| Author |
 Topic  |
|
ChocolateLady 
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
 Posted - 06/16/2007 : 12:12:28
|
Today I clicked on the Top Review link and noticed that Tequila Mockingbird was in first place for his/her review of Henry VIII And His Six Wives with "Boleyn for concubine". Some of you may recall that I have that I've had that same review up for the movie Ann of a Thousand Days, and it is my highest voted review. Thing is, I now see that Tequila's was up for that movie on August 5, 2005, which is before I put mine up (Feb. 2, 2006) for Ann. So, what is the policy? Should I delete mine? Is it okay that the same review is up for two different movies? Please let me know.
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 13:03:26
|
The site policy is that there is no prohibition against using an identical review for a film which has previously been used for another film.
Ethically, it's up to each individual fwfr to decide on an individual case basis.
My view is not to use already used reviews unless they have a different meaning or fit the new film better than the original film.
In your case its easy to feel that the review better fits "Anne Of A Thousand Days", which is about Anne Boleyn's relationship with Henry VIII, than "Henry VIII & His Six Wives" which is obviously more general.
Whether this difference is enough for you to keep the review is entirely your decision.
If you did decide to get rid of the review, I strongly suggest you smithee it, as otherwise someone else will come up with the idea independently sooner or later, and we'll be back to square one again.
(I may have an ulterior motive for the previous paragraph, but its true nevertheless.  )
Incidentally, and this is not aimed particulary at Chocky but in general, don't expect Benj to act as a morality policeman when it comes to this kind of problem.
We are each responsible for our own decisions on this kind of thing, don't dump it onto Benj, or assume because Benj does not delete a review that its necessarily OK.
|
 |
|
|
randall 
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 14:39:39
|
| Chocky, it's completely up to you. Search your mind. Use the Force. Read what Whippy said. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 14:51:58
|
I didn't really want to drop this on Benj, but I've only been here for 18 months and thought you all could make a call better than I could. Essentially, I'm just asking the Fourum people what they think I should do.
Ooohh. Decisions, decisions. And yes, if I do lose it, I will Smithee it.
(And recall fondly the review that brought me so many lovely votes. Sigh!)
|
Edited by - ChocolateLady on 06/16/2007 14:52:13 |
|
|
|
aahaa, muahaha 
"Optimistic altruist, incurable romantic"
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 19:57:38
|
My vote is that you retain it as it fits the film well and it is obvious that you did not see the earlier review.  |
|
|
|
Chris C 
"Four words, never backwards."
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 20:11:55
|
| I'm with Aahaa on this. Keep it. |
|
|
|
GHcool 
"Forever a curious character."
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 20:15:43
|
A review for March of the Penguins was just published that is identical to and more appropriate for noncentz's brilliant review of Winged Migration: "Meet the flockers."
I don't know if the copy cat did it intentionally, but I didn't vote for that review for March of the Penguins.
I'm a little embarrassed to say that I have been guilty of this crime as well. For example, I couldn't resist "Ottoman Empire Strikes Back" for Turks in Space when it was already written for Turkish Star Wars, however this is less of a digression because the review was not a new joke and has been bouncing around for years independently of FWFR. |
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 06/17/2007 : 04:45:56
|
Chocky - if you are asking for 'opinions', I will tell you that I would delete it if it were mine.
As has been said already, this is a personal call, there are no rules against duplicates across films, and I am just giving an opinion where asked for.
GHc - I 'originally' wrote 'Ottoman empire strikes back' for Turkish Star Wars, but I didn't come up with it myself, I saw it on a 'google picture search' for Turkish films while looking for a trophy for my Turkish Delight accolade. I felt bad about having 'borrowed' the pun from another source and deleted the review. Months later Tequila came up with it (absolutely independently). I didn't know it had 'been bouncing around for years' but I did know the joke wasn't mine. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 06/17/2007 : 11:50:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
If you did decide to get rid of the review, I strongly suggest you smithee it, as otherwise someone else will come up with the idea independently sooner or later, and we'll be back to square one again.
