I submitted a movie review for The Last Jedi and it was declined with the reason of "not enough evidence." What exactly does this mean? Enough evidence for what? What's the point of writing a review if it's just going to be declined. Waste of my time. Thanks IMBd.
Posted 2 years ago
Confirmation number 181109-025720-589904 and the review is below. I wanted to include a LOT more but there seems to be a character limit as it wouldn't let me write all of what I originally had.
"Have you ever gone into a dollar store or a 99 cent store and walked down the toy section? Have you ever seen the knock-off toys that have a goofy name to avoid copyright issues, and look like a much more poorly manufactured version? That is exactly what The Last Jedi is. It is a poor parody of Lucas's Return of the Jedi. Never mind the horrible acting, lack of interesting characters and story, or the terrible writing; but the base of it IS the Return of the Jedi, but with a new coat of horrific and ugly paint.
I wanted to do a full review and summary but IMDb has a character limit apparently. So here's what I got.
The Force Awakens was bad enough, but not SO bad that the follow up movie couldn't redeem it. But rather than redeem any flaws the first movie had, it took those flaws and dashed them into jagged pieces, flung them into a dung heap, and then lit them on fire. I really had high hopes, as Star Wars was a great franchise (well the Lucas Films still are and always will be). Too bad I was more than disappointed with the pathetic excuse for a "star wars" movie we got. There are so many loopholes and unanswered questions. Questions that we shouldn't need to wait years to get. The force seems to have tripled in it's power since the Return of the Jedi and we now have people using the force in ways never before seen. As another reviewer put it, the force is basically just magic now. You can do anything and everything with the force. I'm terribly sorry, but you can't just take a franchise and completely change it so that it doesn't fit with the original movies. At least, you can't do that and try to pretend it is a continuation. These movies aren't real Star Wars. They're like watching a really high budget fan-fiction that was written by a 12 year old boy and his little sister in their tree house one warm summer because they weren't allowed to play inside and occupied their time with the screen play.
Some people have tried to defend the awful choices and occurrences (like Snoke's death with no backstory and unexplained over-the-top force power, the red lapel code breaker, Phasma's pathetic death with no more than a few lines and short battle scene) with the idea that the directors just WANT us to think they're dead, or that it went no where. Then in the third movie we'll be surprised by their return or sudden arrival. Well sorry, but at this point, that too would just be bad writing. Obi-wan died in the first original Star Wars movie, but even he had a bit of back story before hand, and enough to satisfy. I understand the idea of "let's trick people into thinking this way and surprise them," but you can't wait years in between the surprise. It's not a surprise anymore it's either just a lie or at least just bad story telling. In all honesty I feel as though both directors had totally different ideas for the series, and just clashed, and didn't work together, and ended with such a disastrous outcome that there is now no going back. Original characters dead, no new good characters, and a story line we've already seen. I won't be paying box office price for this movie that's for sure. If it comes on Netflix, I will feel obligated to watch it as I've already seen the first two. But mostly just have personal closer. I'll need to be ready for severe disappointment, as I think we all should be."
"Have you ever gone into a dollar store or a 99 cent store and walked down the toy section? Have you ever seen the knock-off toys that have a goofy name to avoid copyright issues, and look like a much more poorly manufactured version? That is exactly what The Last Jedi is. It is a poor parody of Lucas's Return of the Jedi. Never mind the horrible acting, lack of interesting characters and story, or the terrible writing; but the base of it IS the Return of the Jedi, but with a new coat of horrific and ugly paint.
I wanted to do a full review and summary but IMDb has a character limit apparently. So here's what I got.
The Force Awakens was bad enough, but not SO bad that the follow up movie couldn't redeem it. But rather than redeem any flaws the first movie had, it took those flaws and dashed them into jagged pieces, flung them into a dung heap, and then lit them on fire. I really had high hopes, as Star Wars was a great franchise (well the Lucas Films still are and always will be). Too bad I was more than disappointed with the pathetic excuse for a "star wars" movie we got. There are so many loopholes and unanswered questions. Questions that we shouldn't need to wait years to get. The force seems to have tripled in it's power since the Return of the Jedi and we now have people using the force in ways never before seen. As another reviewer put it, the force is basically just magic now. You can do anything and everything with the force. I'm terribly sorry, but you can't just take a franchise and completely change it so that it doesn't fit with the original movies. At least, you can't do that and try to pretend it is a continuation. These movies aren't real Star Wars. They're like watching a really high budget fan-fiction that was written by a 12 year old boy and his little sister in their tree house one warm summer because they weren't allowed to play inside and occupied their time with the screen play.
