| Author |
 Topic  |
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
 Posted - 07/03/2007 : 09:36:45
|
| original message moved to its own thread |
Edited by - BaftaBaby on 07/05/2007 16:11:46 |
|
|
Salopian 
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 09:55:43
|
Here is one that is vexing me:
"Thatcher: Tory leader, chick" (for a documentary about her)
It first of all got 'Don't understand', which perplexed me (since Tory and chick are both well-known albeit not utterly universal words and frequently in reviews).
Then it got 'Not accurate'. This is just ridiculous. She was definitely the Tory leader. (She is of course not now, but the review does not state that she is. The film is I think after her time as Tory leader, but it is still about her as having been such.) She is definitely a woman. (Chick in general has connotations of young woman, but that is not the case here as every film's page describes all women as chicks.)
I just don't see it as at all reasonable to reject this review. |
Edited by - Salopian on 07/03/2007 10:08:34 |
 |
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
Singapore
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 10:42:16
|
Sal - hate to say it, but I agree with 'inaccurate'. Chick doesn't mean 'female', as you say it means 'young woman' and has overtones of sexual attraction or at least 'cuteness'.
Although personal taste is always judgemental, I don't think I am overstepping the bounds when I say that there is no concievable way to describe Maggie Thatcher as a 'chick' 
Bafta - unless I watched a different movie, this is a dumb supernatural thriller and her denial doesn't lead to any debacle. I didn't see anything in the movie to indicate it had any level of depth, or that there was anything other than the superficial meaning we were presented with.
** Spoliers **
Bullock tries to prevent her husband leaving town because she knows he is going to die, she follows him in her car, calling on his mobile phone to make him come back, she knows the truck is going to hit him before it even appears over the crest of the hill. Maybe, if it were a better film, I could have reasoned that this was all in her imagination, facts created after the event. But that was never presented as an option in the movie, and it credits the film with a lot less mediocrity than it actually had.
I would concur that it isn't accurate. |
|
|
|
Salopian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 11:00:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by bife
Sal - hate to say it, but I agree with 'inaccurate'. Chick doesn't mean 'female', as you say it means 'young woman' and has overtones of sexual attraction or at least 'cuteness'.
But you have to take on board my point that every film page on this site defines chick as meaning any woman (unless unattractive women are not allowed to score films!). |
|
|
|
Ali 
"Those aren't pillows."
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 11:42:50
|
"Chick" can refer to any woman - and has a funnier effect when used for Thatcher. I think it's fine.
|
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
Singapore
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 11:49:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ali
"Chick" can refer to any woman - and has a funnier effect when used for Thatcher. I think it's fine.
We'll have to agree to differ on the definition, but I take your point that calling her a chick is actually quite amusing. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
New Zealand
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 12:39:04
|
I think "chick" could mean any woman. Sure, more likely young or attractive, but compared to the other 'stretching' we commonly do on this site "chick" for Thatcher isn't much of a stretch.
Also, if the documentary covers her life from her youth then the connotation becomes unimportant. I doubt she was ever attractive though.  
And as Salopian has pointed out, there are only two types of users on this site, Guys and Chicks. 
|
Edited by - Sean on 07/03/2007 13:14:46 |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
United Kingdom
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 13:37:26
|
The use of "chick" is a matter of personal judgment in this case, and that's what the editors are there for. You might agree or disagree, but declining as "inaccurate" is not an unreasonable decision. (It's just not especially generous.)
I have a review pending following a refusal where I use "jetplane" as one word. Dictionary.com gives it as two words, but you can find literally thousands of examples on the net of the use of "jetplane" as one word.
If it cannot be one word, why are there thousands of examples of it around? I say get real, if thousands of people are using it then it's a word.
End of.
|
|
|
|
Salopian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 13:38:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
I doubt she was ever attractive though.
Actually a lot of people (Tory men, admittedly) were famously attracted to her. Power and all that.  |
|
|
|
Salopian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 13:42:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
The use of "chick" is a matter of personal judgment in this case, and that's what the editors are there for.
