| Author |
 Topic  |
|
ChocolateLady 
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
 Posted - 06/28/2010 : 07:07:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
Took me about month to write these five. Inspiration had dried up of late I'm afraid.
And they were well worth the wait - 5/5 from me!
(By the way, [matt] - I'd already voted on all of yours.)
|
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 10:09:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
there were lots of examples of variations on well known sayings or titles that had no relevance at all to the film being reviewed.
Um... this has always been done in large numbers here (e.g. the second, third and fourth highest reviews of all time). It's obviously a better review if it puns on a relevant phrase, but punning on a miscellaneous phrase is totally fine too. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 10:53:14
|
| Good comparison. I haven't voted on any of those three reviews; although they all have a strong relevance to the film being reviewed, even if the original reference is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 11:09:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
Good comparison. I haven't voted on any of those three reviews; although they all have a strong relevance to the film being reviewed, even if the original reference is irrelevant.
So I'm guessing you weren't impressed by this headline then?  |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 12:29:08
|
Given a bit more thought the issue isn't about the random phrase usage, it is actually about the relevance of the pun being made - the crossing over into inaccuracy for the sake of the pun. Several examples I'm thinking of don't have a link to the applied phrase or actually reflect the content of the film. Just putting that thought into the air. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 13:33:06
|
Well, I'm with you on inaccuracy of reviews. I've never been keen on puns (or other reviews) which float around somewhere near the subject matter of the film but aren't actually properly to do with it.
I just took a look back at my reviews from this round in case you meant one of them. The only one it might be is "Water whirled" for Hot Tub Time Machine. I don't think you probably did mean that, but just in case... It is accurate, non-generic and central to the plot but it does exhibit a weakness that is a theme in some of my reviews. Despite being a central element of the film it is not a major one. I think this comes from thinking about reviews while watching the films. Minor elements don't seem so minor at the moment they are on screen. I've in fact often suggested that there be a 'Too obscure' rejection reason (not that this review is bad enough for that): this seems to be what the MERPs actually want to say when they inaccurately choose some of the other options or don't bother to give a reason at all. Anyway, I can live with it. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Seán's FYCTH - #621
