Why such a low score?
This movie is pretty fun. I was surprised to see it at a 6.2. I expected it to be at least a 7.0
sharei think it deserves an even higher rating than that. it was a really funny movie. clever and smart.
____________________________________
http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?big%20jerm
"IMDb publishes weighted vote averages rather than raw data averages. Various filters are applied to the raw data in order to eliminate and reduce attempts at 'vote stuffing' by individuals more interested in changing the current rating of a movie than giving their true opinion of it.
The exact methods we use will not be disclosed. This should ensure that the policy remains effective. The result is a more accurate vote average."
Big Trouble has only been voted on by under 7,000 users. Scarface for example has been voted on by ten times that amount and recieved a 8.1 rating. I'm willing to bet the weighted average takes into account the amount of users that voted. So, although most users gave this film a 7, the weighted average is less than that. If more people voted it would probably recieve a higher rating.
Agreed though, this is a really fun and quirky movie and really under rated.
http://www.myspace.com/mickeyduffy
thanks for explaining, travis!
i hope that more people will see the movie so it can get the recognition it deserves. like, it should be re-discovered or something.
hopefully then the imdb rating would go up :)
this definitely doesn't feel like a 6.2 movie. i agree it should be higher. it feels like a 7.8 movie. or 7.5.
"Mein Fuhrer! I can walk!"-Dr. Strangeloveshare
Ive just endured this dross for the last 85 mins or so and im amazed its got anywhere over 3/10
This garbage is just a lazy 1 joke effort from a fairly impressive cast who are just treading water in there roles
I didnt laugh once but there was nothing to laugh at as the entirity of the movie is premised on how many times u can bump a nuclear bomb in a suitcase into objects without it detonating.
Just my opnion on a BAD movie that i will never ever ever suffer through again.
Lighten up Morpheus640!! It wasn’t a great movie, the box office proves that. It did have its funny moments though. Laugh at whatever you can buddy! Life is too short to be a (insert your own expletive here)!!
shareOkay, there was a reason why this movie did badly in the theatres and on here:
It was originally going to be released around September of 2001. After the 9/11 attack, however, it was pushed back, since the reference to a nuclear bomb on a plane would probably have scared people. It was quietly put into theatres and quietly taken out.
So basically, it wasn't bad at all (my opinion). It's just that it suffered from low advertisement.
I read the book on which this movie was based, and after laughing my ass off, I decided I knew I would see this movie. That was the month before it was supposed to be released. Of course, 9/11 changed everything, and because of that all the trailers and TV ads for it dried up and I had no choice but to reread the book until the movie came out the next April.
While the movie Big Trouble was not as much of the laugh riot that the book was, I enjoyed it even with the scene in which the garbage disposal is turned on at airport security. Which is hopefully not how they run airport security these days (I don't fly much).
Did I mention that I read the book in under one day?
I disliked the book tremendously. The movie is way better. As an aside, I'm a fan of Dave Barry -- he just cannot write a decent novel.
shareI read the book in one day as well. Its great.
and airport security is a bit worse than the one presented in the film. They make you take your shoes off now. and apparently they ration the amount of liquids you can carry on a plane as well. Because more than three ounces of shampoo will KILL US ALL.
Nuclear bombs cannot be set off by being bumped. Maybe it isn't the film that's stupid here.
"It's that kind of idiocy that I empathize with." ~David Bowie
Exactly. if it could be set off by one little bump then what was the point of the count down timer? this is more of the nuclear bomb that terrorists use in a Tom Clancy novel.
shareThat wouldn't be a weighted average.
A weighted average is an average where some of the votes are given more weight (i. e., influence over he outcome) than others. They might, for example, give less weight to votes cast by someone who always gives moves ether a minimum or a maximum score, under the assumption that such voters are merely trying to adjust what they perceive as an unfair score. Or they might give less weight to those who have cast relatively few votes, or vote only for movies with certain actors or from certain studios. But a weighted average is still an average of the actual values being averaged; it would not be artificially inflated by a larger data set nor depressed by a smaller one.
Yeah, I guess this one slipped trough the cracks, I hope that this will change as time goes on and people start to catch up...
Only movies that are worth watching: http://www.rabbit-reviews.com