| Author |
 Topic  |
|
lemmycaution 
"Long mired in film"
|
 Posted - 11/18/2008 : 14:58:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by rabid kazook
How about "A Spinal Tip." for For Your Consideration? Would that pass these days?
Only if Christopher Guest did a mockumentary about a fun-loving mohel.  |
 |
|
|
RockGolf 
"1500+ reviews. 1 joke."
|
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 16:56:05
|
I too am getting frustrated with the number of reviews rejected without explanation. My review for Changling was just turned down. It was "Jolie adopts another waif."
It is perfectly true in the movie in that Jolie's character takes in a child that is not her own. Also, I can't think of a single other movie where Jolie does that. So the review is both accurate and specific. Sufficient criteria, I would think, to allow passage.
Additionally, it plays on the real-life adoptions of Jolie. Is that the problem? Are we really rejecting reviews for reasons having nothing to do with the film?
It also doesn't remotely resemble any of the reviews already posted.
|
|
|
|
demonic 
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 18:03:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopixn
I am surprised that you appreciate this kind of patronizing MERPing. Your average is far higher than any of theirs, so they should not be condescending you with 'good try'.
The new MERP is far too literal and pays no attention to precedent. I don't think noncentz's review is as great as you do but it's definitely acceptable, as is yours.
Thanks for saying so. I have no idea who the MERPs are so I can't draw comparison to relative review writing prowess, and wouldn't really want to because it doesn't matter; they finally have the right of approval. What I appreciate is the idea that the MERP is trying to assist get the review approved with their comment, not simply dismissing the effort.
quote:
Originally posted by Randall
I'm no expert, but since A MIGHTY WIND is also about musicians, wouldn't the Spinal Tap parallels fit more naturally there? Vinyl, tapping folk singers, etc. To me, your review, that second one, implies that Spinal Tap, or maybe a clip from "Spinal Tap," is actually in the movie. Wow, it would be a tough call for me.
I suppose so Randall, but to be picky about it there is music in Guffman too; they are staging a theatre show with songs and dancing in it, although it's admittedly not the focus.
quote:
Originally posted by rabid kazook
How about "A Spinal Tip." for For Your Consideration? Would that pass these days?
I think it's clear from my current case the answer is probably not, although Turrell's "This is Oscar Tap" made it, and is currently a worthy second place with 22 votes. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 18:07:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by R o � k 9 0 1 f
I too am getting frustrated with the number of reviews rejected without explanation. My review for Changling was just turned down. It was "Jolie adopts another waif."
It is perfectly true in the movie in that Jolie's character takes in a child that is not her own. Also, I can't think of a single other movie where Jolie does that. So the review is both accurate and specific. Sufficient criteria, I would think, to allow passage.
Additionally, it plays on the real-life adoptions of Jolie. Is that the problem? Are we really rejecting reviews for reasons having nothing to do with the film?
It also doesn't remotely resemble any of the reviews already posted.
With a rejected without reason I pretty much always resub with explanation in case the MERP missed the meaning, and sometimes take the opportunity to give it a second look and tweak it. My only hesistation to your review would be the use of "adopt" as Jolie doesn't specifically adopt the child in "Changeling". I think it's a good review though. |
Edited by - demonic on 11/18/2008 18:08:20 |
|
|
|
RockGolf
"1500+ reviews. 1 joke."
|
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 18:11:54
|
From m-w.com: quote:
Adopt:
to take by choice into a relationship ; especially : to take voluntarily (a child of other parents) as one's own child
That's exactly what she does. |
|
|
|
Salopian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 18:55:06
|
| I doubt that that was the rejection reason, but I think in countries with formal adoption procedures it's best to use it strictly. |
|
|
|
Salopian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 19:09:40
|
| To demonic, well, they have the power of approval anyway. But of course you have plenty of idea who they are. None of the people with a higher average than you were eligible when MERPs were first brought in. Of people just below you, Sean was a MERP but isn't now. Corduroy Pillow probably was but isn't active now. I don't think RockGolf is a MERP but even if he is he wouldn't write a message like that. No one else around you was eligible, and I cannot believe that you think any of them are the new MERP. Therefore, they shouldn't be saying "good try" to you, or to me, as though they are a teacher. |
|
|
|
rabid kazook 
"Pushing the antelope"
|
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 19:25:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by lemmycaution
quote:
Originally posted by rabid kazook
How about "A Spinal Tip." for For Your Consideration? Would that pass these days?