(I may have an ulterior motive for the previous paragraph, but its true nevertheless. )
No, this is not true at all. A review under Alan Smithee exists on the site just as much as under the writer's name or if a new person resubmitted it. It does not in the slightest take away from duplicating the older review. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 06/17/2007 : 12:07:43
|
| The idea is that if I Smithee the review, then no one else will be able to submit that same review for that same film, and the only person getting credit for that particular review, will be Tequila under the other film. I will have excused myself from getting any credit for that particular review, and also prevented anyone else from doing the same for that particular movie. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 06/17/2007 : 14:22:40
|
| O.K., yep, it's different outlooks. If I were in Tequila's position (which I am, with regards to Whippersnapper's duplicate of one of my reviews), it would be the duplication on the site that I minded, not whether or not the duplicate review were assigned to a real reviewer or Smithee. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 06/17/2007 : 15:18:53
|
Poor Sad Shallowpian!
He is no doubt referring to my "The Osmonds" review, "Band Of Brothers" which, it subsequently transpired, had already been written by him for another film also about the Osmonds. (I didn't notice it originally as the other film title includes "Osmond" not "Osmonds" which I searched under.
As soon as it came to light I asked him, by PM, if he wanted me to delete my review and he replied "it doesn't matter."
Subsequently, having thought it over, I smitheed the review as anyone is now able to see.
Incidentally, let me show you what a piece of work Shallowpian really is.
Have a look at this:
Sliding Doors
Mine was first, and when the obvious duplication of his review - no doubt a simple failure to check properly first rather than intentional - was drawn to his attention on 15MAR he posted:
"Sorry - I had not seen that review. Mine is better [sic], but I agree that it is too similar and that Benj should reject it. Please use the 'Report' button on it."
Now why should it be that, if an author of a review believes his is too similar to someone else's, he doesn't do the decent thing and delete it himself, rather than leaving it there until Benj gets a chance to sort it out and causing him extra work?
Could it be because he is a malevolent hypocrite?
|
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 06/17/2007 : 18:36:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
He is no doubt referring to my "The Osmonds" review, "Band Of Brothers" which, it subsequently transpired, had already been written by him for another film also about the Osmonds. (I didn't notice it originally as the other film title includes "Osmond" not "Osmonds" which I searched under.
As soon as it came to light I asked him, by PM, if he wanted me to delete my review and he replied "it doesn't matter."
No, that was not my wording. I said that, if you were keen to keep it, I wouldn't want to ask you to delete it.
quote:
Subsequently, having thought it over, I smitheed the review as anyone is now able to see.
This is no better a situation, so I don't know why you are trying to gain credit for doing this. It also goes against my endorsement of your keeping the review - I am not sure why you ever asked me if you were then going to act conversely. Perhaps you asked my opinion precisely so that you could do the opposite? Quite possibly.
quote:
Have a look at this:
Sliding Doors
Mine was first, and when the obvious duplication of his review - no doubt a simple failure to check properly first rather than intentional - was drawn to his attention on 15MAR he posted:
"Sorry - I had not seen that review. Mine is better [sic], but I agree that it is too similar and that Benj should reject it. Please use the 'Report' button on it."
Now why should it be that, if an author of a review believes his is too similar to someone else's, he doesn't do the decent thing and delete it himself, rather than leaving it there until Benj gets a chance to sort it out and causing him extra work?
My response here was completely reasonable. I still prefer my review, but gave you full license to have it removed. This was not imposing on Benj as it would only take him a few seconds. My reason for suggesting this route was so that the votes could be transferred. This was not for the sake of you gaining votes, but so that people who had voted on my review would not have wasted their time. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 06/17/2007 21:46:03 |
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 00:21:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
He is no doubt referring to my "The Osmonds" review, "Band Of Brothers" which, it subsequently transpired, had already been written by him for another film also about the Osmonds.
Of course, it had been written for Bee Gees: This Is Where I Came In long before it was ever written for The Osmonds  |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 00:35:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by bife
Of course, it had been written for Bee Gees: This Is Where I Came In long before it was ever written for The Osmonds
Indeed. Last time this came up, I apologised accordingly.  As I mentioned then, when I thought of the review, I thoroughly checked all the Osmond and Jackson films, but didn't think of the Bee Gees. If the Smithee one gets deleted, then I may well delete mine too. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 01:38:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by bife
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
He is no doubt referring to my "The Osmonds" review, "Band Of Brothers" which, it subsequently transpired, had already been written by him for another film also about the Osmonds.
Of course, it had been written for Bee Gees: This Is Where I Came In long before it was ever written for The Osmonds
Yeah, but they don't have the class of the Osmonds, do they?
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
What's the policy?
