| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Catuli 
"Loves Film and Fun"
|
 Posted - 08/16/2008 : 00:15:25
|
While I've often requested that a MERP be specific when voicing concern about a review, I've now discovered that that approach can backfire. In the film "The Fat Spy" seems to have a lot of riffs on a portly James Bond. Some of the accepted reviews just recast the the Bond Series Theme with general plays on well known series entries, i.e. "For Your Thighs Only." I thought I did a acceptable variant of that. The MERP has suggested that I reference exactly who fits my description. First of all, it's hard to work in extra references within the four-limit. Secondly, why isn't such specificity being applied to the other reviews? Thoughts?
|
|
|
Larry 
"Larry's time / sat merrily"
|
Posted - 08/16/2008 : 04:29:55
|
Yeah, I get that all the time. I'll see a bunch of reviews that are, let's say, less-than-specific for a film. I think, Oh good - they're loosening the requirements on this one. So, I write a review in keeping with the spirit of the reviews that have come before it - AND I GET QUESTIONED ON IT. Usually, I challenge it by pointing to other reviews as examples, but all that does is put my review in limbo for months as it waits for Benj to look at it. If he doesn't ultimately approve it, I've wasted a submission. If the review is FINALLY approved, it's usually so late that everybody's over it and it only gets a few votes anyway. It's a lose/lose situation. |
 |
|
|
Catuli
"Loves Film and Fun"
|
Posted - 08/16/2008 : 04:42:07
|
Thanks Larry, I'm glad somebody feels the same way I do on this. What I don't understand is why I'm asked something like "what character in the film are you referring to," as if you couldn't be making a comment on the film in general.
|
|
|
|
randall 
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 08/16/2008 : 12:21:54
|
| Man oh man, do I understand this gripe. I've learned from many declines that the site gets more specific from time to time, and benj feels that reviews for a flick must reflect what happens in the flick itself, DESPITE all the previous clever riffs on a title [porn flicks seem to be excused from all this]. Yet to try and wash all the old ones off the site is a task that borders on idiocy, since you could be spending your time on something [anything!] more productive. Just some observation from an old-timer. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Clarification requests
