?

Log in

No account? Create an account
IMDB H@x0r3d again! - Multiplayer vi [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Tomas Gallucci

counter customisable

[ flavors | Meta Profile ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| Value for Value Politics Tech Reads ]

IMDB H@x0r3d again! [Sep. 24th, 2008|11:50 am]
Tomas Gallucci
[Tags|, , , ]
[Current Location |work]

Someone's done it again! They hacked the All-Time Worldwide Box office page on IMDB, this time in favor of Dark Knight. Currently, the site is reporting the film made $5,091,106,180.


IMDBscreencap


I'm starting a tag for this: All-Time Worldwide Box office fux0red.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: ehowton
2008-09-24 09:07 pm (UTC)
Did someone artificially increase the amount the film make, placing it on top?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2008-09-24 09:27 pm (UTC)
That would be correct.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ehowton
2008-09-24 09:29 pm (UTC)
What is the real amount it made? Why artificially inflate it?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2008-09-24 09:36 pm (UTC)
It's like you didn't even read the post.

I went to the page to find the amount because I knew that it was just under a billion last week. But now I have no idea since the page has been hacked/database isn't working correctly.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ehowton
2008-09-24 09:55 pm (UTC)
I just re-read your post and still didn't pick up on why someone would report that it made more money than it actually did, nor the real amount it made as a comparison.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2008-09-24 09:37 pm (UTC)
The figure has since been corrected: $971,206,180 world-wide.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ehowton
2008-09-24 09:55 pm (UTC)
Thank you.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thefaeway
2008-09-24 09:28 pm (UTC)
It'll never actually deserve the value it's earned.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2008-09-24 09:34 pm (UTC)
Yes, I read your review (which seems to not be available anymore, btw). I definitely think that you are in the minority on this, but I respect your opinion.

That having been said, I plan on driving two hours to see it again on a flat IMAX screen when it re-releases for Oscar season.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thefaeway
2008-09-24 09:47 pm (UTC)
I raised the security level for that post since it deals with a bit of personal drama.

I may be in the minority but if people would stop going to see it "for the sake of making it the highest grossing film ever" then MAYBE it'll be worth the value it finishes with. As it is, so many people see it solely for that purpose, and not because it's really that great of a film, that it's ridiculous. Heath Ledger? Cool acting. Sad he died. Did Aaliyah's fans buy up 30 copies of her final cd and flock to Queen of the Damned in her memory? No. So let's give Mr. Ledger a break and quit trying to boost this movie.

Also there were some plot holes, bad acting and bad script. Whoever can't see that is either blinded by inability to understand what good or blinded by fanboyism for batman and/or Heath Ledger.

My opinion, still.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ehowton
2008-09-24 09:56 pm (UTC)
I heard it was a good movie. I'm going to see it because I enjoyed the last one, and its a great score.

No other reason.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thefaeway
2008-09-24 09:57 pm (UTC)
If it was free, on TV and half as long... I probably wouldn't have been cranky afterwords.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2008-09-24 09:58 pm (UTC)
Yes, the score is fantasstic!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2008-09-24 09:57 pm (UTC)
I never did care for Heather. Batman means very little to me. I did go to see what Christopher Nolan had created. (I've been following his work...if you'll pardon the pun.)

I was blown away by what I saw. Plot holes weren't apparent at first. There were a few weak scenes, but the movie on the whole was very entertaining.

When it was first announced that Heath Ledger would be playing the Joker, I thought it was a joke. I was going to boycott the movie...until I started following the project.

I tried to get a group together to rent out the Tennessee Aquarium and initial IMAX theater, but I couldn't get enough people interested and Chattanooga didn't want the film.

Simply put, I liked what I saw and was especially impressed by Ledger's performance. And I'm happy to see the film do so well.

Despite Dark Knight I still don't think that Heath Ledger is an A-list actor by any stretch of the imagination.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thefaeway
2008-09-24 09:59 pm (UTC)
I didn't particularly find Ledger interesting in any other film but the Joker was, as my review noted, the only truly worthwhile part of the film as far as I'm concerned. This is.. there were three actors, right? However many... the Joker was awesome and that was plain and simple.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)