Viewers know better than IMDb rating- Worst movie of the decade

Rating: 1/10 (9 December 2012)

So much hype! Well IMDb ratings has it over 8 while it totally bombed in the box office.Reviewers say that the photography is excellent, well, why waste your money, since you can see better photography in Nat Geo HD.
All those giving high ratings are probably the pseudo cinema goers. The makers had made the Matrix series, somehow they were more inspired by the 2nd and 3rd part of Matrix than the original. Complex story (like Inception or Shutter Island) is one thing, but trying to make it just so that it seems complex is actually a foolish thing. Every story told even how complex it is should hold the audience in the seat, I took 2 breaks of 30 mins each, that much appealing was the screenplay. And the movie is for 2 and a half hour. You can walk out and walk in anytime and you would still be there.
Several stories and all of them had Tom Hanks and Halle Berry, why? Ummm probably saving money or maybe just trying to put up a pseudo complex story. I would probably watch those kiddish vampire movie series compared to a movie which had Tom Hanks and Halle Berry, it is that bad. Even Sucker Punch or Tron Legacy would probably deserve half a more star than this.