IMDb has been the go-to source for movie information on the Internet since 'Nam, and it (obviously) takes its work seriously. So it's rare that you'll find a synopsis for a well-known movie that's anything but diligent and professional.
That's what makes those moments when you do find a bad IMDb synopsis special. But what makes a "bad" IMDb synopsis, exactly? In this case, we measured it by two things: undertones of laziness, or undertones of snark — and in some cases, both.
We found 10 in a hopeless place.
1. 'Friends with Benefits' (2011)
ANALYSIS: To be fair, the plot of this movie should really just be "Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake take you on a first class trip to Poundtown," as that's the reason the movie exists and sold tickets. But context aside, the above synopsis would have definitely had a Microsoft Word green squiggly underline underneath it signifying the disapproval of the ubiquitous Paper Clip. Plus, can't you just feel the snark coming off the second half of that sentence? Like, "... and you're not going to believe this, but guess what Dylan and Jamie discover?" I see right through you, IMDb synopsis writer.
2. 'Life or Something Like It' (2002)
ANALYSIS: Two things: 1) There's a definite vibe of "Friday at 6:30 p.m. just getting this done and then gettin' mah DRANK ON" of the IMDb synopsis writer here. But more importantly, 2) What percentage of the population hasn't been told something weird by a homeless guy? One time a homeless guy outside of Fenway Park pulled me close and told me I reminded him of his brother over and over again. I was like, 12. This homeless guy was significantly older than 12. Did I write a movie about my experience? No. There's gotta be more here.
3. 'A Guy Thing' (2003)
ANALYSIS: The tone of this synopsis makes us think that the writer had more written out here to make himself laugh, then cut it off without reediting it before publishing. For example, "... he presumes he must have cheated on his fiancee so LET'S WRITE A MOVIE ABOUT IT." Also — unrelated, but — "A Guy Thing" is cheating on your fiancee? Alright, stereotypes! I kind of get it, IMDb writer. I see where your head's at. We're on the same page.
4. 'Pearl Harbor' (2001)
ANALYSIS: I'm not saying the plot synopsis is inaccurate. But there's also a reason why everyone thought this movie sucked, and it's pretty much because of the focus on the meaningless love lives of these two random dudes instead of the war itself. Couldn't throw Michael Bay a bone, plot synopsis writer? Maybe this movie has a 5.9 (anything greater is impossible) if the plot synopsis is something like "With the Second World War raging in the background, Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett continue to make a mockery of themselves in this ..." Fine, IMDb writer, you're right.
5. 'Post Grad' (2009)
ANALYSIS: There are times (not unlike "Pearl Harbor") where you can't really dress the shortcomings of the movie itself with the one-line IMDb synopsis, and it seems "Post Grad" is also one of those cases. For example: You just went through college and you're figuring out now that the right job, relationship and life course is important? What the f**k were you doing for the last four years? Ryden Malby kind of just sounds like the worst.
6. 'Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter' (2012)
ANALYSIS: So many things go wrong in so few words. For one: "The 16th President of the United States." Oh, you weren't talking about another Abraham Lincoln? Got it. Secondly, his being the eventual President is kind of apropos of nothing regarding murdering vampires, right? Pretty incidental to mention here. The matter-of-factness about "He makes it his mission to eliminate them," is fantastic, too. I'm piling on, but then again, you made a movie about Abraham Lincoln killing vampires, so.
7. 'Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters' (2013)
ANALYSIS: We continue with the "Rewriting Characters We're Familiar With as Assassins of Mythical Creatures" genre with the upcoming "Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters," which makes the list just for the words, "In this spin on the fairy tale." What exactly are you spinning on the fairy tale other than using their names? Is there a lost Hansel and Gretel tale about them as children killing witches that we're not aware of? You underestimate our intelligence, IMDb writer. How dare you.
8. 'Nick of Time' (1995)
ANALYSIS: What is an "every-day man?" Aren't we all every-day men (or women)? By virtue of being talented, famous and handsome, does George Clooney take Wednesdays off? Also, why the two adjectives that essentially mean the same thing? Talk about rubbing it in. "We swear, this guy sucks. Promise. Nothing remarkable about him at all." Oh, and the unimpressive every-day man is played by Johnny Depp, with whom literally tens of millions of people are obsessed. "Nick of Time" is also penalized for not being about a time traveler named Nick.
9. 'The Saint' (1997)
ANALYSIS: This one had to have just slipped through the cracks of the copyediting process. The writer (an intern?) is apparently allergic to pronouns, as "Simon Templar" is mentioned three times in the first 19 words. Also what does "working out" the energy formula involve? And what is "the worst" (other than this plot summary HEYOOOOO) and why will it affect the United States, which wasn't brought up at all before now? For shame, LadyN1. Go get us a coffee and our dry cleaning.
10. 'The Air Up There' (1994)
ANALYSIS: It's just the use of the word "hotshot" to describe a mining company's basketball team. There's been no mining company in the history of ever that has a "hotshot" basketball team (Source: Everyone who didn't write this IMDb plot synopsis). Just choose a different adjective, Reid, and we'll forgive you. NOTHING-TO-DO-WITH-ANYTHING CHEAP SHOT ALERT: Sweet poster, Kevin Bacon.
Want more features, news and assorted bits of amazingness from NextMovie?
Sign up for our weekly newsletter.