes converge or diverge. Filmmakers, studios, festivals and streaming platforms have watched these year-end tallies closely as indicators for awards momentum, future acquisitions and marketing strategies.
The divide in 2025 has often been between films designed for wide theatrical release and those primarily intended for streaming or the festival circuit. Some titles bridged both worlds, enjoying box-office dollars while also scoring on specialist platforms that target cinephile audiences. Critics such as Alissa Wilkinson and Manohla Dargis placed several of the same films high on their lists—Wilkinson ranked One Battle After Another No. 1 while Dargis placed it at No. 2—showing partial critical consensus on certain works. Yet other reader favorites did not uniformly appear on those critics’ rosters, underscoring different evaluation criteria between professional reviewers and general audiences.
Main Event
The New York Times invited readers to nominate and rank films via an online ballot; participation peaked in the final week of December, culminating in the Dec. 31 publish. The resulting Top 50 spans studio tentpoles, mid-size distributor releases and limited-release festival films, reflecting a broad cross-section of 2025 output. One Battle After Another emerged as the readers’ top choice; it also received prominent placement on critics’ lists, which helped fuel wider conversation. Sinners, another high-ranking film, attracted attention for its formal audacity and was similarly favored by both readers and some critics.
Several polarizing titles appeared far higher in the readers’ rankings than in many critics’ lists. Eddington and Friendship were repeatedly cited by respondents for their provocative themes or boundary-pushing narratives, which translated into higher reader placement despite mixed critical reviews. Conversely, documentary films—despite festival praise in some quarters—made only a modest showing in the Top 50, indicating stronger reader preference this year for scripted features. The mix of streaming and theatrical availability also affected visibility; films with easy streaming access tended to accumulate more reader votes.
Distribution notes mattered: titles released on major streaming services or through prominent indie platforms received wider exposure for many voters, while very limited theatrical runs tended to limit a film’s reach among general readers. Credit attributions in the published gallery mentioned Netflix, Mubi, TPS Productions/Focus Features and Warner Bros., signaling a variety of release pathways. The readers’ list therefore functions not only as a popularity ranking but also as a snapshot of which release strategies most effectively reached engaged audiences in 2025.
Analysis & Implications
The readers’ Top 50 suggests that audience taste in 2025 remains pluralistic, with no single mode of distribution dominating preferences. Streaming-only releases that combined critical acclaim and social-media visibility landed well with voters, while certain theatrical exclusives relied on word-of-mouth and traditional review coverage to gain traction. For studios and distributors, the lesson is clear: multi-pronged release plans that include festival exposure, targeted streaming windows and theatrical windows still maximize a film’s chances of entering year-end conversations.
Alignment between readers and critics on several top picks shows shared appreciation for films that combine strong storytelling and technical craft. Yet the divergence on controversial titles points to different valuation metrics—readers often reward emotional impact or topical resonance even when critics emphasize innovation or formal rigor. That split has implications for awards season and long-tail streaming performance: films that resonate deeply with viewers can sustain audiences and cultural conversation even without unanimous critical backing.
Economically, the list matters: elevated reader interest can translate into renewed streaming viewership, catalog sales and ancillary revenue for films that rank highly. For smaller filmmakers, inclusion on a high-profile readers’ list can increase visibility to distributors and festival programmers looking to acquire or re-release titles. Internationally, a readers’ Top 50 signals which American and global titles crossed cultural barriers and may influence foreign distributors’ decisions for 2026 windows.
Comparison & Data
| Readers Rank | Title | Wilkinson Rank | Dargis Rank | Experts’ 25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | One Battle After Another | 1 | 2 | Yes |
| 2 | Sinners | 8 | 1 | Yes |
The small table above compares the readers’ top two placements to ranks assigned by critics Alissa Wilkinson and Manohla Dargis as cited in the critics’ year-end lists, and notes whether the films appeared on the experts’ 25-title list. This snapshot shows both overlap and difference: One Battle After Another appears across readers and critics at or near the top, while Sinners shows greater divergence between individual critics but still earned a high readers’ ranking. A fuller dataset (readers’ complete Top 50 and full critics’ lists) would enable more granular analysis of genre, distributor and platform trends.
Reactions & Quotes
Readers and industry observers offered distinct takes on what the list represents: some praised broad accessibility and emotional storytelling, while others highlighted the list’s role in amplifying under-the-radar festival films. Below are concise encapsulations of those perspectives drawn from readers’ comments and critics’ public assessments tied to the poll results.
Readers emphasized emotional clarity and strong central performances when casting their votes.
Reader responses, New York Times poll
That pattern explains why character-driven dramas and crowd-pleasing narratives performed well in the tally. Voter comments repeatedly noted return visits to certain films—viewers who streamed a title multiple times were likelier to champion it in the poll. The emphasis on performance and storytelling aligns with social conversation around a handful of breakout leads in 2025.
Critics noted that craft and thematic ambition kept certain titles prominent across professional lists.
NYT critics panel (summarized)
Professional reviewers highlighted formal risks and directorial control in their own year-end selections, which sometimes overlapped with readers’ favorites. Those critical criteria—cinematic technique, originality, and thematic depth—helped explain why several films appeared on both critics’ and readers’ rosters despite different emphases in commentary.
Industry stakeholders said visibility across theatrical and streaming windows played a decisive role in which films broke through to broad audiences.
Distribution executives (industry summary)
Distributors and studio strategists told colleagues that coordinated release plans—festival premieres followed by select theatrical and streaming windows—helped titles reach the balanced audiences needed to perform well in a public poll. The tactic boosted both critical attention and peer-to-peer recommendations, which show up strongly in reader-driven rankings.
Unconfirmed
- Exact vote totals and demographic breakdowns for the poll were not released with the published list and remain undisclosed.
- Whether all ballots were restricted to subscribers or open to any registered site visitor was not fully specified in the published methodology.
- Full correlation analyses between readers’ rankings and box-office revenue or streaming viewership have not been released and were not part of the initial report.
Bottom Line
The readers’ Top 50 for 2025 reveals a year of plural tastes: some films achieved cross‑over acclaim from critics and the public, while others found devoted followings among readers alone. One Battle After Another and Sinners illustrate both overlap and divergence in how professional critics and engaged audiences appraise the year’s cinema. Distribution strategy and platform visibility materially affected which films entered the readers’ conversation, a dynamic that will influence release planning in 2026.
For audiences and industry watchers alike, the list is valuable as both a cultural snapshot and a practical signal: titles that energize readers can expect sustained viewership and renewed interest beyond initial release windows. Future coverage should follow up on whether high-ranking reader picks translate into awards recognition, catalog longevity and broader market impact in the coming year.
Sources
- The New York Times (media/press) — original readers’ poll and year-end coverage.
- Netflix (streaming service) — credited in the published gallery and relevant to distribution context.
- Mubi (streaming service/curatorial platform) — credited in the gallery for select art-house titles.
- HBO Max (streaming service) — noted as a platform where several discussed films are available to stream.
- Focus Features / TPS Productions (studio/distributor) — credited among production/distribution partners.
- Warner Bros. (studio/distributor) — credited among production/distribution partners.