Not exactly. They are there to ascertain objective facts. They are not there to disagree with subjective opinions. For example, they cannot disallow one half of the "Bush is dreadful"/"Moore is dreadful" reviews. Similarly, there are loads of lascivious reviews - it's irrelevant if they don't themselves fancy the person in question.
Further, as we've said, on this site if nowhere else, chick categorically means any woman. Therefore, even if they were supposed to disallow reviews that opposed their own opinions, that would not be valid in this case. |
Edited by - Salopian on 07/03/2007 13:44:19 |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
United Kingdom
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 14:14:08
|
Whether or not something is an objective fact is often a matter of personal judgment.
Although the site uses the word "chick" it's specifically in the context of female film watchers, as in the phrase "chick flick" and therefore does not necessarily accept the use of the term "chick" for all females outside of the context of film watchers. |
|
|
|
Salopian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 14:22:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Whether or not something is an objective fact is often a matter of personal judgment.
True, but sexual attractiveness is safely in the subjective zone.
quote:
Although the site uses the word "chick" it's specifically in the context of female film watchers, as in the phrase "chick flick" and therefore does not necessarily accept the use of the term "chick" for all females outside of the context of film watchers.
A fairly fair point, if a bit of a stretch (requiring different uses on the same page). However, chick on the film pages is not specifically tied to chick flick, since it refers to a female watcher of any type of film. This raises, though, the fact that there is also chick lit, i.e. another context in which chick potentially means any woman.
If this is the basis for rejection, it is really very tenuous, especially compared to many usages on this site. |
Edited by - Salopian on 07/03/2007 14:23:02 |
|
|
|
Shiv 
"What a Wonderful World"
Kimberleys, Western Australia
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 14:23:16
|
| Inaccurate is probably the wrong way to reject the review - but what were you trying to say in the review? In some ways it's just a statement about Thatcher. |
|
|
|
Salopian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 14:25:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
Inaccurate is probably the wrong way to reject the review - but what were you trying to say in the review? In some ways it's just a statement about Thatcher.
It's wordplay: Thatcher = T, hatcher = Tory leader, chick. That is irrelevant for the MERPs' purposes, though. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
United Kingdom
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 15:52:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Whether or not something is an objective fact is often a matter of personal judgment.
True, but sexual attractiveness is safely in the subjective zone.
quote:
Although the site uses the word "chick" it's specifically in the context of female film watchers, as in the phrase "chick flick" and therefore does not necessarily accept the use of the term "chick" for all females outside of the context of film watchers.
A fairly fair point, if a bit of a stretch (requiring different uses on the same page). However, chick on the film pages is not specifically tied to chick flick, since it refers to a female watcher of any type of film. This raises, though, the fact that there is also chick lit, i.e. another context in which chick potentially means any woman.
If this is the basis for rejection, it is really very tenuous, especially compared to many usages on this site.
I'd say the basis for rejection is simply that the editor or editors believe that Mrs Thatcher cannot accurely be described as a chick, because they feel a chick should have certain qualities over and above merely being female - e.g. young, attractive, girlie, which Maggie certainly did not possess - whilst you feel it can be used without any such qualities. It's a difference of opinion. Dictionary.com, which Benj often uses to decide such points, does not seem to support the wider usage.
I agree there are many examples where words are stretched much further than in your review, but there are always such examples. If you carry that argument to its logical conclusion the site standard would be very loose indeed, and frankly I would expect you would be one of those who object loudest if that ever happened. It's rather ironic as you, in general, like words to have tight meanings and that's why your review has been refused in this case.
I can only repeat that the decision is, in my personal view, reasonable if a little ungenerous. I'd imagine that a resubmission might find the editor in a more generous mood and get an acceptance, but on the other hand, with Dictionary.com against you, maybe not.
|
|
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 07/03/2007 : 16:00:11
|
Okay, sorry guys, but I'm going to re-name this thread to deal with Sal and am starting another because I really would like some feedback on my original posting.
So, thanks Sal and bife for your comments, and I hope this move won't offend anyone.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Rejected reviews
