Multiple movies edited into and released as one movie

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 3 years ago
  • Solved
Earlier this year, I submitted a merger of the title entry 'Warriors of the Rainbow: Seediq Bale - Part 1: The Sun Flag (2011)' with 'Sàidékè balái (2011)' (#160304-203810-552000), thinking IMDb didn't allow a separate entry for a movie that is a compilation of multiple movies in a franchise.

In the case of Seediq Bale—the two-part movie that runs over four hours—it was produced as two movies and released as two movies in some countries. But it was also screened at festivals, released in some countries, awarded prizes, and even submitted for the Best Foreign Language Oscar as a single film: an edited-down version of the two movies that runs approx. 150 minutes. I confirmed all three versions have the exact same credits, so I "synced" all the credits and items the merged entry and the sequel 'Warriors of the Rainbow: Seediq Bale - Part 2: The Rainbow Bridge (2011)' after the merger was accepted.

However, I recently stumbled upon 'It's Such a Beautiful Day (2012)', a trilogy of short films edited together as one movie. It is listed separately from the shorts including eponymous "It's Such a Beautiful Day (2011)", which are listed as "edited into/as" movie connections.

Since I found this, I've started to second-guess myself and now I'm not sure if the merger was appropriate. The thing is, most of the awards were given to the movie called 'Seediq Bale', not to the part one or part two in specific, especially those given by the festivals that screened the abridged version. So it's not really accurate to list both as recipients of one award. And just having "(international version)" in release dates and runtime on both titles never really gives you the chance to know that they refer to the totally same footage, either (visitors might interpret each film has its own international version).

But I would definitely oppose the idea that there should be only one entry, because each movie was made intended to be, and was indeed, released separately in countries including Taiwan, the original country of production. The distinction also helps people rate, review, discuss, and refer to what they actually mean. In fact, I liked the first one slightly more than the second so I rated it higher.

Other examples of multiple movies edited and released as one movie include the 'Red Cliff' diptych, which was edited into and released as one movie outside East Asia, and the Japanese two-part movie 'Parasyte', which was just recently released as one movie in China. (Feel like 'Che' and 'Nymphomaniac' might have been too, but I couldn't find confirmation.) And I'm sure there's many more of these. So, what is the right number of IMDb title entries on each of these cases? Should we have just one, two, or 3+?

And if the merger was inappropriate, is it possible to undo it? Or does one have to submit a new title all from scratch? Whichever the case, is it possible to revive and reclaim the merged title's ID (tt4164458) that is now a redirect to the merged entry?
Photo of Nardog

Nardog

  • 26 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes

Posted 3 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 11961 Posts
  • 8022 Reply Likes
Hi Nardog -

Thanks for pointing out the example, I have reached out to our title editors to take a look and clarify whether the merge you referenced was the appropriate action or not.  As soon as I hear back from them I will post the relevant information for you here.
Photo of Rida

Rida, Employee

  • 38 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Hi Nardog,

Thank you for getting in touch. Looks like your merge into part 1 is ok. As we already have them separated into two entries as below:

http://www.imdb.com/find?ref_=nv_sr_fn&q=%27Warriors+of+the+Rainbow%3A+Seed...

PART I: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2007993/
PART II: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4164468/

Let me know if you require any further clarification.
Photo of Nardog

Nardog

  • 26 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
Looks like your merge into part 1 is ok. As we already have them separated into two entries
Um... and why is that? Of course I know they have been separated into two entries. That's what I described in the original question.

My question was in no way whether the merger was successful or not; I was asking if the merger was adherent to IMDb's policy and how many IMDb title entries these types of movies (where there's a movie that consists entirely of parts of multiple movies from the same series) should have. I thought I made that point pretty clear. :/
(Edited)
Photo of Rida

Rida, Employee

  • 38 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes

Hi Nardog,

Once we have the individual parts listed we should not list the combined title on the site, just the original separate parts:

Please see http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1937390/?ref_=fn_al_tt_3 and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2382009/?ref_=fn_al_tt_4

Hope this helps.
Photo of Nardog

Nardog

  • 26 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
Thanks for your reply Rida, but, again, my question is, when one movie that is solely composed of parts of multiple movies is released (especially exclusively or at least prior to the release of the movies it is cut from in a given country/region), should it have a separate title on IMDb? If not, how should the information about the release of that version be handled?

As far as I know, the Nymphomaniac movies were never cut down to and released as one movie (they may have been released simultaneously, but that's not at all the same thing); and more importantly, let's say they were, then on which title (or both) should the duration, release date, rating, distributor etc. of the cut-down version be listed? And how? – was my question.

Also, if you are saying that it's always "just the original separate parts" that should be listed, are you also suggesting that It's Such a Beautiful Day (2012), an entry of a movie that solely consists of the director's previous work, should also be removed? And if so, where and how should the information on the production and release of that version be listed?

EDIT: I ask this because, as much as we can just put "(international version)" etc. as an attribute next to each piece of information, the problem is, since different cuts of the same movie could vary so much they're different pieces of art, a user who saw a version of multiple movies edited down as one movie might not know on what title they should post their rating or review. Granted, movies such as Alien, Aliens, Blade Runner, and Heaven's Gate, where there are supposedly great differences between the original and other version, do not have separate titles. But It's Such a Beautiful Day and Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut do. So, what are the criteria?
(Edited)
Photo of Rida

Rida, Employee

  • 38 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes

Hi Nardog,

Each case is unique and we try to make a decision based on the specifics of the title at hand, how it was released, what edits were made etc...

In the case of It's Such a Beautiful Day(2012), the title is entirely made up of previous shorts that were released separately and should exist on IMDb as a shell (not have any credits) . Each title is evaluated based on public interest. This title has awards attached to it so we list it separately too.

So in a nutshell, we list titles made up of different parts only if they represent some public interest. The listing will then be as a shell and should exclude any filmography.

Hope this helps.