IMDb ratings have been the center of some controversies recently, especially because of groups of “fans” that took it upon themselves to storm the ratings of films like “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” and the Ghostbusters remake to make them lower. The ratings have always been an inexact tool to say the least, though, as they express a popular rather than critical evaluation of a film.

Well, I raided some IMDb titles with ratings higher than 7.0 and selected 10 awful films among them. From one of Michael Bay’s earliest over-the-top mindless action capers, war epics way overestimated by the patriotic crowd, and wobbly starters of unbearable franchise, here’s a list of films who deserve a worse rep than they get:

10. Crank (Neveldine/Taylor, 2006)

While Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor’s breakout hit isn’t devoid of qualities, it’s far from deserving its generous IMDb rating. It’s a crazy stampede of an action film, sure, with some interestingly kitsch ideas for the genre, but not nearly enough to carry even its swift 88-minute runtime. Jason Statham is a somewhat charismatic lead as Chev Chelios, the professional assassin injected with a poison that will kill him if his heart rate drops.

What follows from this “high concept” (I guess…) premise is the showcase of the writer/directors’ will to repeatedly “go there” – from very public sex scenes to insane action sequences, “Crank” wants to be, as a film, a thrill ride comparable to the surreal one its lead character is forcibly on.

It never exactly succeeds in that endeavour, as it forcibly stumbled from set piece to set piece without so much as a connective tissue one could call a plot. “Crank” is not ridiculous enough to support itself as kitschy fun, and not serious enough to supplant that status.

9. The Rock (Michael Bay, 1996)

There’s an exaggerated love for “The Rock,” mostly because of nostalgia, but maybe also because it is Michael Bay’s most bearable movie to date; however, that doesn’t mean that it escapes the director’s worse vices. Nicolas Cage stars as Stanley Goodspeed (yes, that’s his name), a biochemist partnered by the FBI with an ex-con played by Sean Connery, of all people, to stop a former general (Ed Harris) from blowing up the whole of San Francisco.

As with any Michael Bay film, “The Rock” is cluelessly directed – every scene is designed to carry maximum impact, and every action sequence seems straight out of a commercial. The screenplay by David Weisberg, Douglas Cook and Mark Rosner gets too much credit for doing the bare minimum, and the acting is overdramatic all around, which could be fun if you get on the exact wavelength in which they were conceived. Plus, as it is routine for action flicks, the female characters are either absent or inconsequential.

8. The Greatest Showman (Michael Gracey, 2017)

Rarely has the musical genre seen anything as average and boring as “The Greatest Showman.” Normally, musicals are either critically acclaimed (“Moulin Rouge!”, “Chicago”) or universally despised (“Into the Woods”), but “The Greatest Showman” is just an empty spectacle of great music, good choreography, bland (and dishonest) characters, a predictable moral lesson, and mediocre camera work.

And yet, the film charmed audiences, who not only gave it a 7.7 rating on IMDb, but led it to gross over $400 million at the box office. Hugh Jackman is a vanilla version of egomaniacal businessman P.T. Barnum, the creator of show business, who in reality was also a exploitative, cruel prick.

Here, he’s just a dreamer who “gives a shot” to all kinds of misfits in his new show, the first circus of all time. Cue to stunning musical numbers and people like Jackman, Zac Efron and Zendaya showing off their moves in pretty choreographies. “The Greatest Showman” leaves a sweet aftertaste that’s as fleeting as the veracity of its plot.

7. Underworld (Len Wiseman, 2003)

I’d chalk this one up to early 2000’s nostalgia, because there’s no other reason why the original “Underworld” would have this high a rating. Sure, it’s not a dismal piece of filmmaking, but 7.0 out of 10? Len Wiseman is a competent enough director to not let his own wobbly mythology get in the way of some kitsch-like fun, but “Underworld” takes itself way to seriously to have its own deficiencies completely ignored.

While she has proven to be a great actress with the right part (see “Love & Friendship”), Kate Beckinsale is completely out of place here, and it’s kind of tragic that this is the film most people will remember her by. The success of the franchise, which released a new chapter as recently as 2016, and the fact that every single film after this one is worse than the original, does nothing to absolve it of its faults – a nonsensical plot and questionable production value among them.

6. The Bucket List (Rob Reiner, 2007)

While it is certainly a tantalizing proposition to see Morgan Freeman and Jack Nicholson sharing the scene in a comedy/drama by Rob Reiner, “The Bucket List” is far from being as good as the sum of its parts. The legendary actors play two terminally ill men who escape from a cancer ward and embark on a road trip to fulfill a wish list of adventures before they die – and as their journey progresses, antics and heartbreak ensue.

Justin Zackham’s script is true to the screenwriter’s roots – before “The Bucket List,” he authored juvenile comedy “Going Greek,” and has since done the equally bland “The Big Wedding” and “One Chance.” Nicholson and Freeman have fun on screen, which is enough to entertain for the 97 minutes of the film, as director Reiner mainly stays out of the way. The result is a forgettable film, considerably inferior to the one that everyone involved deserved.

