The Four Word Film Review Fourum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Return to my fwfr
Frequently Asked Questions Click for advanced search
 All Forums
 FWFR Related
 Site Maintenance
 Non-films
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Send Topic to a Friend
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 19

Larry 
"I'm still plugging along."

Posted - 10/05/2011 :  23:06:32  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Joe Blevins

The removal of the Star Wars Holiday Special is silly. Despite its title, it is most definitely a made for TV movie and not a mere variety special. It's actually a movie-length production (2 hours with commercials) and has a narrative plot which runs all the way through it. If it's ineligible, then all TV movies should be ineligible... and I don't think that's a road you want to go down. (Do you? Hoping not.)

Not that I'm defending its quality, mind you. I've actually SEEN it, and it's truly dismal. But I wonder about the person who asked that it be deleted: has he or she actually seen it...? Again, its title makes it sound like a variety special, but it's really more of a made-for-TV musical. Definitely a movie. Its deletion from FWFR was an overzealous mistake.

P.S. - Not that I'm defending my own reviews for it either. They were fair at best. I'm not mourning their loss. But this case calls the whole site's veracity into question. I worry about people deleting movies before getting the facts straight beforehand.



Nicely said. There are other films that have been mistakenly removed and subsequently blocked based on quirky titles or on incorrect IMDB descriptions (yes, IMDB makes mistakes) that will need to be addressed some time in the future. I do hope that the votes given to these deleted films have been recorded somewhere so they can be reinstated when saner heads prevail things are re-evaluated.

Edited by - Larry on 11/05/2011 22:36:12
Go to Top of Page

Paraguaian 
"Four-word thinking"

Paraguay

Posted - 11/05/2011 :  22:26:44  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Joe Blevins

The removal of the Star Wars Holiday Special is silly. Despite its title, it is most definitely a made for TV movie and not a mere variety special.

Loads of cinema-released films have been excluded too, so this is not really the point. I'm not endorsing its removal, just pointing out that the films being removed long ago went past just T.V. movies or any other discernible pattern.

Go to Top of Page

Paraguaian 
"Four-word thinking"

Paraguay

Posted - 11/05/2011 :  22:28:50  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Larry

I do hope that the votes given to these deleted films have been recorded somewhere so they can be reinstated when saner heads prevail.

Hhmmm, as much as I disagree with many exclusions, I don't think it's really nice to say that Benj is lacking in sanity!

Go to Top of Page

Larry 
"I'm still plugging along."

Posted - 11/05/2011 :  22:36:53  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian

quote:
Originally posted by Larry

I do hope that the votes given to these deleted films have been recorded somewhere so they can be reinstated when saner heads prevail.

Hhmmm, as much as I disagree with many exclusions, I don't think it's really nice to say that Benj is lacking in sanity!



Point taken. Original comment changed.
Go to Top of Page

Larry 
"I'm still plugging along."

Posted - 17/05/2011 :  17:31:01  Show Profile  Reply with Quote

The mad slasher strikes again. Another film previously added which now, suddenly, is classified as "not a film." This Time Around. Yeah, it's a TV movie, but I don't think that's why it has been deleted. It's full length, played in the USA and a bunch of other countries, either on TV or released as a video movie. It doesn't seem to be part of a series. The point is, I don't mind films being retracted, but I think we deserve more of an explanation than just "not a film." If I know what the guidelines are I can stop adding, and stop reviewing, stuff that will eventually be eliminated. It'll save me a lot of time, and the time of the MERPS who have to read the reviews, if I don't submit reviews for films that will, at some point, go bye-bye.
Go to Top of Page

Paraguaian 
"Four-word thinking"

Paraguay

Posted - 18/05/2011 :  17:14:17  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Larry

The mad slasher strikes again. Another film previously added which now, suddenly, is classified as "not a film." This Time Around. Yeah, it's a TV movie, but I don't think that's why it has been deleted. It's full length, played in the USA and a bunch of other countries, either on TV or released as a video movie. It doesn't seem to be part of a series. The point is, I don't mind films being retracted, but I think we deserve more of an explanation than just "not a film." If I know what the guidelines are I can stop adding, and stop reviewing, stuff that will eventually be eliminated. It'll save me a lot of time, and the time of the MERPS who have to read the reviews, if I don't submit reviews for films that will, at some point, go bye-bye.

