Cal, about the rating on IMDb, the low result probably has to do with their very flawed top secred method for calculating "weighted averages". Here's who they explain it:
Quote:IMDb publishes weighted vote averages rather than raw data averages. Various filters are applied to the raw data in order to eliminate and reduce attempts at 'vote stuffing' by individuals more interested in changing the current rating of a movie than giving their true opinion of it (*).
The exact methods we use will not be disclosed. This should ensure that the policy remains effective. The result is a more accurate vote average.
What this means, probably, is that some votes are given more weight than others. They probably have some sort of formula for evaluating user profiles decide how much weight to give their votes based on their voter history.
They can't tell us how they calculate this, or else people could find ways to cheat it.
This is necessary. Otherwise, people could create one-time 50 profiles to vote 10 on a movie they loved. If you had a bunch of people doing that to a movie, they could significantly influence the results.
However, what I found is that often small or obscure movies suffer from this calculation. It's likely that the people who appreciate these kinds of movies tend to be given less weight, whereas those who hate them tend to be given more weight. I don't know why that is, but it seems to be the case with a lot of these movies.
Malunde is a perfect example. If you look at the ratings in more detail, you'll see that the 17 voters on IMDb gave it an arithmetic mean of 7.2, which is very respectable. The "weighted average" brings this rating down to 5.8. Only one person gave it a 4, and everyone else voted 5 or higher.
Sorry for the long-winded explanation/rant.
This looks like a good movie. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.