IMDb’s ratings, voted on by the internet-surfing public, usually end up representing the majority opinion fairly well. With so many votes cast by the website’s visitors, anomalies are ultimately de-emphasized by the louder prevailing voices.

On the site, a score of 7.0 or higher is usually a pretty good indicator of a movie’s popularity and overall quality. If a movie can break the 7.0 barrier, it probably has a pretty good standing with the public. That does not mean that every movie earning that score is a good one, however. Some of those films are quite undeserving of that solid mark but, for whatever reason, have deceived IMDb’s voters. Here are the 10 worst movies rated higher than 7.0 on IMDb.

1. Iron Man 2 (7.0)

Marvel movies are generally well-liked and definitely strong money makers. However, Iron Man 2 is one of the worst movies in the Marvel canon and definitely undeserving of its 7.0 score. Unlike the first Iron Man film, which burst onto the not-yet-oversaturated comic book scene in 2008 with verve and kinetic energy, the sequel represented everything wrong with comic book adaptations. It is bloated, soulless, and often on autopilot.

Though Mickey Rourke tries to goose it with a livewire energy, the movie’s lackluster plot and formulaic twists undermine any momentum the original Iron Man had established. It was the first of more than a couple uninspired sequels to clever first features under the Marvel banner.

Even Robert Downey, Jr. seems to be bored here, perhaps viewing the film as nothing more than a paycheck before finding more to get excited about in some of the intelligent future Marvel films. Luckily, Iron Man 3 (which only rates a slightly better 7.2 on IMDb), helped restore some of the Iron Man cachet.

2. Burn After Reading (7.0)

The Coen brothers are exhilarating filmmakers whose singular gift for dialogue and dark comedy with beautiful insight into human nature has made them critical darlings and sometime commercial successes. That has not prevented them from writing and directing a few duds over their career. One of the bigger duds–and one unworthy of the 7.0 score on IMDb–is Burn After Reading.

Though Burn features a delightfully zany performance from Brad Pitt and an always-worth-watching Frances McDormand, it is ultimately a silly exercise in wheel-spinning, resulting in very little realism and even less resonance. Though there are a few scattered laughs in the film, most of the script’s supposed “hijinx” seems forced and undercooked. While one can never fully go wrong with a Coen brothers movie, this particular movie did not get enough right.

3. Four Weddings and a Funeral (7.1)

Four Weddings and a Funeral was a sleeper hit in 1994, even earning a surprise Best Picture nomination. However, that nomination came more from its commercial success than its cinematic excellence. Though there is an interesting melancholy tone to the romantic-comedy, it seems to have been celebrated more for its “British-ness” than any lasting value.

When viewed now, outside of the 1994 excitement, it is easier to see Four Weddings for what it is: a run-of-the-mill rom-com with a few mournful scenes that disguise its obvious trajectory. Hugh Grant is charming, Andie Macdowell is compelling, and John Hannah threatens to steal the movie. But the movie he almost steals is nothing more than a lark. There is very little insight into the human condition and what little insight there is exists solely in movie-land, where coincidences abound and happy endings are inevitable.

4. The Rock (7.4)

Before his name became synonymous with a very specific kind of schlocky blockbuster that had no intention of aspiring to anything better (The Transformers series, Bad Boys II), Bay made a few movies that people really appreciated. They were fun, they were breezy, and they made a lot of money. But that did not make them high-quality films. The second of these films was the high-octane The Rock, starring a charismatic Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage-y Nicolas Cage.

The Rock is absurdist joy, presenting a story about trying to get on to Alcatraz to prevent a nerve gas attack. What it is not is a 7.4 score-worthy movie. The acting is over the top, the story never gets in the vicinity of reality, and no involved cared about any of those things anyway. And they did not need to care. The movie works–for what it is: a nonsensical, entertaining action movie.

5. Gangs of New York (7.5)

The first of two Martin Scorsese movies of this list, Gangs of New York suffers mostly from delusions of its own grandeur. Featuring one of the best actors of all time, Daniel Day-Lewis and perhaps one of the most criticized actresses of all time, Cameron Diaz, Gangs of New York sets out to tell a sprawling tale of revenge, lust, and violence but ends up collapsing under its own weight. Diaz can’t quite communicate the gravity she needs to, Leonardo Dicaprio seems to be a teenager playing a particularly detailed game of dress-up, and Day-Lewis is magnetic as always but cannot quite save what is a beautifully designed, elegantly shot mess in search of a more compelling story arc.

Though many amazing movies have worked on the strength of their characterization alone, Gangs of New York is content to let the characters exist as archetypes instead of fully-fleshed-out humans. The carnage on display here is often impressive, but the vividness of the imagery is betrayed by the shallowness of the plot machinations.