How Can I Get A Person To Read A Declined Review?

@Michelle​ , one comment and one comment only stated something that was not in the film itself--that one person interviewed died shortly after she was interviewed.   It's unbelievable a bot caught that or that a rep reading the review declined it for that one thing. 

Moreover, I read a couple of reviews yesterday on a true crime film where it was mentioned by some reviewers that the film left out facts about the case, and then proceeded to list those facts.  Plus, I've read multiple reviews for various movies or TV shows, none political, where the reviewer is ranting about politics.  Why weren't those reviews declined?

Also, what exactly do you mean about focusing "on elements outside of the context of the film itself"?  That almost sounds like you don't want reviews where the viewer actually thinks about what she or he has watched, and is forbidden to elaborate on those thoughts.  We reviewers are not all in the movie/TV industry and don't look at films in a "professional" way.

Maybe IMDB needs to better understand general public reviewers, who actually make up the majority of reviewers here, as far as I can see.  I only started posting reviews here because so many of the Netflix or Hulu films can't be reviewed at Amazon, which is where I have thousands of reviews.  I'm not exactly a novice at reviewing.  I can't imagine an Amazon rep stating what you have stated and IMDB is owned by Amazon.

Sorry, please elaborate on what you are saying, if you think I am misunderstanding what you are saying.  My declined review was posted today.  If I need to go remove the one statement I mentioned, please tell me and I will do so. I certainly don't want to break some rigid guideline rule you have, a rule that is obviously only randomly enforced.  Or maybe I truly don't understand what you are talking about . . . . 

Hi @bluedusk​ -

To clarify a bit further, a review should focus on the context and content of the title itself, so for example if there is a documentary about a real-life murder mystery, a review should contain opinions about the content addressed in the film itself verses opinions about external elements of the murder-mystery.  So while it is acceptable to share opinions about the real-life case, it must be directly related to the context of the documentary film.

I hope this helps.

Thanks for trying to clarify, but could you do so a little further, please.  What exactly would be "external elements of the murder-mystery"?  Could you give examples?  Also, how would a bot be able to detect such a thing?  I know I read somewhere that IMDB does not have enough employees to read all the reviews.  Thus, a bot must be reading them first.  

@Michelle​ , okay, so you are saying the unacceptable part of the review was describing something that did not happen in the documentary, but was news from elsewhere?  How would a bot recognize such a thing, however? 

There are IMDB reviews that have such information, too.  I saw one last week, and personally was happy to get the additional information, which I verified by doing online searches.  The reason I was happy was because the doc gave a very inaccurate description of what had gone on in the deceased person's life, making her seem like she never had a care in the world.

Also, I see such info as a way of critiquing the film.  It's important to know if a film is extremely biased and left out important facts. I did not review the episode, but would have felt unfairly limited if I did review it and could not point out what the documentary left out.  Although I do see how IMDB would be concerned about a reviewer listing all sorts of unconfirmed facts, or telling downright lies, or describing nothing but fantasies in their head.

Hi @bluedusk​ -

Just to clarify, pointing out information and/or facts that a documentary left out is acceptable, but you want to avoid going into a deeper tangent that is removed from the documentary, as the review should focus on the documentary content (or in some cases lack there-of).  Another example, non-documentary related I can give is that of reviewing a film where the main star performed terribly - it's acceptable to discuss the ways you disliked the performance and why, but going on a further tirade of how badly they performed in other titles and commenting about their personal life choices or career tanking, this could be crossing the line as per our guidelines, as it typically has nothing to do with the film itself.

I hope this helps clarify further, unfortunately, when it comes to documentaries it is a little gray, as these titles involve real-life people and events.