This is NOT the #3 movie of all time!!!

Rating: Null/10 (23 April 2002)

After seeing this movie rated as #3 in the history of movies worldwide on the IMDB rankings, I had to post a reaction (this happens to be the first time I have posted on this site).
I have generally agreed with the user ratings of movies on this site, but #3 all time?!?!? I don't think so.
Arguably, this movie is not even in the top 3 for 2001-2002 and it is definitely not in the top 3 for the last decade (Schindler's List, Pulp Fiction, Fight Club, Being John Malkovich, Life is Beautiful, Traffic, Memento, Magnolia, Fargo and Billy Elliott are just among the handful of superior films that were released in the past decade). This movie doesn't even belong in the top 50 all-time.
That being said, this is a movie that deserves all the "technical" awards it won for special effects, editing, sound, cinematography, etc., but lacked in several critical areas including acting (the only performance worth even mentioning for any awards was Ian McKellen) and character development (I haven't read the book, but the movie could have used more character development...and, no, we shouldn't have to wait for the sequels to see more development).
I agree that this is a good movie, but #3 all-time is giving is way too much credit. If one goes in to this movie expecting one of the best movies of all time, one will be sorely disappointed. Go in without any expectations and you will see a very good movie that was arguably one of the top 3-5 films of the last year (personally, I think The Royal Tenenbaums, In the Bedroom, Moulin Rouge, Amelie and A Beautiful Mind were all better films...but that's just my opinion...).