| Author |
 Topic  |
|
ragingfluff 
"Currently lost in Canada"
|
 Posted - 01/27/2007 : 16:24:40
|
I am sure I am not the only one who has had reviews declined for reasons that boggle the mind. Can we have a fourum (for fun only) of submissions of declined reviews, or does that break the rules.
Here are three of mine that were declined (no reason given)
Note: I have resubmitted them with further explanation and they are now back in my huge "pending reviews" pile and may yet be approved
2001: A Space Odyssey - To the Moon, HAL-ice!
All The President's Men - Spoiler Alert! Nixon Resigns
Bowling for Columbine - Fahrenheit 3.57
I'm not fishing for compliments, just curious as to why some reviews get rejected and others (that frankly, seem pretty blah) get approved |
|
|
Montgomery 
"F**k!"
|
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 16:49:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by ragingfluff
I am sure I am not the only one who has had reviews declined for reasons that boggle the mind. Can we have a fourum (for fun only) of submissions of declined reviews, or does that break the rules.
Here are three of mine that were declined (no reason given)
Note: I have resubmitted them with further explanation and they are now back in my huge "pending reviews" pile and may yet be approved
2001: A Space Odyssey - To the Moon, HAL-ice!
All The President's Men - Spoiler Alert! Nixon Resigns
Bowling for Columbine - Fahrenheit 3.57
I'm not fishing for compliments, just curious as to why some reviews get rejected and others (that frankly, seem pretty blah) get approved
Are they headed for the moon in 2001? That might be the problem with that one.
Not sure about All The President's Men. Seems fine to me. And, sorry, I don't get the Bowling for Columbine one. Please explain.
EM :) |
 |
|
|
ragingfluff
"Currently lost in Canada"
|
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 18:04:19
|
Well, technically HAL is not on board the ship that goes to the Moon, so I see your point.
Fahrenheit 3.57 is a piss take on Fahrenheit 911 (also made by Michael Moore). 3.57 is the caliber of a gun (the Magnum 3.57): it seemed apt considering the subject matter of Bowling for Columbine. |
Edited by - ragingfluff on 01/27/2007 18:04:48 |
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 18:34:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by ragingfluff
Well, technically HAL is not on board the ship that goes to the Moon, so I see your point.
Fahrenheit 3.57 is a piss take on Fahrenheit 911 (also made by Michael Moore). 3.57 is the caliber of a gun (the Magnum 3.57): it seemed apt considering the subject matter of Bowling for Columbine.
The only thing I can think of with the Nixon one is that the times I've submitted a "spoiler alert" based review, they've been declined even if it were a complete no brainer like Titanic: Spoiler alert: Iceberg ahead.
I thought that gun calibre was expressed as .357??
|
|
|
|
lemmycaution 
"Long mired in film"
|
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 18:37:18
|
Hi, ragingfluff
I know the 'declined' feeling. I have a long list of reviews that did not make it. Other than generic and inaccurate, another reason that many of mine were declined is that they are just a little too arcane or far out. I found out early on that a review that I thought was brilliant was just a little too far out in left field to make it. It is really hard to qualify, but the more reviews you write and the longer you are on the site, the easier it is to see what will work and what won't.
I think your Columbine review was one of those.
As far as ATPM is concerned, I suppose your review could also refer to 'Nixon' and probably some others. ATPM isn't really about Nixon's resignation anyway.
Whatever you do, don't get discouraged. You have too many good reviews to allow that to happen and I am glad to see you resubmit with explanation. This has worked for me in a number of situations. |
Edited by - lemmycaution on 01/27/2007 19:42:39 |
|
|
|
ragingfluff
"Currently lost in Canada"
|
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 19:36:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
quote:
Originally posted by ragingfluff
Well, technically HAL is not on board the ship that goes to the Moon, so I see your point.
Fahrenheit 3.57 is a piss take on Fahrenheit 911 (also made by Michael Moore). 3.57 is the caliber of a gun (the Magnum 3.57): it seemed apt considering the subject matter of Bowling for Columbine.
The only thing I can think of with the Nixon one is that the times I've submitted a "spoiler alert" based review, they've been declined even if it were a complete no brainer like Titanic: Spoiler alert: Iceberg ahead.
I thought that gun calibre was expressed as .357??
