| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
 Posted - 02/12/2011 : 10:11:25
|
| Talking of porn, I have just added three rugby films � a straightforward one, one involving drugs and a porn one. (Bizarrely, the first one erroneously has as its I.M.D.B. poster the cover of an unrelated porn film!) I have got a nice review which would work for any of them, but especially the porn one � so Benj, please could you at least leave it intact till Monday when I can submit that and you can see whether it's worth it? |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/12/2011 : 16:10:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
Talking of porn, I have just added three rugby films � a straightforward one, one involving drugs and a porn one. (Bizarrely, the first one erroneously has as its I.M.D.B. poster the cover of an unrelated porn film!) I have got a nice review which would work for any of them, but especially the porn one � so Benj, please could you at least leave it intact till Monday when I can submit that and you can see whether it's worth it?
Oh well, it was worth a try (nice accidental pun there). I quite liked my "Orgy involves flattened balls!", but that's obviously not the one that can be transferred to one of the others (albeit losing a level of meaning). |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 10:08:51
|
| It seems a bit more unfair that now the normal rugby film has been excluded too. I'm also very disappointed about losing Blowing Up Paradise, for which I had some great reviews waiting. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/20/2011 : 13:05:14
|
| Concert |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/21/2011 : 19:19:57
|
| Concert |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 04/11/2011 : 00:13:08
|
A very fine television movie was lost to a deletion this evening (not ever cinema screened, but DVD released and unquestionably a film) and the frustration that engendered made me wonder about the seeming double standards of the "non-film" cull. The film in question I added, had a review approved for and put through a successful round of FYC voting before it latterly bit the dust. However there are still a mass of heavily reviewed and highly voted items that clearly shouldn't be here under the more stringent rules that are producing these deletions... .
It may be sacrilege to suggest it but perhaps it's time that the documentaries and clip shows that have only graced television screens and DVD special features and "making of's" that proliferate got a proper looking at.... it'll be interesting to see if they can dodge the bullet having been around for a lot longer and gathered a lot more attention. A TV film with one review isn't going to bother many people, but a lot of these will, and they have no more reason to be here regardless of their popularity.
The signs are bad...
Felt wrong
Oh Troy...
Psych-no
Bearly legal
Another for the fire...
Dick off
Television programmes / clip shows:
I Scream
What '04?
Inside - out
Strip it
No Stooges
Banned from FWFR?
Who? Why?
Spock off
Dr No?
This has been mentioned on this thread before and survived, but it's clearly another standard television compilation countdown programme: http://www.fwfr.com/display.asp?ID=15021
I keep changing my mind, but there'd be a strong argument against all of these too.
 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 04/11/2011 : 00:42:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
I keep changing my mind, but there'd be a strong argument against all of these too.
Some of them, at least, have been shown at the cinema (according to noncentz).
Some unambiguous films that have been shown at the cinema (and even won awards) have been excluded, so it has never been possible to identify any real parameters since the cull began. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 04/11/2011 : 00:56:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
Some unambiguous films that have been shown at the cinema (and even won awards) have been excluded
What would be examples of that? I read through this thread before posting but don't think I spotted you mentioning anything like that before. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 04/11/2011 : 01:07:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
Some unambiguous films that have been shown at the cinema (and even won awards) have been excluded
What would be examples of that? I read through this thread before posting but don't think I spotted you mentioning anything like that before.
I haven't mentioned many cases of unfair removals, although there have been a lot, as there doesn't seem any point. I e-mailed Benj when I noticed the exclusion of the award-winning one. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 04/11/2011 : 01:31:54
|
| Okay, what was it? |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 04/11/2011 : 09:55:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
Okay, what was it?
No idea.
|
|
|
|
aahaa, muahaha 
"Optimistic altruist, incurable romantic"
|
Posted - 04/26/2011 : 14:56:41
|
| Dunno how this works, but this is listed as the pilot of a TV series from 1977 to 1979 on IMDB and hence I believe it should be considered as a non-film. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 05/02/2011 : 10:55:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by aahaa, muahaha
Dunno how this works, but this is listed as the pilot of a TV series from 1977 to 1979 on IMDB and hence I believe it should be considered as a non-film.
A T.V. pilot definitely can be a film (after all, if it's the right length and the series didn't get made, wouldn't it be a film?), but you're right that this one is very much presented as part of the T.V. series now. There's not really any pattern to which entries Benj excludes, so we'll have to wait and see. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 05/03/2011 : 15:38:32
|
| I saw this at a cinema yesterday, so the video tag is obviously wrong (and even if it were correct it would unambiguously be a film), but Benj has removed it. |
|
|
|
Joe Blevins 
"Don't I look handsome?"
|
Posted - 05/10/2011 : 21:30:21
|
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.
|
Edited by - Joe Blevins on 05/10/2011 22:13:36 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Non-films
