| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| bife |
Posted - 05/24/2008 : 07:03:45
... I'd find myself promoting an I see dead people/Icy dead people pun, but:
Soda's Eye see dead people is a top review.
The film in question, Eye, is a 'supernatural thriller' about a blind woman who receives an eye transplant, the eye she receives shows her supernatural images of people dying.
I think that 'Eye sees dead people' wonderfully links the two films whilst acting as a very literal description of the film. Kudos to Soda for managing to make something valuable out of such a tired and overused pun
While there, a quick honourable mention to misterbadidea's 'The fifth sense' review, which manages to say so much about the plot using only three words (I am not 100% sure that sight is the fifth sense, always thought it was the first, but that is splitting hairs)
Love both these reviews |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Herky |
Posted - 05/29/2008 : 01:12:06
quote:
Originally posted by Ali
Made even better by Herky's misspelling encourage.
Busted!  Will you be proceeding to round 2 of the "how many ways did I unintentionally make my point with my own post" game? 
|
| Sludge |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 15:46:11
quote:
Originally posted by Ali
quote:
Originally posted by Sludge
quote:
Originally posted by Herky
The only drawback to the "review already exists for another film" feature that I can see is that it may encourange reviewers (especially newcomers) to become less diligent in checking the extant reviews for film they are reviewing to see if there's a similarity, in much the same way that spell checkers now encourage people to be lackadaisical in their spelling. However, I believe the benefits outweigh the drawbacks and I support this feature.
Good point.
Made even better by Herky's misspelling encourage.
Bad point. |
| Ali |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 15:40:19
quote:
Originally posted by Sludge
quote:
Originally posted by Herky
The only drawback to the "review already exists for another film" feature that I can see is that it may encourange reviewers (especially newcomers) to become less diligent in checking the extant reviews for film they are reviewing to see if there's a similarity, in much the same way that spell checkers now encourage people to be lackadaisical in their spelling. However, I believe the benefits outweigh the drawbacks and I support this feature.
Good point.
Made even better by Herky's misspelling encourage.
|
| Sludge |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 15:29:02
quote:
Originally posted by Herky
The only drawback to the "review already exists for another film" feature that I can see is that it may encourange reviewers (especially newcomers) to become less diligent in checking the extant reviews for film they are reviewing to see if there's a similarity, in much the same way that spell checkers now encourage people to be lackadaisical in their spelling. However, I believe the benefits outweigh the drawbacks and I support this feature.
Good point. |
| Ali |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 14:04:52
I recently reviewed The Eyes of Laura Mars: "Eyes see dead people." It got a few votes. I am awesome.
|
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 13:59:26
quote:
Originally posted by MM0rkeleb
and the fact that people on this site are likely a touch smarter than the average bear
I'm not fonda your implication here and would rather you dunaway with your accusation or else I'm walken outta this site, I swear I'll sue dead people if I have to.
|
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 06:24:22
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I'd like to find one for "Green ideas sleep furiously." 
Sounds like a ringer for "Who Killed the Electric Car?".
Or Soylent Green?
(Although I'm not sure furiously works.
|
| turrell |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 05:49:44
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I'd like to find one for "Green ideas sleep furiously."
Sounds like a ringer for "Who Killed the Electric Car?". |
| turrell |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 05:48:57
quote:
Originally posted by R o � k G 0 1 f
quote:
According to these assumptions, which frankly seem a little conservative to me, there are 2500^3, or more than 15 billion, different reviews that could be written (reviews shorter than 4 words ignored as negligible). This means we've uncovered about .002% of the possibilities out there.
I'm still trying to find a film for the review "Shark calliope often fucshia."
Watch Shark Week - something might fit |
| MM0rkeleb |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 03:17:39
quote:
Originally posted by R o � k G 0 1 f
quote:
According to these assumptions, which frankly seem a little conservative to me, there are 2500^3, or more than 15 billion, different reviews that could be written (reviews shorter than 4 words ignored as negligible). This means we've uncovered about .002% of the possibilities out there.
I'm still trying to find a film for the review "Shark calliope often fucshia."
Entirely possible that's one of the 400 quadrillion or so I eliminated in the 10% section of the estimate. 
|
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 00:23:34
I'd like to find one for "Green ideas sleep furiously." |
| RockGolf |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 00:18:05
quote:
According to these assumptions, which frankly seem a little conservative to me, there are 2500^3, or more than 15 billion, different reviews that could be written (reviews shorter than 4 words ignored as negligible). This means we've uncovered about .002% of the possibilities out there.
I'm still trying to find a film for the review "Shark calliope often fucshia."
|
| Herky |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 23:53:03
The only drawback to the "review already exists for another film" feature that I can see is that it may encourange reviewers (especially newcomers) to become less diligent in checking the extant reviews for film they are reviewing to see if there's a similarity, in much the same way that spell checkers now encourage people to be lackadaisical in their spelling. However, I believe the benefits outweigh the drawbacks and I support this feature.
|
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 00:05:10
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
Speaking for myself I might be more apt to remove an inadvertent duplicate if you pm'd me instead of went the public shame route.
That's up to you, but the point of posting openly is not to try to force the person to delete -- it's to give everyone the knowledge of what reviews there are, so they can decide which to vote for. |
| turrell |
Posted - 05/26/2008 : 23:41:36
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
Sean is right that this is a big problem now, which is why when I recognise F.W.F.R.s in the F.Y.C.T.H./MIHAI or can tell that they will have definitely been used I now post links to the earlier cases.
Speaking for myself I might be more apt to remove an inadvertent duplicate if you pm'd me instead of went the public shame route. |
