You may, on the other hand, have noticed that both films suffer from the same drawback. Each of them has an IMDb User Rating score of 4 or worse. Poor Hannah Montana is actually at 2.6 — and slipping, believe it or not; the original score was 2.9 — while Roscoe Jenkins is clinging to a score of 4. That leads to an important question: If you have both of those movies on your Ultimate Movie Moguls slate, are those terrible IMDb scores destroying your chances of victory? (Note: If you have them both on your Box Office Moguls slate, well, cool. Getting fat grosses out of cheap flicks is an excellent way for Box Office players to win.) Or maybe you're being dragged down by another recent IMDb millstone: Meet the Spartans has topped $30 million at the ticket counter, with 5 PTA points and 7 Top 5 points ... but the IMDb score is a comatose 2.5. With all of that in mind, perhaps it's an opportune moment for another Ultimate-specific examination of User Ratings. How are they affecting your game?

For the benefit of any readers who are Fantasy Moguls newbies: The IMDb User Rating reflects the opinion of registered members of the Internet Movie Database regarding the quality of individual films. A film's IMDb score is an average of all its ratings, on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being highest), as voted on by individual users. It's a weighted average, so the system is, for the most part, able to neutralize any attempt to rapidly and/or greatly sway a film's overall rating. (Or at least that's the intent  — whether or not the system succeeds 100 percent of the time is another matter; more on that later.) A vote of 1 and a vote of 10 aren't given the same weight as other choices simply because they are on the extreme ends of the scale. A 4 is calculated into the average differently from a 7, and so on. In IMDb's own words, their rating system "takes into account the proportional relevance of each component, rather than treating each component equally." Of course, they don't tell you exactly how each vote is weighted —  that would defeat the whole intended purpose of the system.

Alas, I guess you'll never know whether you're really helping yourself by handing out all of those 9s and 10s to your own slate's movies, while carpet bombing your opponents with 1s and 2s. And yes, it's true, a lot of Moguls vote on IMDb based on Fantasy Moguls gameplay, as opposed to on which movies they actually liked — or even saw! On the whole, that tactic probably doesn't really have a huge effect on movies' scores. Sure, every vote is tabulated, but the influence is still negligible in the grand scheme of things. (On the other hand, it sure does feel good. Try it, you'll like it!) So now we're back to the real question at hand: How many IMDb clunkers can you afford to have on your Ultimate slate — even if they deliver great results for the investment in the other three categories —  before your chances of winning are out the window?

Well, in three of my recently completed leagues, the winners of the IMDb category had a combined score of over 60: each movie, then, had an average IMDb score of over 7.5. But aye, there's the rub. In order to win the IMDb category, you may have to fill your slate with a multitude of prestigious films that may have lower earning potential, and thus, TWO categories suffer: box-office revenue and Top 5 points. And in none of these three cases did the IMDb winner emerge as the league winner; the top finisher was No. 3 out of 18. Players with more pedestrian IMDb totals were able to fare just as well because their bigger films, despite having slightly lower IMDb scores, earned more money and garnered enough Top 5 points. For example, in one instance, the Mogul ranked 14th out of 20 in IMDb still managed to crack the Top 5. That player's lowest-rated film was The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything, at 4.7 —  not nearly as bad as Hannah Montana, Roscoe Jenkins, or Spartans. I still say you can carry at least one IMDb dud, however, without being completely out of the race.

If you have a bunch of films with great IMDb scores, too (like In Bruges, with 8.3), it may sort of "even out" the damage done by a low-scoring pick. Think of Bruges combined with Hannah Montana as two movies each scoring 5.5, not a separate 8.3 and 2.7 —  It's less painful, trust me. That might allow you to remain in the middle of the pack, IMDb-score wise, and thus still have a shot at victory. The prospects would be iffy, but not totally out of reach. Put two IMDb stinkers on your slate, however, and you're ruined. Even if they provide great results for a small investment, they will put you so far behind in that category that you'll pretty much have to win every other category in order to finish strong. And really, what's the likelihood of having the most money, but the lowest review score? Even the big breadwinners tend to have at least decent IMDb scores, like Cloverfield (7.9) or 27 Dresses (6.5). Now, that's not to say it can't be done, but the odds are heavily stacked against you.

But how can you foresee which films might have low IMDb scores? Well, it's a strange phenomenon, but certainly not an isolated one: most films starring African-Americans (First Sunday, 2.4), aimed toward African-American audiences (Crossover, 1.7), or made by African-Americans, namely Tyler Perry (Why Did I Get Married, 3.2) seem to consistently receive lower IMDb ratings. Generally, most predominantly-African-American films fall victim to this trend. There are certain exceptions, like Denzel Washington's The Great Debaters (7.8), but that, I think, is due to Denzel himself. Same thing with movies starring Will Smith, for example, or Forest Whitaker. It may be because these men, as opposed to your Tyler Perrys or Tracy Morgans or Martin Lawrences, generally make movies that have a more widespread appeal. Perhaps that is reflected in the voting of IMDb users.

Whether it is pure racism in voting, or whether movies that get such low ratings are truly that bad is certainly a debatable point, but whichever side of the fence you are on, the fact remains: We know this happens. It is a part of gameplay, and thus has to affect your strategy. If you picked Roscoe Jenkins in an Ultimate league, yeah, the money is great, and so are the 4 top 5 points and the 2 PTA points, but the low IMDb score isn't very surprising. It's not just largely African-American movies that don't fare very well as IMDb ratings go. Spoof movies like The Comebacks (2.9) also tend to be rated poorly, as well as anything aimed primarily at young girls (BRATZ, 2.9; see also Montana, Hannah) and, albeit less frequently and often somewhat less damagingly, children (The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything, 4.9).

Put one low-scoring film on your slate, and you can certainly recover, especially if the low scoring movie also offers a considerable box office contribution. It'll be a bump in the road, sure, but by no means will you have to be at or near the top in the IMDb category to win the league (although it certainly helps!). But by the same token, you can't expect to win if your IMDb score total is near the bottom of the league ranking. So don't load up on movies that are cheap but have some box office potential; you'll end up shooting yourself in the foot. After all, films with tiny price tags have them for a reason, and in Ultimate leagues, that reason is very often the probability of a painfully low IMDb score.

So while it's too late to drop Hannah's awful IMDb score from your slates, beware the films like Meet the Browns and Superhero Movie that might be destined to suffer a similar indignity in March. I'd certainly pick either of these in Box Office leagues, but they're more dangerous choices for Ultimate Movie Moguls. Perhaps one or both will be an IMDb surprise. After all, who would have thought Rambo would manage 7.9? And maybe someone will win a February league despite having both Hannah Montana and Roscoe Jenkins on their roster. Now THAT would require some very shrewd moves indeed. Good luck!

Mister Informative did not see the Hannah Montana movie ... so he's feeling a tiny little bit wicked for having given it a 9.5 on IMDb, out of an unsuccessful impulse to save his IMD-bacon. Need to confess your own User Ratings pecadillos? Send a note to misterinformative@gmail.com.