Some people have tried to defend the awful choices and occurrences (like Snoke's death with no backstory and unexplained over-the-top force power, the red lapel code breaker, Phasma's pathetic death with no more than a few lines and short battle scene) with the idea that the directors just WANT us to think they're dead, or that it went no where. Then in the third movie we'll be surprised by their return or sudden arrival. Well sorry, but at this point, that too would just be bad writing. Obi-wan died in the first original Star Wars movie, but even he had a bit of back story before hand, and enough to satisfy. I understand the idea of "let's trick people into thinking this way and surprise them," but you can't wait years in between the surprise. It's not a surprise anymore it's either just a lie or at least just bad story telling. In all honesty I feel as though both directors had totally different ideas for the series, and just clashed, and didn't work together, and ended with such a disastrous outcome that there is now no going back. Original characters dead, no new good characters, and a story line we've already seen. I won't be paying box office price for this movie that's for sure. If it comes on Netflix, I will feel obligated to watch it as I've already seen the first two. But mostly just have personal closer. I'll need to be ready for severe disappointment, as I think we all should be."
Loophole?
You made to many references to other movies by way of comparison. It's as if you were reviewing those movies too and the relation to Jedi. I can see that there is not enough evidence of a review of the title in question.
Starting the review with the 99 cent store would flag it too as the editor had to go too far before you talked about the movie itself.
What "evidence" do they need? Like evidence that I watched the movie? Evidence that I liked the movie? Still not a very clear reason. And again, IMBd wouldn't let me write my whole review. I spent almost an hour on my review before it stopped letting me add anything, and I had to take out so much because I can't write a full review with the limited space they gave me. This was certainly a very disappointing waste of time. I would like to know how the other reviews got approved. Thanks for the response.
(Edited)
I'd say that it was rejected because the writing style is shoddy and the opinions are poorly-formed and infantile. Alt-right Gen X'ers hate the direction that Star Wars has gone. We get it.
You aren't the target audience. Move on.
You aren't the target audience. Move on.
I'd agree that it is not a very interesting review, but we don't know that the author is outside the target audience let alone belonging specifically to "Alt-right Gen X".
Nikolay Yeriomin (Mykola Yeromin), Champion
Jay Herlihy, to be perfectly honest, alt-right Gen-X'ers are far from the only demographic which does not like the new Star Wars movies. There are enough problems with just filmmaking aspects of these movies for them to be polarizing.
I know of no specific guideline against it, but making prognostications about the yet-to-be-made next installment in the series should probably be avoided.
Thats why the "Evidence" rejection. He spent too much time on everything but the actual movie itself.
The problem is that the occurrence is common enough for some movie reviewers to feel singled out if their reviews do not make get approved. I just flat out do not give much credence to IMDb user reviews and usually only read them if any of the following conditions exist:
- I've not seen the material, it looks interesting to me, and nearly the only data attached to its IMDb title entry is at least one user review.
- I've already seen the material and found the story to be vague, curious or taboo, thus I want to see what other people thought about it.
- Somebody has come to this forum to complain about a particular user review or set of reviews, especially if for a movie that is banned in one prominent country but not another.
Stopped reading anything but critics reviews
Although Prolific Reviewers reviews can work sometimes.
I'm inclined to like prolific reviewers' writings. I'd actually like the option to filter out reviews by non-prolific reviewers. So many reviews are written by people who only care about one, two or three movies. It's sickening. I prefer to read what people with a broader perspective have to express.
You're lucky you were even given a reason. I had a review (already approved and posted) on this awful film called "Alone in the Woods". It was visible for a few days but in less than a week, the review was removed and I wasn't even notified. Don't forget we are living in times when saying the "wrong" thing, writing the "wrong" thing or thinking the "wrong" thing out loud can ruin lives. IMDB is just playing the game by the rules.
Hi, Deeρξrsηλdξs ofHouσξ. That's a interesting point. It's kind of like the nineteeneightyfour lingo/dialect.
You have a rad handle. Wow.
I'll just call you DSH for short if that's OK
What probably happened is a person or 2 Reported the review.
You see below every review is this "Report This"
Click it and you get this
If enough of these are taken a data editor feels that if a certain amount of them have checked the same box and attached the same reason, it gets removed. So if not for the report function, IMDb would have left it alone.
I'll just call you DSH for short if that's OK
What probably happened is a person or 2 Reported the review.
You see below every review is this "Report This"
Click it and you get this
If enough of these are taken a data editor feels that if a certain amount of them have checked the same box and attached the same reason, it gets removed. So if not for the report function, IMDb would have left it alone.
