| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,685 |
| | Posted: | | | | I seem to have stepped into a hornets nest here. It regards entries like this:  My view is that Rating Details should be the details supplied by the rating agency (in this case BBFC) together with the rating. So I have replaced texts like this with the actual wording on the BBFC website, if available. The data in the illustration is said by some to "reflect BBFC rating info given at the time of release". But that's subjective. The fact is that it is not data supplied by BBFC. If it is not supplied by BBFC, then it is simply a product description, not a rating detail. That's how I feel. What say you? | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,685 |
| |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 868 |
| | Posted: | | | | I was (on of?) the No-voter(s).
I think the rules clearly specifiy rating details, which these imho are, should preferably be taken from the cover. Of course the format in which it is presented poses some challenges, but that doesn't mean, again, in my opinion, these are not details why the movie is rated in a certain way.
Paul |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,197 |
| | Posted: | | | | I see no problem entering it as it is. No need to consult other sources when its plainly written on the cover. | | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,641 |
| | Posted: | | | | Guess I'm not fully following but which text are you replacing... maybe an example would help. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,685 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Nexus the Sixth: Quote:
I see no problem entering it as it is. No need to consult other sources when its plainly written on the cover. Yes, it is plainly written, but does that make it Rating Details? If it is not in this format, do we take other descriptions that is plainly written on the back cover as Rating Details? Where do we draw the line? Does this "reflect BBFC rating info given at the time of release"? How do we know? This is obviously something that is written by a third party, probably someone at the media company. Is this really what Ken intended by Rating Details? Shouldn't Rating Details be defined by someone who has intimate knowledge of BBFC:s decision making, i.e. someone at BBFC? | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,750 |
| | Posted: | | | | Looks like rating details to me.  | | | | Marty - Registered July 10, 2004, User since 2002. |
|
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Personally I strongly prefer using the data from the BBFC in such cases, as this is not a format that readily fits our field. But I, too, have found that not everyone agrees, so I've usually ended up nog submitting this particular bit of data, and keeping it local instead. Luckily, this format hasn't been used in many, many years - I only have a handful of these left in my collection. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,685 |
| |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,279 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
Does this "reflect BBFC rating info given at the time of release"? How do we know? This is obviously something that is written by a third party, probably someone at the media company. Whilst it's a moot point. I know because I've followed the BBFC for a long time. Legally the companies are not allowed to supply their own wording to put on the case. It has to follow what the BBFC make available for the public if they choose to provide detail. The same way the logo has to be displayed and has to follow the BBFC's current size and design at the time of printing. If you'd searched the BBFC's website at the time that's the advice you would have seen and is not something somebody at the company has made up, you'll find the same wording across multiple releases from multiple compmanies. The BBFC are forever tinkering with how they rate and how they word it based on the whims of the current viewing public by doing regular surveys. You can imagine if you had wanted to update from the website we'd be continually changing the rating info every few years. I will say I've changed my mind on adding the the totally generic wording e.g. only suitable for adults because this is included as part of the rating in Profiler anyway. | | | | IVS Registered: January 2, 2002 | | | | Last edited: by Lithurge |
|
| Registered: March 23, 2007 |  Posts: 97 |
| | Posted: | | | | So as a UK resident my understanding is that this was the early version for DVD's any that I have I have not submitted them as they did not match the rules. I do however submit the newer style I must admit though that I still include the word contains (even though I know it gets ignored by the programme). Any that I come across I would consider which way to go as per the rules, I would possibly even look to do the same and remove them from the Database and ask the individuals to lock them locally as they do not match the rules. |
|