I checked about the gun calibre; you're correct and I have changed mu review accordingly.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
ragingfluff
"Currently lost in Canada"
|
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 19:42:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by lemmycaution
Hi, ragingfluff
I know the 'declined' feeling. I have a long list of reviews that did not make it. Other than generic and innacurate, another reason that many of mine were declined is that they are just a little too arcane or far out. I found out early on that a review that I thought was brilliant was just a little too far out in left field to make it. It is really hard to qualify, but the more reviews you write and the longer you are on the site, the easier it is to see what will work and what won't.
I think your Columbine review was one of those.
As far as ATPM is concerned, I suppose your review could also refer to 'Nixon' and probably some others. ATPM isn't really about Nixon's resignation anyway.
Whatever you do, don't get discouraged. You have too many good reviews to allow that to happen and I am glad to see you resubmit with explanation. This has worked for me in a number of situations.
Thanks for the encouragment.
It's stupid, I know, to get upset about this; I just find it bizarre that fairly straightforward reviews (e.g. ones which describe what happens in the film - and not in a clever way) get accepted and other, wittier, cleverer ones get declined. Technically speaking straightforward descriptions of a film's action should not really qualify as a review...there's no critique, is there??? This may be hair splitting.. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 21:26:02
|
| It can be very frustrating, but it's best to step back and have another look from an outside perspective at your work and wonder if it is a) an accurate description, b) generic. I think the three examples you gave all fit into those two catagories. Sometimes reviews just need a little explanation too, so no harm in the resubmission if you feel strongly about it. Sometimes that decline makes me realise how much better the review can be. |
|
|
|
stroll 
"Husband, Father. Smithsmothsmuthen. Muppetologist."
|
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 02:12:17
|
[quote]Originally posted by ragingfluff
I am sure I am not the only one who has had reviews declined for reasons that boggle the mind. Can we have a fourum (for fun only) of submissions of declined reviews, or does that break the rules.
Here are three of mine that were declined (no reason given)
(Stroll removed the two he was not commenting on)
All The President's Men - Spoiler Alert! Nixon Resigns
It is interesting you had a spoiler alert one declined.
I just submitted Wizard of Oz - Spoiler Alert: Dorothy's dreaming. That was also declined but I have resubmitted and is now pending for a 2nd chance.
I so much like the Spoiler alert concept that I have 2 other ones pending:
Armageddon: Spoiler alert: Asteroids miss.
Miracle: Spoiler Alert: U.S. wins.
If and when yours or any of mine are accepted we should start a spoiler alert accolade for all films with a spoiler alert review in it.
|
|
|
|
stroll
"Husband, Father. Smithsmothsmuthen. Muppetologist."
|
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 02:27:01
|
[quote]Originally posted by lemmycaution
...
As far as ATPM is concerned, I suppose your review could also refer to 'Nixon' and probably some others. ATPM isn't really about Nixon's resignation anyway.
Lemmy, while I think your words of encouragement were excellent, I must disagree with your ATPM comments. ATPM is all about Nixon's resignation. That is why the film ends with his resignation. Some feel that If it wasn't for woodsteen there would not have been a need for Nixon to resign. While that sentiment may not be actually true, it certainly feels true when you watch the movie.
But if the reviewer thought like you did, that may have been why it was declined. As I implied in my last comment, I thought the review excellent and I look forward to it's approval, so I can vote for it. |
Edited by - stroll on 01/28/2007 02:29:21 |
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 04:09:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by stroll
If and when yours or any of mine are accepted we should start a spoiler alert accolade for all films with a spoiler alert review in it.
Personally, I'm fond of the spoiler alert idea myself, though I think they work best and are funnier when the film is widely known and the spoiler is, as I mentioned above, a no brainer.
A friend and I have run a pop culture trivia channel on an IRC server for about 5 years now, and I write a lot of questions for the bot. I went on a spree a year or two ago and wrote a bundle of spoiler alert questions. They would transfer to here SOOOOO easily. (However, I tend to think the "US wins" review may be rejected as too generic.) |
|
|
|
stroll
"Husband, Father. Smithsmothsmuthen. Muppetologist."
|
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 06:30:54
|
[quote]Originally posted by wildhartlivie
The only thing I can think of with the Nixon one is that the times I've submitted a "spoiler alert" based review, they've been declined even if it were a complete no brainer like Titanic: Spoiler alert: Iceberg ahead.
