| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | OK, two examples (The ones which are pending at the moment. So everyone understands what we are talking about); On the cover we see: As Good as It Gets Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me And you (Tim) have added (which I'm trying to remove) the details "Violence, Coarse Language" and "Violence", but if you click on the above links you'll see this age:  And that's the problem. The details do not belong to the age on the cover, and adding them gives users the wrong information. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands | | | | Last edited: by Daddy DVD |
|
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 8,722 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Daddy DVD: Quote:
The details do not belong to the age on the cover True. The rating details still belong to the FILM, though. Again, we have a rules-allowed, official source to take the rating details from. It's valid, film-specific data, and there isn't any other source. So either we tell the person who's looking for rating details on 'As Goods As It Gets': "Well, it seems to be rated '12'', but I can't tell you anything more about it", or we say: "it contains violence and coarse language". IMHO, the latter is more useful. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | We can't separate the rating from the rating details (in The Netherlands). Together they represent the weight of the given information. So, "12" and "Violence, Coarse Language" means the used details have more weight than what they have with "6". And "AL" and "Violence" means the used detail has less weight than what it has with "6". It's only useful if we make the right combination. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 460 |
| | Posted: | | | | At first I too thought that the new information was better, but after reading this:
IMHO, and therefore comming to Daddy DVD's defence, the ratings as displayed on the DVD cover should be used.
Can we come to an agreement on this? | | | | Jean-Paul |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,722 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JP_S: Quote:
the ratings as displayed on the DVD cover should be used.
Can we come to an agreement on this? That agreement has already been reached: as far as I know, all of us agree that the rating as displayed on the cover should be used. This is just about the rating details. The rules tell us that if the rating details are not shown on the cover or on-screen, we can then take them from the "region-specific ratings information website". For The Netherlands, that website is www.kijkwijzer.nl, and there you can find the rating details. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | Yes, the details for "Kijkwijzer" but not for "Videovoorlichtingsysteem". | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,722 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Daddy DVD: Quote:
Yes, the details for "Kijkwijzer" but not for "Videovoorlichtingsysteem". Lacking any details from the other two allowed sources, i'm after rating details for the FILM. Again, we have a rules-allowed, official source to take the rating details from. It's valid, film-specific data, and there isn't any other source. So either we tell the person who's looking for rating details on 'As Goods As It Gets': "Well, it seems to be rated '12'', but I can't tell you anything more about it", or we say: "it contains violence and coarse language". IMHO, the latter is more useful. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| |
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,722 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Daddy DVD: Quote:
There's no need to repeat the point you already made. That's all we seem to be doing, isn't it? I might as well join in. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting Daddy DVD:
Quote:
There's no need to repeat the point you already made.
That's all we seem to be doing, isn't it? No, I didn't. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 460 |
| | Posted: | | | | Well that is great, I just didn't actually know if the agreement was definite. | | | | Jean-Paul |
|
| Corne | | Registered: Nov. 1, 2000 |
| Registered: April 5, 2007 | | Posts: 1,059 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting JP_S:
Quote:
the ratings as displayed on the DVD cover should be used.
Can we come to an agreement on this?
That agreement has already been reached: as far as I know, all of us agree that the rating as displayed on the cover should be used. This is just about the rating details. The rules tell us that if the rating details are not shown on the cover or on-screen, we can then take them from the "region-specific ratings information website". For The Netherlands, that website is www.kijkwijzer.nl, and there you can find the rating details. I'm inclined to agree with Daddy DVD on this one. The symbols of the rating details are only attached to the Kijkwijzer system. The old system has no rating details at all. The website of Kijkwijzer is only refering to the Kijkwijzer system. So when the cover is rated by the old system, those info should be used. The rating details of the old system cannot be found on the Kijkwijzer website. | | | | Cor |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Not that I'm affected by this (I only have a couple of Dutch titles) I have to agree with Martin too.
Taking rating descriptions from one rating and applying them to another is misleading.
We can tell why the two titles under discussion were rated 6, however there is no guarantee they were originally rated 12 and AL for the same reasons - it's likely, but not confirmed.
If you can find a reason for the original Videovoorlichtingsysteem rating, then fine - use that. But I don't think you can apply a description from one rating to another, even if they're for the same title. | | | | Last edited: by northbloke |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | . | | | | Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions. | | | | Last edited: by ? |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,722 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Giga Wizard: Quote:
You now replace existing rating details from existing covers (1st release) by new ratings from a continuous changing website with changing rating details? No. Per the rules, if there are rating details on the cover or on-screen, those prevail. There is no danger whatsoever of original rating details being replaced. Also, the actual rating from the original cover is ALWAYS kept. Quote:
Now we have to look at the cover again to know what it was originaly? Again: no. Anything that's on the cover will ALWAYS be kept. This only concerns DVD's where there are no rating details shown on the cover, nor on-screen. You then have a choice between either entering nothing, or entering valid, film-specific data from the only remaining available source. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | . | | | | Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions. | | | | Last edited: by ? |
|