| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Wheeljak 
"I'm not that guy."
|
 Posted - 05/18/2006 : 06:43:20
|
Hello, all. New guy here.
I'm feeling totally dissed right now, because a great review (IMO) got declined with a "Don't Understand" flag.
My review was thus:
Future's a living Hel.
Why was this so hard to understand?
I contend that it's not only understandable, but understandable on two levels:
1. Metropolis paints a dystopic future, where the underclass toils without reward or respite. "living hell"
2. Hel the robot absorbed Maria's life essence and became a living being herself. "living Hel".
Since I'm new here, I'd like to calibrate myself to the sensibilities of the people who populate this place. Was this review really too esoteric to be understandable? |
|
|
bife 
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 06:50:39
|
Hey there Wheeljak, big welcome to the fourum 
'Dont understand' is a rejection type you shouldn't get too upset about - it doesn't mean that the review is too esoteric to be understandable, nor that there is no place for it on the site.
Rather, it means that benj or the MERP looking at the review didn't understand themselves.
'Dont understand' is essentially an invitation for you to resubmit the review with a 100 character explanation of what it means in the 'Explanation box'.
You can add the explanation after you submit the review by going to the 'My fwfr' page, and clicking on the review. It will take you to the 'Edit review' page, where you will see an empty text box capable of taking 100 characters.
You can access this page either immediately after submitting a review, if you already suspect a MERP wont understand it, or you can access it after it has been declined. The former option generally gives rise to a much quicker turnaround time
Welcome again |
Edited by - bife on 05/18/2006 06:52:08 |
 |
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 06:54:51
|
And it is a good review - will vote for it when, as I suspect it will, it makes its way onto the site
Edit:
you already have a couple of cracking reviews - love 'Special school for leotards' and '88 divided by one'  |
Edited by - bife on 05/18/2006 06:58:24 |
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 06:55:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wheeljak
Hello, all. New guy here.
I'm feeling totally dissed right now, because a great review (IMO) got declined with a "Don't Understand" flag.
My review was thus:
Future's a living Hel.
Why was this so hard to understand?
I contend that it's not only understandable, but understandable on two levels:
1. Metropolis paints a dystopic future, where the underclass toils without reward or respite. "living hell"
2. Hel the robot absorbed Maria's life essence and became a living being herself. "living Hel".
Since I'm new here, I'd like to calibrate myself to the sensibilities of the people who populate this place. Was this review really too esoteric to be understandable?
Hi Wheeljak. A review declined with a "Don't Understand" notice means just that. It means that whoever processed it didn't understand it. Probably because they haven't seen the movie, or if they have, don't recall essential information about it, or perhaps were not able to find that information elsewhere on the web. So, it just means "Hey, I didn't understand that review, please resubmit it with an explanation and it'll be reconsidered".
Remember that there are 15,000 movies on this site, and the most avid lifetime movie addict probably only sees half this number in their life.
So, given your explanation, it sounds like this review is quite correct and specific to that movie, and is a clever and succinct review.
So, hit the Edit button, resubmit, and summarise what you said above in less than 100 characters and it'll very likely be approved the second time.
BTW, I saw that movie about 20 years ago, and recall it's set in a dystopic future, but certainly don't recall the name of a robot. Perhaps whoever processed it was in the same boat.
Edit: Ahh, I see bife got there first.  |
Edited by - Sean on 05/18/2006 06:56:10 |
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 07:02:23
|
Well that was quick - it's already there and with two votes - probably mine and sean's!
Suspect it'll get more. |
|
|
|
Wheeljak
"I'm not that guy."
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 07:05:15
|
Thanks for the explanation, bife and Sean. And thanks for the compliment, bife! That really makes me feel better, because my "declined" list is getting so very, very long.... |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 07:07:46
|
BTW, Wheeljak, I had a look at your page and found plenty of good ones to vote for.  Keep 'em coming.
Se�n |
|
|
|
Josh the cat
"ice wouldn't melt, you'd think ....."
