It has to do with their 'Goofs' section. Here's an example:
Goofs forTo me, this is akin to going to the special extras on the DVD to see: "There exist some goofs" and then not listing them. Some times are worse than others. Check out this one:
"Mad About You" (1992)
Continuity: As with any long-running show there are many inconsistencies between series. Characters' life histories, their birthdays and ages are reported differently from time to time as the writers invent new stuff for them that wasn't thought of when the series began.
Goofs forI read this one as: "There are SO many things wrong with this movie that we can't possibly list them all; not only that, but since we don't want to even have to check all the many many possible submissions, our policy is to not list any. So, don't bother sending them in; we aren't listening."
Core, The (2003)
Incorrectly regarded as goofs: Since almost all of the "science" in the movie is entirely erroneous, we are prepared to accept that the movie's universe *must* have entirely different rules - it's the only possible explanation. It's just for fun.
Also, the lack of information on their "movie connections" is quite frustrating.
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones references Metropolis (1927)? How? It spoofs RoboCop (1987)? Where?
Why not simply require that movie connection submissions include at least a one line explanation? How hard would that be?
I love the IMDB, and it is free (thank god), I use it all the time, and tvtome and movietome are nowhere near complete enough to compete with it. But it wouldn't be much harder to make it much better.
Sigh.
I agree with you about the inexplicable "connections" between many of the films on the IMDb. That's something that has long troubled me.
ReplyDelete