Why does some clown's review panning the film show as the main review?

What the hell is up? I just watched this film and thought it was quite good as an indie dark comedy/thriller, so I come to IMDb to check out some details about the film and on the main page there's some deluded know-it-all blathering on about how this film is deritative of David Lynch and Blue Velvet in particular...

Well, nothing could be further from the truth. First of all, this film did not come in the wake of Blue Velvet--I'd say being produced 6 years later is not a rip-off--and while, yes, it does have moments of black comedy that resemble some of Lynch's work in Twin Peaks and Blue Velvet, it's definitely not trying to ape Lynch's approach because there's no non-sequitars in logic, or droning apprehensive music overlaid over every scene of slight dramatic tension.

But what's really upsetting me is that although every other reviewer who saw the film were generally positive toward the film and recommended it, the one tight-ass who judged it deritative and a copycat and dismissed it gets to be the main review to read when you scroll down on the main detail page. Why is this nattering nabob so blessed at the expense of the other majorly positive reviews? Just because he blathered on for the most expense of words perhaps?





"Oh..my...God.....IT'S DIPPPPP!!!!"
> Jessica Rabbit