sf_Jef's profile

3 Messages

 • 

100 Points

Thursday, March 25th, 2021 8:48 AM

Reviews taken down

Oye!  I'm honestly not up in arms like some reviewers, but I legitimately had 2 reviews inexplicably taken down.  -One of which had solid engagement. 

Look, I'm a comedy writer, so I'm skilled in catty criticism, but nothing I wrote was obscene or vulgar.  -Definitely nothing that constitutes expulsion.  Also, I stand by what I wrote.  -It was funny, check for yourself... oh wait.

All I want to know is: why it got taken down.  Backstory: I wrote a 1-star review of Allen v Farrow where I pointed out that Alien vs Predator was a more balanced documentary (wordplay!).  No vulgarity, no wild accusations, just "I didn't think this was a balanced doc".  It had engagement with over 90 reviewers, and now it's gone.

So again, why?  I don't trade in conspiracy theories, so the pro-Mia, "Rescue the kids from the Pizza basement"-thing is not an option.  I just want to know why.  Can a review be taken down because enough other users don't like it?  If so, let me know, cuz I'm a stickler for spelling and punctuation.

Also, if you want to take down one of my reviews because it sucks, I completely understand.  I do stand-up comedy, so I'm used to people walking out during my set (and during sex).  But, if that's the case, I have MUCH worse reviews you should consider for execution.

So that's it.  I eagerly await your prompt response. 

HA!  Best joke of the night!  I can hear the virtual shredder firing up now!

IMDb avoids critical feedback like I avoid medical test results.  ;)

(That last part isn't a joke, I'm actually quite sick.)

Luv the site!

43 Messages

 • 

870 Points

4 years ago

It might just be the case some other user objected to your review. In your case someone who dislikes Woody Allen.

I once reviewed a lousy action movie set in the Balkans which to to my surprise at least took a critical stance on Serbian atrocities.

I mentioned that at least I agreed with their sentiments. I guess a Serb must have objected.

Employee

 • 

1.2K Messages

 • 

34.1K Points

4 years ago

Hey there! Your review of Justice League was not a review of the film, you stated you'd write the review later. Please note that reviews should be complete and cover the subject of the film when submitted. Your second review did not review the title itself, but discussed the way the subject was covered. This is called out in our guidelines which state "Do not include personal opinions on real life events or subject matter on which a film is based."

3 Messages

 • 

100 Points

Thx for the response, but I greatly disagree.

My Justice League review, while incomplete (which is a criticism of a 4 hour film), criticized the embarrassing and unimaginative name of a character in the film.  How is that not about the film?  But, sure, I did say it was too long to finish in one night, so I accept the review was incomplete.

My Allen v Farrow review criticized the quality of fairness on the part of the director which, by definition, is about the film itself.  Fairness is taught on day 1 of Documentary Film Making 101, and separates truth from propaganda.

Also, how is pointing out that all the interviews in the film only supported one side of the subject-matter not reviewing the title itself?  While it is a personal opinion (these are reviews), it's about the film-making choices not the "real life events or subject matter on which a film is based."

Sidenote: that guideline is quite suspect.  That's saying if a film mischaracterizes an event, please don't have an opinion of that mischaracterization (which, again, is not what I did.).

I get that these are subjective judgements on people's opinions, but in these two cases they're also quite dubious and could be applied to 90% of all IMDb reviews.

(edited)