Dawn of the Dead 1978 and Imdb.com

[Philly_SWAT]

For this post, I will assume most of you know what imdb.com is. If you dont, I suggest you check it out, it is the best movie resource of the web. As George A. Romero's Dawn of the Dead is my favorite movie, I always wanted to see it on imdb's top 250 list. Even though it never was, to my enjoyment it was always just off the list. I didnt enjoy the fact that it wasnt in the list, just that enough people thought highly enough of it to give it high ratings to where it was almost making the list (as I realize that type of movie isnt everyone's cup of tea). From time to time I would look and see if its ranking had went up or down. I checked just now, and since the last time I looked, it had risen from a 7.8 to an 8.0! Finally it would be in the coveted top 250 list. But now....it is not on the list, even though the bottom few are only rated at a 7.9. What gives? The only thing I can figure out is this.... is says that only votes of "regular voters" go toward the top 250 list. Does anyone know what a "regular" voter means in this context? I mean, I am a "registered" voter, although I have not voted on all that many movies. Do you need to have a certain number of votes to be considered "regular"? Or vote a certain number of times a year? Well, if you search on imdb help pages, you get this answer... To maintain the effectiveness of the top 250 list, we deliberately do not disclose the criteria used for a person to be counted as a regular voter. What the hell kind of crap is that?

[Bub666]

That is so stupid.How can they not tell you what the criteria are on voting for movies?It sounds like the voting might be fixed.

[bassman]

It's IMDB....I don't try to figure it out. I go there sometimes to look up some stuff, but it's populated by a bunch of rude little kids so I try to avoid it. And the information on the site is often wrong. The rating system has always confused me over there. I mean....The Dark Knight is at #4!?!? I like that film alot and all, but it definitely doesn't deserve to be that high up on the list...

[Yojimbo]

Back in day, during the run up to the release for DAWN 04, I used to frequent the Dawn of the Dead boards at IMDB and would post quite often. There were some decent freaks there just like here, but the majority of folks that were on the unmoderated boards of IMDB were obnoxious or stupid. Eventually, I tired of arguing with rhetoric like "I liked DAWN 04, it was cooler than the original but not as good as SWIMFAN" and left in disgust. While I agree that there is a lot of information to be had at IMDB, I caution folks to view everything that you read there with a healthy dose of suspicion since they have a penchant for listing incorrect facts and rarely correct their mistakes in spite of repeated e-mails to their webmasters. I agree that their ranking system of the movies makes no sense, and propose that it is - like many of their posters - entirely full of $hit.

[darth los]

It's IMDB....I don't try to figure it out. I go there sometimes to look up some stuff, but it's populated by a bunch of rude little kids so I try to avoid it. And the information on the site is often wrong. The rating system has always confused me over there. I mean....The Dark Knight is at #4!?!? I like that film alot and all, but it definitely doesn't deserve to be that high up on the list... It sounds as if how cool a film is at the moment factors in to how high the ranking is. I agree. I can list 10 films off the top of my head that deserve to be higher.

[sandrock74]

"To maintain the effectiveness of the top 250 list, we deliberately do not disclose the criteria used for a person to be counted as a regular voter." Doublespeak for: "It's all fixed, so don't sweat it fanboy."

[darth los]

"To maintain the effectiveness of the top 250 list, we deliberately do not disclose the criteria used for a person to be counted as a regular voter." Doublespeak for: "It's all fixed, so don't sweat it fanboy." Similar to elections, if there is no transparency it ceases to be legitimate.

[Yojimbo]

Similar to elections, if there is no transparency it ceases to be legitimate. You're damned right! That which we are not allowed to question becomes inherently questionable.

[Danny]

dude, who cares?!?, imdb is home to the prissiest little bitches on the net!, theres more asseholes on there than 4chan and the gametrailers.com forums combined. you cant rely on a website that lets people register there ****ty indie film on there and then allow them themselves to give the only review and vote on it. -no, really, this happens on there a lot.

[Yojimbo]

imdb is home to the prissiest little bitches on the net! I cannot argue with that!

[MinionZombie]

But a criteria for getting a film on there is that it must be shown publicly, not just YouTubed ... I do find their process for adding titles ridiculously long-winded, and generally chaotic in layout. It took me bloody ages to submit "Contempt of Conscience" (which I worked on, go and give it an IMDb'ing ).

[Trin]

I understand why they would feel compelled to limit visibility into their voter selection process. The Internet is filled with griefers looking to spoil anything and everything they can touch. By exposing the methods by which they choose votes they would be writing a cookbook for the griefers to follow.

[Philly_SWAT]

I understand why they would feel compelled to limit visibility into their voter selection process. The Internet is filled with griefers looking to spoil anything and everything they can touch. By exposing the methods by which they choose votes they would be writing a cookbook for the griefers to follow. This is a good point. However, makes me wonder why Dawn of the Dead voters somehow wouldnt be considered "regular". I think the main problem with imdb is this....they should limit the abilty for anyone to vote on anything until it has been out for a while. That would keep something like "The Dark Knight" suddenly beating out the Godfather as best movie of all time only a few days after it was released. All the fanboys went and ruined the supposed "integrity" that imdb is striving to maintain. Yes I guess I would be a Dawn fanboy, however, the movie came out 30 years ago, its not like hundreds of thousands of people are voting for it all of a sudden. It has achieved its ranking over a long period of time.