| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
 Posted - 20/10/2014 : 14:04:19
|
If, as happened to me recently, reviews are declined for films yet to be released and which have no info, but are listed on imdb ... then why are they allowed to be imported into the fwfr database? Doesn't seem logical to me. benj? Any wise words, please!! TIA
|
|
|
MguyX 
"X marks the spot"
United States
|
Posted - 22/10/2014 : 19:54:16
|
I think the question goes to the content of the review. Programming code to recognize whether a film has been released may not be possible, given the parameters of IMDB (I'm not sure they have a readily available field for released -- though I imagine the presence of a release date, versus the absence of one might work).
The question, really, is what the reviews were? For example, I once posted a review about an unreleased film, punning on the fact that it had yet to be released. It was declined because (as I was told) it contained a "double fault": the film did not exist, and the review was of the fact that it did not exist, so it wasn't really a review of the (nonexistent) film in the first place (which would immediately become an "inaccurate" review when and/or if the film ever became made). a paradox, of sorts.
So I hunted down the MERP and shot him.
Where's Randall these days?  |
Edited by - MguyX on 22/10/2014 19:55:39 |
 |
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 22/10/2014 : 22:13:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by MguyX
I think the question goes to the content of the review. Programming code to recognize whether a film has been released may not be possible, given the parameters of IMDB (I'm not sure they have a readily available field for released -- though I imagine the presence of a release date, versus the absence of one might work).
The question, really, is what the reviews were? For example, I once posted a review about an unreleased film, punning on the fact that it had yet to be released. It was declined because (as I was told) it contained a "double fault": the film did not exist, and the review was of the fact that it did not exist, so it wasn't really a review of the (nonexistent) film in the first place (which would immediately become an "inaccurate" review when and/or if the film ever became made). a paradox, of sorts.
So I hunted down the MERP and shot him.
Where's Randall these days?
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Have rules changed re reviewing unreleased films?
