| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Beanmimo 
"August review site"
|
 Posted - 07/28/2010 : 18:40:45
|
Got my copy of the book today... we're famous!!
|
 |
|
|
Yukon 
"Co-editor of FWFR book"
|
|
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 07/29/2010 : 08:15:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
My review is up on Associated Content by Yahoo!
Nice work Davida!
Though a tad late due to circs beyond control - I concur!
Good job, CL  Let's hope it brings lotsa new peeps to the wonderful world of fwfr! 
|
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 07/30/2010 : 16:09:28
|
My copies arrived in the post this morning - had to get through a whole day at work trying in vain to concentrate on real things, AND then put the kids to bed, before I could open them up.
Wonderfully executed, really great job mike/benj.
Was surprised at some of the reviews that made it, I'd heard that you were going family friendly:
 Dick and sea men (moby dick)
Rear penetration surprises Greeks (300)
Hymen has seven dents (snow white) - one of my personal favourites!
Holy fuck! (Last temptation of christ)
When Jesus Came (Last temptation of christ)
Carpenter nails Mary Magdelene (Last temptation of christ)
Got to say it again, the whole thing is really well put together, far smoother and a much better 'read' than I expected. The short film summaries (the ones that are longer than 4 words!) work very well.
I'm truly honoured to be included.
Thanks benj for some great years here, and thanks to both of you for publishing this.
Only downer is that my 9 year old son, who was named in my four word quote "Kai's stolen my xbox", was really upset - "now everyone will think I'm a thief!". I thought he'd be excited to be named in the book! |
Edited by - bife on 07/30/2010 16:11:42 |
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 07/30/2010 : 21:54:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
quote:
Originally posted by Cheese_Ed
quote:
Originally posted by randall
I caught my first editorial miscue. Somebody -- either the titular [huh huh, he said "tit"] editors or a downstream copyeditor -- ruined my review of LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. Look it up, boys. At least nobody knows it was I who wrote it.
Just found one of mine edited as well:
The Number 23 - went from 'Dumb and Number.' to 'Carrey: Dumb and Number.'
Don't know that either of these changes ruin the review, but they certainly aren't improvements so it is kind of annoying.
Hi Cheese Ed,
Pretty much all of the reviews in the main part of the book were untouched. (Unless the Adams Media editors tweaked one or two).
However, I did change some for the "Name That Film" section only. There were some great reviews that I wanted to include in the quiz, but I had to change to fit the quiz format.
"Dumb and Number" was a bit too general -- the answer could apply to hundreds of films. Adding "Carrey" makes it specific to only one film, so it's a better review for the quiz. (
Another expample is "The Lass Samari." I changed it in the book quiz because it could apply to any movie with a woman and a sword (eg. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon). So in the book, it's "Uma: The Lass Samuri" (answer: Kill Bill Vol 1 or 2.)
If Dumb and Number wasn't in the quiz section then I have no idea why that review was changed.
Hope that clarifies things.
I'm still waiting to see how you explain mine way up there at the top, Yukie: how did "Crucifact and crucifixion" become "Crucifact and crucifiction"? You also deflated a "bang" [exclamation point] on my review for THE STEPFORD WIVES: it should have read, "Chicks are really built!", thus emphasizing the adolescent point of view, but, then, it's a drag explaining humor, isn't it?
I'm not mad at all -- I think the book is fantastic and I'm proud of my small part in it. However, I do not want to hear you blame such little errors on your publisher. You, the editors, properly get the applause, but then you also have to shoulder the responsibilities. These little things are not your publisher's fault. They gave you the opportunity to review galley proofs before going to press. So the burden of "proof" is ultimately on you.
Sorry if that sounded harsh -- I really didn't mean it that way -- but it's the truth. I sat on the publisher's side of the table for many years, and it's so. |
Edited by - randall on 07/30/2010 22:23:38 |
|
|
|
Yukon
"Co-editor of FWFR book"
|
Posted - 07/31/2010 : 01:44:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by randall
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
quote:
Originally posted by Cheese_Ed
quote:
Originally posted by randall
I caught my first editorial miscue. Somebody -- either the titular [huh huh, he said "tit"] editors or a downstream copyeditor -- ruined my review of LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. Look it up, boys. At least nobody knows it was I who wrote it.
Just found one of mine edited as well:
The Number 23 - went from 'Dumb and Number.' to 'Carrey: Dumb and Number.'
