Standalone Adjectives as Keywords

@Peter_pbn​ 

In what situations would you recommend the standalone keyword "gay"  should be used? 

Shouldn't keywords like the ones listed below be preferred, rather than the vague keyword "gay"?

gay-cinema (414 titles)

lgbt-interest (265 titles) 

lgbt-cinema (389 titles)

queer-cinema (502 titles)

lgbt-film (51 titles)

lgbtq-film (29 titles)

@keyword_expert​ 

I think it is an acceptable catch-all for all titles about gay people for the reasons I stated. I don't think it is very vague. It clearly does not mean "carefree".

gay-interest is a longstanding keyword, but unusual in that it seems to refer to the audience. I think it has been used even when no one is explicitly characterized as gay.

I don't like gay-cinema etc. because it specifies title type. (An exception would be new-queer-cinema, a specific and established genre term.)

lgbt or lgbtq is OK and would be the best candidate for a genre, but is obviously less specific than gay, lesbian, etc.

@Peter_pbn​

Yeah, I agree with you that the keyword "gay" would never be mistaken for "carefree."

And I guess "vague" is not the best word for it. More like it's a very "broad" keyword. The keyword "gay" by itself doesn't say very much -- you can't tell if it's a gay director, a gay character, etc.  It's about like adding the keyword "male" or "female" to a title, although those are more extreme examples for sure.

@bradley_kent​ 

I have never seen a documentary nor an experimental film that was not BOTH psychological and emotional.  For that matter, I have never seen ANY film that was not BOTH psychological and emotional.

Prepare for your first viewing experience of an experimental film that is neither psychological nor emotional. 

1. Wavelength (I) (2022)

1 min | Short, Mystery

  Rate this

It's a film of a 45-second long dolly in on a window over a period of 45 seconds. It's a Wavelength (1967) remake, indeed.

Director: Mich Gelinas

Personally, I find this video very weird and mysterious.  What are those objects on the window sill?  What is that drawing and what does it mean, if anything?  It makes me question (psychological) and feel (emotional).  Any filmmaker, in how he/she composes a shot, moves a camera, holds a shot, or edits (context dynamics),  a psychological and/or emotional aspect is intended, presented, and open to response, even if it's "nothingness"!

@bradley_kent​ 

LOL. You are confusing plot/content of a film with viewer reaction to the film. There are not any human characters in the film, so by definition the film does not involve psychology or emotions. 

Tell Disney that there is no psychology of emotions in its titles where there are no humans.  One can express a psychological and/or emotional intention WITHOUT human characters.  (Some people are in love with there cars.)  I am not confusing viewer reaction, but looking to the creator's intention.

Every artist has some thought/emotion behind his/her creation.  Otherwise, there is no stimulus to create it.  Most art is intended for communication as well as self-expression, and, other than art that is "closeted," wants to arouse a response.

@bradley_kent​

You are making straw arguments. 

There are no characters at all in the 45-second experimental film I shared.

Without any characters, it is impossible to conclude that it fits into one of the "psychological" subgenres like, for example, psychological horror or psychological thriller. 

These distinctions have been explained to you in the past, several times. 

@bradley_kent​ 

And, isn't lgbtq now preferred over lgbt?

Depends on whom you are asking that question. There are several other variations too, like LGBTQIA, LGBTQI, LGBTQ+, etc.

As these keywords alone show, there are a variety of different takes on that question. Believe it or not, every single one of these is a keyword on IMDb.

lgbqt
lgbt-cinema
lgbt-film
lgbt-interest
lgbt-plus
lgbtq
lgbtq-film lgbt
lgbtq-movie
lgbtq-plus
lgbtqi
lgbtqia 
lgbtqiaplus

lgtb
lgtbi
lgtbiq
queer-cinema

Well, LGBTQ encompasses LGBT. A problem doesn't really exist in regards to attaching "LGBT" where "LGBTQ" is already attached, but it may not be wise for this to happen the other way around. However, along that line of thinking, also being as it is that "LGBTQIA" (along with "LGBTQI", "LGBTQ" and "LGBT") is something of a cultural/social activism thing, it may not be proper to automatically apply it to a work that is specific to gay cisgender males, or.to a work that is specific to lesbian cisgender females, unless there is anything within the work to suggest the presence of LGBT culture/movement/activism, I pointed out in another thread (the genre proposal one to be specific) that people who represent one letter in "LGBTQIA" don't necessarily want anything at all to do with people represented by another in the acronym. Certain aspects of keyword management and the overall ability to narrow down search criteria can be very tricky. We want (or ought to want) for people to be able to easily make searches be more precise.

@bradley_kent​

We are saying the same things. Check my comments, and you will see that I have said nearly half a dozen times now that most if not all of these keywords should be "audited."

If I am tired of hearing you say the same, it's because you may be assuming that I disagree with that proposition, when I am on the record many times agreeing with it.