| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
ci�nas 
"hands down"
|
 Posted - 11/03/2009 : 00:31:31
|
benj, if you�re listening, I would really like some clarification of the �too generic� decline reason. Today, or rather yesterday by the time I finish this, I had a review declined on the grounds that it was too generic because it could apply to one other film (which the MERP named).
And so it could. But a while ago I noticed that this review had been accepted. (Apologies to the reviewer for singling this out, although I suspect he won�t be reading this.)
Clearly a rule or guideline or whatever it is that disallows one review because it could apply to a total of two films yet allows another that could apply to � say � 20% of the films on the site lacks consistency.
With potentially �too generic� reviews there is also the matter of interpretation. Most of the best reviews have more than one meaning, & sometimes the non-generic one isn't obvious. I aim for as few words as possible & therefore expect, & duly get, quite a lot of �too generic� rejections. Recently I reviewed Junebug with �Outsider, art� & it was rejected. But I was quite surprised by the decision. The MERP adduced Pollock & one or two other films about artists that the review would fit. True, but only up to a point. As I�d explained when submitting it, outsider art is na�ve art, more or less, & Junebug is about a sophisticated Brit art dealer in North Carolina, an outsider among rural Americans, trying to strike a deal with a local self-taught artist. That is to say, when construed correctly � not just as two isolated words but as a semi-technical phrase � the review becomes far more specific. (�North Carolina; outsider, art� has subsequently been accepted, but I think the geographical reference is clunky & serves to detract from whatever wit the review originally had.)
Anyway, these are simply examples. This isn't a complaint about these two declines in particular or MERPs� subjectivity in general. Subjectivity is unavoidable. I�m just totally confused about what is & what isn�t too generic.
|
|
|
benj clews
"...."
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 00:53:37
|
I'd need to know what the review was I guess (but even then it'd just be my opinion on what is or isn't generic).
Still, in general, I'd say if a review could apply to a small number of other films (2 certainly falling into this category) then yes- it's not what I'd typically consider generic. *However*, if those two films are both very well-known films (once again a bit subjective) then I might rethink this a little and tighten the generic rule some.
I should also add that, with the subtle extra details you clearly put into your reviews, it sounds likely you'll often need to resubmit with an explanation. I wouldn't expect a MERP working their way through a bunch of reviews to read into the review quite to that level without a bit of clarification. |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 02:04:41
|
Yep, the MERPs are absolutely dreadful at comprehending the 'Too generic' rule.
Great review. |
|
|
|
ci�nas
"hands down"
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 23:53:46
|
Thanks, Salopian.
OK benj, the first review mentioned is �Cop dog�. I submitted it for Turner & Hooch, which I�ve had the misfortune to see, & the MERP rejected it as too generic because it could also apply to K-9. I resubmitted it straightaway & await the outcome.
I have deleted the accepted review for Junebug, resubmitted �Outsider, art�, & again will wait & see. (BTW, previously it was submitted & unavailingly resubmitted with full explanations.) 
I�m not hung up about these two reviews or about any reviews in particular. Most you win, a few you lose. I prefer reviews that are short & aspire to be snappy, & accept that they run a greater risk of being or seeming too generic than longer reviews. But trying to anticipate how the rule will be applied ain�t easy.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
ci�nas
"hands down"
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 23:56:49
|
Ah, the original Junebug review was accepted while I was writing the above & doing other stuff.
Many thanks for that.
|
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 00:22:00
|
| I've just had "J. Morrison dies young" declined as too generic -- apart from a small number of films about the Doors (which this review is obviously not about), what other ones could it possibly refer to? It's just a ridiculous situation. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
too generic