Don't know that either of these changes ruin the review, but they certainly aren't improvements so it is kind of annoying.
Hi Cheese Ed,
Pretty much all of the reviews in the main part of the book were untouched. (Unless the Adams Media editors tweaked one or two).
However, I did change some for the "Name That Film" section only. There were some great reviews that I wanted to include in the quiz, but I had to change to fit the quiz format.
"Dumb and Number" was a bit too general -- the answer could apply to hundreds of films. Adding "Carrey" makes it specific to only one film, so it's a better review for the quiz. (
Another expample is "The Lass Samari." I changed it in the book quiz because it could apply to any movie with a woman and a sword (eg. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon). So in the book, it's "Uma: The Lass Samuri" (answer: Kill Bill Vol 1 or 2.)
If Dumb and Number wasn't in the quiz section then I have no idea why that review was changed.
Hope that clarifies things.
I'm still waiting to see how you explain mine way up there at the top, Yukie: how did "Crucifact and crucifixion" become "Crucifact and crucifiction"? You also deflated a "bang" [exclamation point] on my review for THE STEPFORD WIVES: it should have read, "Chicks are really built!", thus emphasizing the adolescent point of view, but, then, it's a drag explaining humor, isn't it?
I'm not mad at all -- I think the book is fantastic and I'm proud of my small part in it. However, I do not want to hear you blame such little errors on your publisher. You, the editors, properly get the applause, but then you also have to shoulder the responsibilities. These little things are not your publisher's fault. They gave you the opportunity to review galley proofs before going to press. So the burden of "proof" is ultimately on you.
Sorry if that sounded harsh -- I really didn't mean it that way -- but it's the truth. I sat on the publisher's side of the table for many years, and it's so.
Sorry Randall -- It's completely unrealistic to expect us to cross referance every review in the book to make sure it matches the review on the website 100%.
There were some minor changes made -- it's been so long I can't remember the thought process that went into each one. Some changes were my decision, some changes were the book editor's and copy editor's decision. Some times, there was no intentional change. I could have very easily typed in "Chicks are really built" into the manuscript forgeting to type the "!"
If you want to blame me for the missing "!" and the spelling of crucifiction, go ahead. I accept the responsibilty.
I understand that not everyone is going to be 100% happy with the book -- there will be quibbles over the reviews we did/didn't pick and the odd tweak to a review.
I just ask you to realize that Benj and I did our best to pick as reviews from as many reviewers as possible because we wanted to make as many people as happy as we could.
|
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/31/2010 : 03:16:30
|
| Got mine today. |
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 07/31/2010 : 11:05:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
quote:
Originally posted by randall
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
quote:
Originally posted by Cheese_Ed
quote:
Originally posted by randall
I caught my first editorial miscue. Somebody -- either the titular [huh huh, he said "tit"] editors or a downstream copyeditor -- ruined my review of LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. Look it up, boys. At least nobody knows it was I who wrote it.
Just found one of mine edited as well:
The Number 23 - went from 'Dumb and Number.' to 'Carrey: Dumb and Number.'
Don't know that either of these changes ruin the review, but they certainly aren't improvements so it is kind of annoying.
Hi Cheese Ed,
Pretty much all of the reviews in the main part of the book were untouched. (Unless the Adams Media editors tweaked one or two).
However, I did change some for the "Name That Film" section only. There were some great reviews that I wanted to include in the quiz, but I had to change to fit the quiz format.
"Dumb and Number" was a bit too general -- the answer could apply to hundreds of films. Adding "Carrey" makes it specific to only one film, so it's a better review for the quiz. (
Another expample is "The Lass Samari." I changed it in the book quiz because it could apply to any movie with a woman and a sword (eg. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon). So in the book, it's "Uma: The Lass Samuri" (answer: Kill Bill Vol 1 or 2.)
If Dumb and Number wasn't in the quiz section then I have no idea why that review was changed.
Hope that clarifies things.
I'm still waiting to see how you explain mine way up there at the top, Yukie: how did "Crucifact and crucifixion" become "Crucifact and crucifiction"? You also deflated a "bang" [exclamation point] on my review for THE STEPFORD WIVES: it should have read, "Chicks are really built!", thus emphasizing the adolescent point of view, but, then, it's a drag explaining humor, isn't it?
