| Author |
 Topic  |
|
noncentz 
"Myself in four words."
|
 Posted - 11/21/2004 : 07:02:51
|
Why do I visit this thread? Why??!!! (My sphincter tightens each time I visit - which is certainly handy when I need a pencil sharpened but that's about it.)
My two centz: For my money there are only a few kinds of "wrong" reviews, which I think is such a judgemental word. Wrongish reviews: one with more than 4 words, one that is impossibly generic, and one that is more than glaring in it's factual innaccuracies. There are a few othe minor infractions but overall, I love the poetry of metaphor and find a hard time calling something "wrong" here. Innacurate, yes.
Snap, Crackle, Pop, kids.
A fine double-meaning pun Benj. The laser thingie goes snap and crackle. Moranis is the kids' pop. And kids speaks for itself, the children and the humor. As for recalling the cereal scene, it's the most memorable scene in the film and your review nicely recalls it.
Good work.
Cheerio, all.
|
Edited by - noncentz on 11/21/2004 07:09:03 |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/21/2004 : 08:00:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by noncentz
Snap, Crackle, Pop, kids.
A fine double-meaning pun Benj. The laser thingie goes snap and crackle. Moranis is the kids' pop. And kids speaks for itself, the children and the humor. As for recalling the cereal scene, it's the most memorable scene in the film and your review nicely recalls it.
I don't remember the laser snapping or crackling, but if it does, then that review is indeed literally fine. It still cannot refer to Cheerios, though. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 11/21/2004 08:00:41 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 11/21/2004 : 08:01:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tori
Is this your favorite thread? :)
Nope.
|
|
|
|
thefoxboy 
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 11/21/2004 : 09:22:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by noncentz
Why do I visit this thread? Why??!!! (My sphincter tightens each time I visit - which is certainly handy when I need a pencil sharpened but that's about it.)
My two centz: For my money there are only a few kinds of "wrong" reviews, which I think is such a judgemental word. Wrongish reviews: one with more than 4 words, one that is impossibly generic, and one that is more than glaring in it's factual innaccuracies. There are a few othe minor infractions but overall, I love the poetry of metaphor and find a hard time calling something "wrong" here. Innacurate, yes.
Snap, Crackle, Pop, kids.
A fine double-meaning pun Benj. The laser thingie goes snap and crackle. Moranis is the kids' pop. And kids speaks for itself, the children and the humor. As for recalling the cereal scene, it's the most memorable scene in the film and your review nicely recalls it.
Good work.
Cheerio, all.
Thanks noncentz, did you vote on it?
|
|
|
|
noncentz
"Myself in four words."
|
Posted - 11/21/2004 : 11:54:25
|
My vote has been Posted.
|
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 00:03:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
I hate to do this to you Pope George Ringo, but...
http://www.fwfr.com/display.asp?id=10526
Wrong sport. The Montreal Expos play baseball, not football. But it's a great joke, so hold on to this one in case there turns out to be a "Naked Major League Baseball"
Hmmm, the way I see this review is that PGR has 'punned' "Montreal Expos" (the baseball team) and created a new team of naked football players called "Montreal Expos". Ok, so it's an exact copy, so the word 'pun' isn't quite correct. The Montreal Expos presumably don't play naked baseball either, so one could argue that it wouldn't be suitable for a "Naked Major Baseball League" movie for that reason.
I see this one as on par with the "Snap crackle etc" review, sure it's the incorrect brand of cereal but is it really that important? 'Snap crackle pop' refers to cereal, and 'Montreal Expos' refers to sport, I don't mind if it's the wrong sport or the wrong brand of cereal and think both are OK.
|
|
|
|
benj clews 
"...."
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 00:40:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
I didnt' pay any attention to the cereal argument so I don't know anything about that.
What I do know is that this one makes a reference that makes no sense because it's simply incorrect. Yeah, it's a funny joke, but the review is still "wrong." If we've decided that the site policy is now "close enough" then we might as well start making puns on the names of actors that aren't even in the movie we're reviewing.