Only if Christopher Guest did a mockumentary about a fun-loving mohel.
I just talk stupidities. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 20:16:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by R o � k 9 0 1 f
From m-w.com: quote:
Adopt:
to take by choice into a relationship ; especially : to take voluntarily (a child of other parents) as one's own child
That's exactly what she does.
I understand - I meant in the strictly legal sense of the term (filing adoption papers etc) but yes, she voluntarily takes him in even though he's not her son. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 11/18/2008 : 23:21:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopixn
To demonic, well, they have the power of approval anyway. But of course you have plenty of idea who they are. None of the people with a higher average than you were eligible when MERPs were first brought in. Of people just below you, Sean was a MERP but isn't now. Corduroy Pillow probably was but isn't active now. I don't think RockGolf is a MERP but even if he is he wouldn't write a message like that. No one else around you was eligible, and I cannot believe that you think any of them are the new MERP. Therefore, they shouldn't be saying "good try" to you, or to me, as though they are a teacher.
You know, I haven't got a clue who they are, and I try not to think too much about it; knowledge may be power but ignorance is bliss etc.
As I said I don't mind if a MERP declines with a reason as long as they are trying to help get the review passed in their comments, which in most cases I've found they are trying to do - I think a "good try" comment should be taken in the spirit it is intended. The quality of their own reviews isn't an issue to me, I'm interested in consistency in what is approvable and what isn't. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 11/21/2008 : 00:16:28
|
Well, if you're looking for consistency you are probably on the wrong site.
I'm getting particularly frustrated about refusals for old films which none of us has or probably ever will see, where really amusing reviews are being refused as "FACTUALLY INACCURATE", like anyone gives a flying fuck.
I've just had one such refusal where every accepted review for the film is almost certainly FACTUALLY INACCURATE and some are anachronistic, whereas mine is contemporaneous.
There's at least one MERP out there whose misplaced literalism is going to drive reviewers off this site and that is NOT a good thing. 
Yours
Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells.
|
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 11/21/2008 : 00:33:22
|
Dear Disgusted,
We hear your pain.
To return very briefly to your first point though... why should we not expect consistency on the site, is it such a lofty ideal? How hard would it really be for MERPs to follow a fixed series of guidelines for acceptance set down by Benj? There must be something like it in place already - I think it would actually be far simpler than we think to bring many of our recently voiced concerns into line.
It's one for the big boss man really. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 11/21/2008 : 00:53:31
|
What MERPs should realise, but obviously some don't, is that some films are just here to make jokes about. No-one is ever going to see them so whether the reviews are factually accurate or not is beside the point. Its enough if the review is amusing and appropriate.
On the other hand, films which we are likely to see SHOULD be factually accurate, although one look at the reviews for MARIE ANTOINETTE shows how badly the MERPs ballsed up that one by allowing umpteen head jokes which have nothing to do with the film at all and which have completely drowned out any real reviews of the film.
Oooh, it makes me mad....
|
|
|
|
benj clews 
"...."
|
Posted - 11/21/2008 : 01:08:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
What MERPs should realise, but obviously some don't, is that some films are just here to make jokes about. No-one is ever going to see them so whether the reviews are factually accurate or not is beside the point. Its enough if the review is amusing and appropriate.
Not quite. No films are here just to make jokes about, although all films can be joked about. There are simply films we know the details of and others we don't and, until we do, these get more leeway for reviews based purely on the title. It certainly isn't enough to say a review doesn't have to be accurate if no-one's going to see the film irrespective of how much we know about the film's content. The amount known of the film is the deciding factor for pure joke reviews here, not what we assume are the chances of someone ever seeing the film. |
|
|
|
Salopian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/21/2008 : 01:39:18
|
| I agree with Benj's way of putting it officially but napper's version is still the de facto truth. After he mentioned his Drunken Acrobat rejections, I submitted some reviews as a test, most of which were rejected unreasonably, either without a reason or with a basesless 'Factually inaccurate' etc. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Click for Details