I'm not mad at all -- I think the book is fantastic and I'm proud of my small part in it. However, I do not want to hear you blame such little errors on your publisher. You, the editors, properly get the applause, but then you also have to shoulder the responsibilities. These little things are not your publisher's fault. They gave you the opportunity to review galley proofs before going to press. So the burden of "proof" is ultimately on you.
Sorry if that sounded harsh -- I really didn't mean it that way -- but it's the truth. I sat on the publisher's side of the table for many years, and it's so.
Sorry Randall -- It's completely unrealistic to expect us to cross referance every review in the book to make sure it matches the review on the website 100%.
There were some minor changes made -- it's been so long I can't remember the thought process that went into each one. Some changes were my decision, some changes were the book editor's and copy editor's decision. Some times, there was no intentional change. I could have very easily typed in "Chicks are really built" into the manuscript forgeting to type the "!"
If you want to blame me for the missing "!" and the spelling of crucifiction, go ahead. I accept the responsibilty.
I understand that not everyone is going to be 100% happy with the book -- there will be quibbles over the reviews we did/didn't pick and the odd tweak to a review.
I just ask you to realize that Benj and I did our best to pick as reviews from as many reviewers as possible because we wanted to make as many people as happy as we could.
I think you took my comment a different way than I intended, despite my best efforts. I repeat: I think the book is great, you folks did a great job, and of course nobody's perfect. I only said what I believe, that the ultimate responsibility for any errors lies with you, not with the book editor or copy editor. [I'm assuming they gave you the opportunity to review their work.] |
Edited by - randall on 07/31/2010 11:07:24 |
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 07/31/2010 : 14:05:16
|
Congrats on your review in the 8/6/10 issue of ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY! The entire review:
Title says it all. A |
Edited by - randall on 07/31/2010 14:18:26 |
|
|
|
rockfsh
"Laugh, Love, Cheer"
|
Posted - 07/31/2010 : 20:30:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
Got mine today.
Penguins with belly buttons? |
|
|
|
AC
"Returning FWFR Old-Timer"
|
Posted - 08/01/2010 : 05:47:29
|
I got home today from a trip to Boston and was thrilled to find this beautiful book in my mailbox. So inspired was I, that after reading through the entries, I decided to spend a couple of hours reflecting the book's achievement in Accolade form! While I know this isn't the right place to talk Accolades, it is the right place to talk book, so I beg your indulgence and urge you all to get reviewing on all those films you haven't yet taken on yet hold the publisher's imprimatur!
As many have done (for example, with Baftababe's 'Sibling Amity' Accolades, I have made one giant 'all-in' Accolade, and then broken that up into ten chapter-themed Accolades. Happy Reviewing!
Four Word Film Reviews: The Book
Review all of the films featured in the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "The Fast and the Fourious"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Action' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "Dude, Where's My Oscar?"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Drama' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "Use the Fours, Luke!"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Science Fiction' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "Show Me the Funny"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Comedy' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "Keanu Wins Acting Oscar"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Fantasy' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "This Chapter, Horror-bly Funny"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Horror' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "Italian-American Actors Pay Rent"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Mafia, Gangster, and Crime' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "These are Unfourgettable Films"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Classics' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "Movies With Four-Drawn Conclusions"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Animation' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
The Book: "Scenes, but not Heard"
Review all of the films featured in the 'Silent Movie' section of the magnificent 'Four Word Film Reviews' book, released in August 2010!
|
|
|
|
thefoxboy
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 08/02/2010 : 04:31:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
Got mine today.
No wonder you got yours before me, mine arrived today via NZ 
|
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 08/02/2010 : 11:37:38
|
Hurray! My copy just arrived. So cool!
(And by the way... among all the genius, one that particularly shines through is your choice of reviews for Groundhog Day!) |
Edited by - ChocolateLady on 08/02/2010 14:43:22 |
|
|
|
Yukon
"Co-editor of FWFR book"
|
Posted - 08/02/2010 : 20:01:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by randall
Congrats on your review in the 8/6/10 issue of ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY! The entire review:
Title says it all. A
SERIOUSLY! We are in the Aug. 6 issues of Entertainment Weekly? I just spent the past 30 minutes trying to find this review on line. My Google skills are pretty weak -- if anyone can find a link, please post it! |
|
|
|
Beanmimo
"August review site"
|
Posted - 08/02/2010 : 21:47:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Hurray! My copy just arrived. So cool!
(And by the way... among all the genius, one that particularly shines through is your choice of reviews for Groundhog Day!)
I'd vote for that... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
FWFR:The Book