Considering the review was up for less than a week, Cliff J, I doubt it "offended" enough people to be removed for that reason and at that time, it was the only review listed (with the spoiler warnings to boot), so it definitely was not a duplicate or a spoiler without warning. Seems to me, someone, somewhere found something THEY personally deemed "inappropriate"...no doubt one of the cogs in the machine at IMDB got their feathers all ruffled over this simple line:
"The movie, in true 2018 style, has all your "politically correct" characters featured (virtually no one is left out)"
That mere insinuation and what "protected class" might be offended by this fact-based observation is probably the real reason the entire review was taken down. Note that I did not name call, stereotype or even describe the characters. I left that up to the viewer to discover should they make the mistake of going to see it.
IMDB's justification? ---"Reason Not Specified. Your contribution has been declined.We did not capture a specific reason during processing."---- That pretty much says it all. "We can't find a legitimate reason why your review would be declined, but we're going to remove it anyway"....So much for freedom of speech on the internet.
So there you have it. Like the user above you, Jeorj Euler, wrote... "1984" has come to fruition. Somewhere, somebody didn't like what I said. They can't quite figure out WHAT exactly wasn't liked, but that's irrelevant. The point is someone didn't like it and if it doesn't please a particular segment of the population, then it is dangerous and must be removed so as not to give others any ideas about not falling in line with the politically correct charged climate we live in.
"The movie, in true 2018 style, has all your "politically correct" characters featured (virtually no one is left out)"
That mere insinuation and what "protected class" might be offended by this fact-based observation is probably the real reason the entire review was taken down. Note that I did not name call, stereotype or even describe the characters. I left that up to the viewer to discover should they make the mistake of going to see it.
IMDB's justification? ---"Reason Not Specified. Your contribution has been declined.We did not capture a specific reason during processing."---- That pretty much says it all. "We can't find a legitimate reason why your review would be declined, but we're going to remove it anyway"....So much for freedom of speech on the internet.
So there you have it. Like the user above you, Jeorj Euler, wrote... "1984" has come to fruition. Somewhere, somebody didn't like what I said. They can't quite figure out WHAT exactly wasn't liked, but that's irrelevant. The point is someone didn't like it and if it doesn't please a particular segment of the population, then it is dangerous and must be removed so as not to give others any ideas about not falling in line with the politically correct charged climate we live in.
(Edited)
For a while, IMDb listed at the top of one's review page all of their reviews that had been deleted. They should bring that back, so at least we'd know if the reviews are deleted, if only left to speculate as to the reasons. One used to be able to easily sort the titles to quickly find a specific review on their page, but that's no longer possible, either, so if something like a review being deleted happens for anyone who has a large number of reviews, they'd likely not notice it.
Seems like once IMDB did away with the message boards, anything that remotely resembles an opinion which may not fall in line with the politically correct one is now simply removed...along with any other freedom of expression.
For a while, IMDb listed at the top of one's review page
all of their reviews that had been deleted.
by IMDbmember
Joined on September 18, 2013
https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/people/imdbmember
- - -
Does this old link still work ? ?
Change for your number
May or may not work if you enter another Users number
The link works, but I do not see my deleted review on there when I enter my UR number
@ DEEΡΞRSΗΛDΞS ofHOUΣΞ
I do not write reviews
Tried this other User number:
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur2467618/comments-deleted
and the link changed to
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur2467618/reviews
.
Nope. All I see is the edited version of the review.
Here is the url with the "Declined" version.
https://contribute.imdb.com/contribution/181104-030815-980904?ref_=pe_3181150_242625130
Here is the url with the "Declined" version.
https://contribute.imdb.com/contribution/181104-030815-980904?ref_=pe_3181150_242625130
(Edited)
Here is the url with the "Declined" version.
https://contribute.imdb.com/contribution/181104-030815-980904?ref_=pe_3181150_242625130
- - -
Only IMDb staff can look at "181104-030815-980904" numbers
and you do not need the "ref_=" here
that is for IMDb tracking
.
Joel, Official Rep
Hi Vary Anomaly,
Thanks for your post.
Please remember that user reviews are subjective and the vetting process isn't always so simple. I can see this was your first review to the database, the review itself doesn't touch on much from the specific movie but instead generalizes the franchise (and upcoming speculations). This likely went some way to an editor rejecting the contribution.
I would recommend re-submitting your review to be a little more focused on the title at hand and let us know if you experience any further issues with process.
I hope this helps.
Joel
Thanks for your post.
Please remember that user reviews are subjective and the vetting process isn't always so simple. I can see this was your first review to the database, the review itself doesn't touch on much from the specific movie but instead generalizes the franchise (and upcoming speculations). This likely went some way to an editor rejecting the contribution.
I would recommend re-submitting your review to be a little more focused on the title at hand and let us know if you experience any further issues with process.
I hope this helps.
Joel
Thanks Joel.
I think all of us here said the same thing too.
Cheers
I think all of us here said the same thing too.
Cheers
