| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
 Posted - 07/05/2007 : 09:58:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
This thread is in the wrong section, by the way. The 'Site maintenance' section was created so that this section did not have too many negative threads.
That damned foxboy!  |
 |
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/05/2007 : 10:00:35
|
And to think I supported the Fox Hunting ban too!
|
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 07/05/2007 : 10:00:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
And as it stands, the review said "Lobe at First Bite."
Hhmmm, it's true that is not explicit as some, but it does come across as more a part of the actual film than the type of thing I was imagining.
Surely there is a later documentary that these reviews could be attached to? Similary, why can't the non-Dunst reviews be moved to another Marie Antoinette film? |
|
|
|
benj clews 
"...."
|
Posted - 07/05/2007 : 12:18:48
|
The simple(ish) rule is if it doesn't happen or isn't referred to in the film then it doesn't stand as a review/ summary of the film. If these types of reviews are allowed you could theoretically review the Hollywood satire/ biography 'Swimming With Sharks' as "Diver meets dangerous fish".
The exception (i.e. the reason for putting 'ish in the above statement) is that if there's no information available about the plot of the film then title plays are allowed, which I think is pretty generous.
If there are other films where reviews fail this ruling then those reviews should also be declined, it's just a matter of them being flagged up and me getting around to declining them. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/05/2007 : 16:14:05
|
The Judgment of Solomon Benjamin.
But can I refer to him as an ear-biter because he later became one and we all now think of him as one?
If so I would argue that "Ear-biter loses Hearing" would be OK as he lost the Rape Hearing within the context of the film, and therefore that review could stand.
If that's not acceptable, could it pls be changed to "Ironically, Tyson loses Hearing" instead of being completely, eh, knocked on the head?
These fwfrs are nothing but trouble... 
|
|
|
|
randall 
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 07/05/2007 : 23:18:03
|
Hey hey, ho ho,
Those ear reviews have got to go! |
|
|
|
thefoxboy
"Four your eyes only."
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/06/2007 : 00:35:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
But can I refer to him as an ear-biter because he later became one and we all now think of him as one?
If so I would argue that "Ear-biter loses Hearing" would be OK as he lost the Rape Hearing within the context of the film, and therefore that review could stand.
If that's not acceptable, could it pls be changed to "Ironically, Tyson loses Hearing" instead of being completely, eh, knocked on the head?
These fwfrs are nothing but trouble...
It sounds like a reasonable argument, although benj is probably ripping his hair out (and his ear off) over it. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Mike Tyson.