I've asked again and again for parameters as to what is being removed, but to no avail. I've also asked for the obviously false Not a film to be changed to something more accurate (e.g. Entry excluded from database).

Edited by - Paraguaian on 18/05/2011 18:36:57
Go to Top of Page

Larry 
"I'm still plugging along."

Posted - 18/05/2011 :  18:17:43  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian

quote:
Originally posted by Larry

The mad slasher strikes again. Another film previously added which now, suddenly, is classified as "not a film." This Time Around. Yeah, it's a TV movie, but I don't think that's why it has been deleted. It's full length, played in the USA and a bunch of other countries, either on TV or released as a video movie. It doesn't seem to be part of a series. The point is, I don't mind films being retracted, but I think we deserve more of an explanation than just "not a film." If I know what the guidelines are I can stop adding, and stop reviewing, stuff that will eventually be eliminated. It'll save me a lot of time, and the time of the MERPS who have to read the reviews, if I don't submit reviews for films that will, at some point, go bye-bye.

I've asked again and again for parameters as to what is being removed, but to no avail. I've also asked for the obviously false Not a film to be changed to something more accurate (e.g. Entry excluded from database).



Yes, I know, Cracovian. I was hoping my post would add some weight to your plea. Apparently not. I'm not sure benj even looks at this anymore.
Go to Top of Page

demonic 
"Cinemaniac"

United Kingdom

Posted - 18/06/2011 :  11:37:08  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Fail Caesar
Go to Top of Page

Paraguaian 
"Four-word thinking"

Paraguay

Posted - 10/09/2011 :  17:26:33  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I have for a while thought that my Salopian's Cine File 2011 accolade was significantly smaller than it should be, but I couldn't think of what was missing. However, I have now noticed my review for this in my rejected list with Un-added. This is a short, but there are many other shorts here and this one is about half an hour. I saw it at a respected film festival, and it's good other than in the fact that it is a rip-off of a real-life story. This kind of thing doesn't get much information at the I.M.D.B. quickly, but it likely will in time.

This may sound melodramatic, but I feel angry and upset about these removals and think that they are simply cruel. I have specifically asked on at least two occasions that creators get alerts when their accolades lose films. This would obviously just be useful in general, but this site is the only place where I have (or rather had) a thorough record of the films I've seen, so now I've lost this knowledge for ever.

Like others elsewhere, I can't understand why Benj wants to keep decimating the site like this without ever offering an explanation. If we cannot review films that we have seen this year at the cinema, then really what is the point in reviewing anything?
Go to Top of Page

Paraguaian 
"Four-word thinking"

Paraguay

Posted - 14/09/2011 :  18:24:57  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Here is another award-winning film that has been removed.
Go to Top of Page

Paraguaian 
"Four-word thinking"

Paraguay

Posted - 14/09/2011 :  18:26:33  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
And this was made for television but is clearly still a film.
Go to Top of Page

Paraguaian 
"Four-word thinking"

Paraguay

Posted - 19/09/2011 :  23:50:55  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
This might be terrible but it is definitely a real film -- I had the misfortune to see it recently and wanted to score(/possibly review) it here.
Go to Top of Page

Larry 
"I'm still plugging along."

Posted - 29/05/2012 :  12:27:14  Show Profile  Reply with Quote

The system wouldn't let me add this film, which is interesting since Part 3 and Part 5 are already part of the FWFR database.
Go to Top of Page

benj clews 
"...."

United Kingdom

Posted - 29/05/2012 :  17:15:37  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Larry


The system wouldn't let me add this film, which is interesting since Part 3 and Part 5 are already part of the FWFR database.



Cheers for letting me know. I just deblocked this- give it a try now
Go to Top of Page

Larry 
"I'm still plugging along."

Posted - 04/06/2012 :  12:28:50  Show Profile  Reply with Quote

Another blocked film.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 19 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Send Topic to a Friend
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
The Four Word Film Review Fourum © 1999-2013 benj clews Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000