I agree. IMDb has changed drastically since I first registered. Now anyone can write the synopsis, and most of the time it's written by someone with poor English. They used to be written clearly. And the people that write about the ratings seem to be writing for extremist religious people only, listing every scene that shows someone in shorts, bathing suits, cleavage, males without shirts--scenes we can see in real life watching some sports events or typically in the summer at beaches and parks, and clothing store posters. They also list every instance of people hugging, kissing and holding hands! It's ridiculous! I can only imagine these contributors, who turn what should be a simple search for pertinent information into a tedious frustration chore, must be shut-ins who have nothing else to occupy their time.
I find that Wikipedia provides the best synosis along with the top critics' opinions, and the box office reception, if it won a Raspberry Award, etc. I actually never base my decision to see a movie solely on a critic's opinion.
I check these sites to see if a movie is one I'd like, my wife and I would like and if it's one we'd watched with various ages, whether due to sex, nudity, profanity and/or violence. Here, on IMDb, some teens give a movie a low rating just because it doesn't show female nudity. Some fantanics do so if there's a scene of someone killing a chicken, even if it's a movie based of true events. It's rare to find a fair non-extremist critique of a movie here. Then people turn the comments into a big argument. I think that's why most people come here, to argue. Ok, I've wasted enough time on this. The movie's finished downloading.
Under our clothes, we are all naked!
reply
share