I agree.
Once again it's down to my opinion where the line is drawn, but I think this *is* pushing it- especially so when the film is *about* football (at least with HISTK, the film wasn't revolving around Cheerios). Have declined review for now.
|
|
|
|
Downtown 
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 00:46:14
|
|
|
|
|
MguyXXV
"X marks the spot"
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 01:09:13
|
Obviously, I've got too much stuff occupying me lately (and for good reason), but I applaud the obvious absence of any substitute ranters. So I just chime in for good measure.
As to HISTK: noncentz is on the money. Cha-ching!
On NMLB: the fact that there is a baseball team named Expos is nearly meaningless. Back in the day, when EVERYTHING in St. Louis was "the Cardinals," I think we learned that sports teams share names. Accordingly, our esteemed reviewer has created a fictional team that puns well. Who says he was referring to the baseball team?
"Keep it coming love" -- K.C. & The Sunshine Band --
|
|
|
|
Pope George Ringo
"the Pope on stage"
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 01:44:48
|
Sean was following my line of thinking with Montreal Expos, I also had "Spectators = New York Yankees" waiting to get reviewed as well...both came from the punchline to the joke "What are Pee Wee Herman's favorite baseball teams?" Seemed to fit even though they technically came from the wrong sport.
|
Edited by - Pope George Ringo on 11/22/2004 01:48:35 |
|
|
|
Downtown
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 02:12:26
|
It's nothing personal or anything and I hope you didn't take it as such. You're still one of my favorite reviewers.
|
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 02:51:21
|
I'm not sure where this 'point out reviews written by others that we think are bending the rules so benj can delete them' habit is going. And I'm not sure I like it too much.
It's one thing to point out a review that is hopelessly wrong, eg, someone has posted a review for a film but their memory failed them and they posted it for the wrong film, like the one that started this thread. But it's another thing to find 'rule benders that have bent the rules a little too far' and try to have them deleted.
I can see why Emily noticed the 'Snap Crackle Pop' review was associated with a different brand of cereal, she is an Advertising Creative. Probably she associates that slogan with the brand, knows it was created in 1967 by Joe Smith and caused an increase in sales of 38% within 6 months and increased brand-awareness of 27% in the 9-16 year age group. (Ok, I'm making this up but you get my drift). It's her profession. So that review would have jumped out at her with bells on.
And Downtown presumably immediately noticed that the 'Montreal Expos' were a baseball team, he is a self-confessed baseball fanatic.
But, when I read both of those reviews I neither noticed that the cereal brand was different from the slogan or noticed that the Montreal Expos were a baseball team. And I didn't care either, in neither case did it make any difference to my appreciation of the review. I voted for both of them, and still think that both are valid, as the cereal brand and type of sport are indicental to the review. Anyway, benj has made his decision on both of these so I won't go on about them.
So my point is, where is this going? And why should people like me who like those reviews be cheated out of reading them because they are a 'stretch'? How many reviews at fwfr are a 'stretch'? Thousands at a guess, including most of my favourites.
Anyway, for the record, I'm not going to look for 'wrong reviews' from any reviewer, I'd rather write them, read them, and vote for them.
|
|
|
|
AC
"Returning FWFR Old-Timer"
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 03:16:42
|
Amen.
|
|
|
|
Pope George Ringo
"the Pope on stage"
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 03:32:28
|
If your backlog is anything like mine, then you'll probably agree that Benj needs as much time as possible to judge the merits of new reviews not waste his time deleting ones others think are wrong or streching the rules.
|
Edited by - Pope George Ringo on 11/22/2004 03:33:10 |
|
|
|
noncentz
"Myself in four words."
|
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 03:47:00
|
I don't do it often but when I find a curiously inaccurate review, I simply message the reviewer and let him/her know that I'm onto their dastardly game.
Public humiliation ain't my bag baby, unless it's my own.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Reviews that are wrong
