Criticker.com

x

I haven't seen this version, but it seems fair to say that it is at least as distinct a work as Apocalypse Nows Redux or Final Cut, or Brian Helgeland's version of Payback, all of which have their own Criticker entries. But they also all have their own IMDb entries. At last comment The Guys were still steadfast on the IMDb requirement, though I, JonSmith, and others have since voiced objections to this rule in several other threads, with no admin response.

I can anticipate some slippery-slope objections regarding fan edits and the like that also don't have their own IMDb entries, but I think it's easy enough to distinguish between the Moroder Metropolis and, say, Soderbergh's "Butcher's Cut" release of Heaven's Gate.

However, from what Michael has said, they are hesitant to consider such ambiguous cases individually and would rather rely on some consistent external yardstick. This is reasonable but now seems unduly conservative, especially as IMDb's status as a database has been permanently compromised.

iconogassed wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 28, 2020 5:10 am

[E]specially as IMDb's status as a database has been permanently compromised.

Not saying I disagree, but I'm not familiar with the basis for this statement. Care to enlighten me?

A reference database cannot also be a catalogue for the world's largest corporation.

I'm really just curious and trying to understand here. Was there some kind of recent change that you're referring to? I know that IMDb is owned by Amazon, but Wikipedia tells me that has been the case since 1998.

Mere ownership is not the issue (though certainly an inherent conflict of interest), but that the site is now an actual interactive product catalogue, with accessibility and comprehensiveness, the two most important goals of a database, taking a backseat at every juncture to commercial interests and the promotion of Amazon's own products and services. Searches are skewed to titles that Amazon is selling, rather than the best match for the query, and given gross additional prominence via forced trailer integration and embedding of Amazon streaming content, all of which impede retrieval of any desired non-Amazon-related information. And as I have mentioned, they plainly do not give a shit about correcting or updating things anymore (try submitting a correction on a years-old title), or paying much attention to anything they can't actively monetize or "create content" for. It certainly has characteristics of a database, but none that aren't subordinated to those of corporate monopolization.

Got it, that was very helpful. Thank you

Hey,

I actually created a make-shift entry for this but I'm not sure it ever was cleared. I would just like to add my support of the entry, as OP has stated the Moroder version has very distinct aesthetic and contextual differences that should warrant its own distinction as a standalone version. I know that KINO has released the Moroder version on its own.

Hope to see it on here soon.

DD

I would also add my support. It's relatively easy to do if I understand how submissions work. Admins would just have to allow a duplicate imdb address on here.

I also support this, since I've ran into a similar problem with another movie I want to submit : https://myanimelist.net/anime/2952/Fina ... n_Complete
https://anilist.co/anime/2952/Final-Fan ... -Complete/

Essentially, it's a different cut of Advent Children with around 30 mins of added material.

Like other users have mentioned on the forum (I lurk here), I just don't get why they just don't make IMDB optional, since the Games section of Criticker operates well without ids. I also heard they plan to add other stuff like books and I don't know if there is a website with ids in that regard, mostly since all the book websites seem to be stuck in the wrong decade when it comes to functionality.

My grievances on the subject also come from the fact that I submitted a title to imdb weeks ago and there has been no movement. The site is now an ad for Amazon properties .

Well now here we go. A realtime interrogation (so to speak) of the issues at hand. By which I mean I don't think 26 minutes of extra footage in a movie is necessarily sufficient for a separate entry, and the information on that page does nothing to convince me that this is an exceptional case. There are any number of Hollywood blockbusters with equal or greater claim on those grounds.