| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 24, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,228 |
| | Posted: | | | | I submitted the following changes to Love Goddess of the Cannibals (EAN 5060162230221) and it was declined without reason. Could someone please enlighten me what changes (if any) were incorrect or if there was a problem with my contribution notes? Quote:
Changed genres as this is not an adult (i.e. porn) film, but a thriller with some sex scenes (similar to Basic Instinct, if you will) and have added the studio, also added the audio tracks from PowerDVD 9.
Cast and crew from the opening credits. Melissa Clementi is an odd addition as there are more entries under just 'Melissa' in the CLT but most of those are 'Hidden Title" films so have stuck with her full name and used the credited as field. Use credited as for Joe D'Amato in his role as director of photography as he used his birth name of Aristide Massaccesi (see Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_D'Amato) Roles are from the film and rear cover |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | IT COULD have to do with removing adult from the genres. Adult does not necessarily mean porn. Ken has stated here in the forum if there is any nudity shown on the cover... it must be marked as adult. So could this be the case? | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: January 1, 2009 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | | Last edited: by VirusPil |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Also real names means nothing for the Credited As.... we use the most commonly credited form of the name for the common name. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: January 1, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | | Last edited: by VirusPil |
|
| Registered: January 1, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | Melissa would also be correct if it is her first credit in database. If there are different Melissas in database, there would be the BY needed to distinguish. (Til now  ) Btw, sorry if all sounds a bit harsh, isn't meant like this. Hope we can help you with the provided informations. | | | | Last edited: by VirusPil |
|
| Registered: March 24, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,228 |
| | Posted: | | | | I've now resubmitted -- oddly the old one had gone through without the Adult in genres and with Melissa Chimenti [Melissa]! I don't understand how it was declined yet the information went through; how very strange. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Did you make sure you had the newest info in the profile before trying to upload? Maybe it was done in a previous contribution you didn't download. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 24, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,228 |
| | Posted: | | | | Yep. Mine was one of the few contributions for that profile which is pretty much a niche title with very few owners |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | You stumped me then... I have no idea. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: January 1, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | Just downloaded the profile to have a look on.
It was still the version with adult/porn as rating and no cast in it. So your older conbtribution from July 17 got approved, but not released now. (should be today)
Voting can be done to the new version.
As the screeners have accepted the remove of Genre porn/adult it wouldn't be needed. But I can see also no harm if re-adding it.
Looks good.
For further questions you can always ask. |
|
| Registered: March 24, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,228 |
| | Posted: | | | | If, as you say, my contribution was accepted removing Adult from the genres even though there is some nudity on the cover, it makes you wonder why it was ever released when it was declined? |
|
| Registered: January 1, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Nosferatu: Quote:
If, as you say, my contribution was accepted removing Adult from the genres even though there is some nudity on the cover, it makes you wonder why it was ever released when it was declined? No, I don't wonder at all. The screeners can also make mistakes or they have decided this nudity is not so strong it needs no adult genre/rating. But what is a bit strange: Your contribution from July 17 is still approved, but not released. Mostly the time between approving and release is not more than one day. And on this screen: http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=458104&PageNum=LASTfor this contribution both is listed: Profile approved and profile declined. Now I'm out of ideas. |
|
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 8,733 |
| | Posted: | | | | I've found that the "Approved" or "Decline" label doesn't necessarily reflect what has actually happened with the contribution. They do most of the time, of course, but I've certainly had multiple contributions released despite the fact that they were initially (and erroneously) given the "Declined" label, and I also seem to remember that the opposite (a certain "controversial" contribution disappearing without a trace while it initially got the "Approved" stamp) has happened, although I'm a little less certain about the latter.
As far as I can tell, this tends to happen when a contribution is evaluated twice - either when the screener realises that he's made an error and goes back to have a second look, or else when a "2nd level reviewer" intervenes. In both scenarios, the contribution was first declined (or approved) and that that decision was later reversed. In those cases, the original "Declined" or "Approved" stamp ocassionally sticks, even though the actual outcome is the reverse. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,733 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting VirusPil: Quote:
And on this screen:
http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=458104&PageNum=LAST
for this contribution both is listed: Profile approved and profile declined. In these cases, the last ruling is the "final" one. Here, you see that it was approved at 1:54PM, then declined at 1:55PM. Apparently the screener realized his error just after he approved it, so he went back and declined it after all. You can stop hoping for it to appear in the daily update - it won't, because it was declined. Maybe the "Approved" label stuck, which, as I just explains, tends to happen when a contribution gets re-evaluated, but at that second evaluation, it was definitely declined. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
|
| Registered: January 1, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
... Maybe the "Approved" label stuck, which, as I just explains, tends to happen when a contribution gets re-evaluated, but at that second evaluation, it was definitely declined. But what makes me so confused: If you vote on this movie Nosferatu's changes are in the existing profile.  If the profile would be declined, it wouldn't be on the voting screen as existing profile on the left side. Explain this! *joking* Thanks for your two posts. Learned something new.  |
|