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 08:43:36
|
Hey there Wheeljak I've been over and voted on a load of your reviews to help you settle in
Josh the cat |
|
|
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 08:49:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Josh the cat
Hey there Wheeljak I've been over and voted on a load of your reviews to help you settle in
Josh the cat
Ditto from me, Wheeljak! Some promising talent there. Specially liked your FWFR for Freeway = Little Red Riding Hoodlum.
|
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 08:59:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wheeljak
Thanks for the explanation, bife and Sean. And thanks for the compliment, bife! That really makes me feel better, because my "declined" list is getting so very, very long....
Not sure if you wanna know or not, but here's what I do with my declines:-
a) "Don't Understand" - I resubmit with essential information to help the Editors understand why it's valid.
b) "Generic" - I have a good think as to how it may apply to another prominent movie or movies, if it can then I delete it. If I think that there is something about the review that makes it apply to the relevant movie better than other movies then I resubmit with explanation.
c) "Factually Inaccurate" - I have a think about where I may have got it wrong, i.e., is my review correct or not? I either fix it and resubmit or delete it.
d) Declined without reason - I interpret this to mean that the editors think it was shite, and if so, then they're probably right and the cleverness probably only existed in my own mind, so I delete it.
Either way, my Declined pile is permanently empty, as declined reviews only spend 5 minutes there, after that they're corrected or resubmitted, or deleted. Although I know of some who never delete their declined reviews, ever. I couldn't stand it! 
Everyone gets plenty of declines when they start out at fwfr, including our old-timers and some of our most respected reviewers. It's normal, until you get the hang of the site rules which have proved notoriously difficult to define. Either way, keep 'em coming, and don't be afraid to ask someone here occasionally for some advice on the ones that leave you really stumped. |
|
|
|
turrell
"Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh "
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 09:53:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wheeljak
Metropolis paints a dystopic future, where the underclass toils without reward or respite. "living hell"
Since I'm new here, I'd like to calibrate myself to the sensibilities of the people who populate this place. Was this review really too esoteric to be understandable?
To help you calibrate, most of us slobs don't know what esoteric or dystopic mean .
Actually I thikn the review is pretty good as is (not that I am quaified to make such a comment). Perhaps resumbit with the explanation given above - they may not have known that Hel was a robot in the movie and thus did not understand. |
|
|
|
Beanmimo 
"August review site"
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 10:02:26
|
Now that You are over your rejections woes you can concentrate pon polishing up some new reviews. you've got some good ones there!!
B |
Edited by - Beanmimo on 05/18/2006 10:03:43 |
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 10:46:05
|
Hiya, Wheelie, just took out the Voting Hammer and Smote ya. Don't worry, you'll get the hang of it in no time. Keep 'em coming!
|
Edited by - randall on 05/18/2006 10:47:49 |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 11:20:17
|
Actually I havent watched Metropolis yet. I picked up a copy last week, free with a newspaper costing �1.20 ($2). I'll watch it soon and see whether you deserve my precious vote.
Meanwhile, I visited your reviews and sprinkled around a vote or two.
View with absolutely NO obligation |
|
|
|
lemmycaution
"Long mired in film"
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 13:40:15
|
Hello and welcome, Wheeljak.
It's been about 40 years since I saw Metropolis (around the same time that I saw its director star in the magnificent 'Le Mepris') but I like your review and will visit your page to get to know you better.
Hope you stick around.
P.S. Don't bother looking for any links in this post. You will soon find out that there are two species of fwiffers--shameless self promoters (Linkus extremis) and the more self-effacing type (fwifferus modestus).
To determine which category I fall under, simply click the name to the left of this post.
Happy trails.
EDIT. Roommates a Hedy case for SWF--Hee hee. |
Edited by - lemmycaution on 05/18/2006 13:45:48 |
|
|
|
TitanPa
"Here four more"
|
Posted - 05/18/2006 : 14:25:45
|
| This topic is misleading. I was expecting Superman. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Any Metropolis fans out there?