What I see the problem as with the spoiler alerts review is that the submitters get the joke, which those declining the review seem to miss.
I hate to have to hold a humor clinic here, but I will.
The reason why the spoiler alert is funny on a fwfr is because it's not really a spoiler!! Wildhart expressed it so well: The more known the movie and the more known the outcome of the movie, the funnier that review is. So everybody who's seen Titanic, All The President's Men, and Miracle or know the history behind these fact based films should see the irony in calling them spoiler alerts. In fact, if those 3 attempted reviews did not contain the phrase spoiler alert, they would be too genric. That's the point: we say it's a spoiler and then give generic info. That's funny.
I am available to give talks for the humor impaired. Chances are, however, they wouldn't find them amusing. :(
|
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 08:41:57
|
Just an aside. One of the pitfalls I keep falling into is getting too attached to a certain pun or play on words for a review. Sometimes it works (like with my All That Jazz review) but sometimes the MERPs just will not get it. I've been trying to get a review for Cold Mountain accepted that I thought was brilliant: "Goodbye? Ruby Thewes, stay!". It plays on the Rolling Stone's song Goodbye Ruby Tuesday, and since Ruby Thewes is a drifter who has to be convinced (albeit halfheartedly) to stay with Kidman on the farm, I thought it worked. But the MERPs weren't having any of it. I'm giving it one more try as "Kidman's Ruby Thewes stays", but if that goes down too, I'll drop it.
Sometimes we have to allow the MERPs to kill our babies.
|
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 10:36:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
I've been trying to get a review for Cold Mountain accepted that I thought was brilliant: "Goodbye? Ruby Thewes, stay!". It plays on the Rolling Stone's song Goodbye Ruby Tuesday, and since Ruby Thewes is a drifter who has to be convinced (albeit halfheartedly) to stay with Kidman on the farm, I thought it worked. But the MERPs weren't having any of it. I'm giving it one more try as "Kidman's Ruby Thewes stays", but if that goes down too, I'll drop it.
Sometimes we have to allow the MERPs to kill our babies.
I think that's fairly brilliant as well. My number one highest review uses that same exact concept. Beetlejuice: Day-O of the Dead. The only thing I see different between that and yours is that the Banana Boat Song is used in the film. That was written within the first week or two that I started here and it seems I haven't topped the pinacle of that one review. 
I personally endorse your review.
But I'm not a MERP... |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 13:37:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
I've been trying to get a review for Cold Mountain accepted that I thought was brilliant: "Goodbye? Ruby Thewes, stay!". It plays on the Rolling Stone's song Goodbye Ruby Tuesday, and since Ruby Thewes is a drifter who has to be convinced (albeit halfheartedly) to stay with Kidman on the farm, I thought it worked. But the MERPs weren't having any of it. I'm giving it one more try as "Kidman's Ruby Thewes stays", but if that goes down too, I'll drop it.
Sometimes we have to allow the MERPs to kill our babies.
I think that's fairly brilliant as well. My number one highest review uses that same exact concept. Beetlejuice: Day-O of the Dead. The only thing I see different between that and yours is that the Banana Boat Song is used in the film. That was written within the first week or two that I started here and it seems I haven't topped the pinacle of that one review.
I personally endorse your review.
But I'm not a MERP...
I appreciate the endorsement, but my guess is that the revision will probably get declined as well. Too bad the Rolling Stones didn't do some of the music for this movie. If they had, my review would have been brilliant!
|
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 15:14:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Just an aside. One of the pitfalls I keep falling into is getting too attached to a certain pun or play on words for a review. Sometimes it works (like with my All That Jazz review) but sometimes the MERPs just will not get it. I've been trying to get a review for Cold Mountain accepted that I thought was brilliant: "Goodbye? Ruby Thewes, stay!". It plays on the Rolling Stone's song Goodbye Ruby Tuesday, and since Ruby Thewes is a drifter who has to be convinced (albeit halfheartedly) to stay with Kidman on the farm, I thought it worked. But the MERPs weren't having any of it. I'm giving it one more try as "Kidman's Ruby Thewes stays", but if that goes down too, I'll drop it.
Sometimes we have to allow the MERPs to kill our babies.
Yeah, especially clones... 
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Declined Reviews
