It's the time of year when critics, pundits, and pretty much anyone who wants to compiles a list of their favorite films from the year before. The IMDb is also offering its annual user poll, where visitors to the site who've signed up for a free account can cast their ballots for best picture, actor, actress, director, and superlatives in several other categories. And this, as you might expect, can be dangerous.

I'm a huge IMDb fan, and have been since high school. It's the biggest and most-used site of its kind, and holds a wealth of information. But their active users tend to skew differently than you'd think. Sure, The Godfather is among the site's Top 250 Movies, currently ranking at #1, but Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King sits at #4, a position far too high for such a historically unproven and terribly overrated movie. Taxi Driver (#39) and To Kill A Mockingbird (#40) are on the list, but they're not as high as The Matrix (#34). Frighteningly, Crash (#65) outranks Double Indemnity (#69). Reading their Top 250 list is like listening to that guy in college who thought he was smart or deep or edgy or whatever because he liked stuff like The Boondock Saints, when really that guy's kind of pitiable.

Anyway, they've opened their polls for the best of 2005, and so far, the results are both what you'd expect and below what they should be. Brokeback Mountain currently sits in second place in the best film poll, but it's an aberration compared with the rest of the list: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, King Kong, and, sadly enough, Star Wars: Episode III—Revenge of the Sith. The only other non-fanboy title on the list is Crash, this year's version of the "deep" film for people who don't understand why it's actually not that good. Right now, Harry Potter is winning with 22% of the vote, or 9,326 votes, to Brokeback's 13%, or 5,584. The acting categories are disturbing, as well; last I checked, Rachel Weisz and Maria Bello were competing with Emma Watson and Dakota Fanning.

Now, I feel I should repeat, for the people I know won't understand this post: I have nothing against the more mainstream stuff on the list (except for Crash, but I'll deal with that later). In fact, I think Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is the best Potter film yet. But comparing Watson's performance in that film to Bello's in A History of Violence? Even pretending that they're on the same level is an insult to Bello, and to film in general.

I guess what I'm saying is: Reach for the treetops, IMDb voters. Sure, War of the Worlds was fun, but maybe you should dig a little deeper when it comes to deciding what films were really among the best of the year. Or, you know, don't. That's fine, too. Just do what you want. Vote your little non-caring hearts out. Maybe go home and watch Dead Poets Society, which is in no way saccharine or overhyped. Everything's fine.

Everything's fine.