General Discussion

Glad to see you guys listening to our feedback. And I agree that the reviews need to be quality not lifted from the reviewers own blog.

@erichr: That's a good idea. I have to say writing about Touch was one of my favorite things so far, so I will think about a BSG angle and hopefully make that a priority soon.

Just hire @litrock already.

The guy writes enough content for a website all by himself, and it's not even his job.

I'm really missing the in-depth analyses of older films that I used to love. Bring back themed weeks - maybe that will inspire some new features.

I just don't see how "What's on TV this weekend" and "Box Office News" is enough to sustain a site.

Let me just start off by saying thank you for this post, one of the things that irritated us so much about the Cabin in the Woods review is that there was no sign at all that our complaints were being heard. Screened isn't just a movie website, it's a movie community, a place for film buffs to come together. So not having any response from you guys made it feel like we had lost that, so this does put some fears to rest.

As for the reviews, I'll go back to what I said a moment ago, Screened is not a movie website, it's a movie community. It's a site about movies and television run by people who truly love the mediums. And because of this, I'd say select a handful of the members here and make them your official review team. You wouldn't even have to do much, you'd just have to say "here's the deadline for when you have to have the review in for us." Then the review team themselves could contact each other to divide up the movies that are coming out that week, then each of them could tackle at least one movie and review it. And on smaller weeks with few releases you could even have them each review it in order to give multiple official Screened opinions. And you might worry that since they'd be staff you'd have to pay them, but honestly if you just gave them each enough money for the movie tickets each week I'd say that would be fitting compensation (maybe a little more to make up for transportation and snacks at the theater).

Now as much as I'd like to start waving my hand around and saying "Oh, oh, pick me, pick me, I'd be great for it," let's get real, your number one choice here is litrock. He's the living reviewing machine on Screened. However as I said, I do think you should have at least three people on this team, so maybe you could open it up to the Screened community to nominate people for the positions, then each person (if they accept) could submit to you a little cover letter and samples of their work here on Screened to show you why they think they deserve to be part of the Screened Review Team. And if this works, then maybe you could do the same with editorials and special blogs on the site, because as I said, this place isn't just a site to get movie news, but a place to actually hear movie fans talk about movies, and there are lots of clever people on this site dedicated enough to it who would gladly step up. I've been trying my best over the past week to add my own new ongoing features, but we need something not just in the forums, we need some fans who can add stuff right to the front page.

@FinalDasa: FinalDasa!

I just voiced my current grievances of/in the current review but in regards to what can be done to improve this site, I put it all on you. I know a lot of people are saying hire ______ or involve the community more, and I agree with them to an extent, but I am not going to advocate for the hiring of members. I am going to say that there needs to be something, hell anything, that lets the people that visit Screened.com for their daily movie/tv news know why they should continue to do so. Right now, the only reasons I see to come to this site are the forums, where I can actually see news/discussions/opinions, or to see how bad this site has tanked in the quality of its daily posts. The main issue that i assume most people have (including myself) is just the lack of any care in what goes up here. Everybody understands the position you are in and that transfers take time. However, that should never be used as an excuse to turn in poor quality work. Copied and pasted reviews from another site? Another member said it best on this current review, the offense does not come from the fact that a review was copy/pasted on this site, but the fact that you guys were fine with it. TWICE. I mean come on. At least look over it. Make him change something. Hell, just make it seem like you gave a crap as to what you decided to present on this site to the community. I get that you respect his work, and maybe he has great reviews on his site, but just letting him literally paste the exact same review word for word and then expecting the community to give a crap about who he is or what he has to say sight unseen is just ridiculous. To cut this down and to avoid going into a long winded rant, I will say the same thing I said on the current review: WHERE IS THIS SITE GOING? This is the main question whose answer will quell many of the angry members here. You have inherited a group of people on this site that make up for their lack in size with their dedication. They will follow you to the end but you have to give them some reason to believe in you. Allowing your perceived lack of care and effort show though with these reviews (and that god awful Dick Clark two sentence eulogy, of which there is no excuse for) doesn't help anyone. Not the community, and more importantly, not yourselves.

First of all, you must at least research on who the deceased person is before writing their eulogy (at least one full paragraph should do it, but longer ones are okay). Don't skimp on it like you did with Dick Clark. That was shameful.

Selecting members for a review team is also a good idea (Litrock is obviously choice #1), but it helps a lot more if a review is written in your own words instead of being copy-pasted from another site. You also need some community involvement into other stuff as well, including the times when major front-page movie/TV news is involved.

One last bit is that I also agree on bringing back theme weeks because everyone grew used to them. However it mustn't be on what the old hosts have already covered! They must be new subjects that can be helpful to even those who haven't seen much movies involving said theme.

This "Mitch" guy is just bad. plain and simple. His writing may be passable elsewhere, or by BB standards, but his writing is far below the quality we've come to expect from Screened.

Format changes can't fix bad writing.

@staceywi: Thanks for the update. As has been said, many of us are stressed that Screened has lost its founders, and many of us were here when it was built so such a huge change is difficult and alien. A big part of what made Screened such a big thing was interaction between everyone, and that's the missing piece. We're forgetting this is still a transitional phase. Admittedly, I was bitter at first, but the fact that you are trying to make things comfortable for us is really good to know.

I don't see why the guy should write two reviews.. but the issue is, if you're using a review from another site, just use the screened domain to redirect there and get it over with quickly like ripping off a band-aid, instead of the site dying slowly like it has been.

And seriously, 2 stars if you're lucky? Did he think that was witty?

It's too bad the reviews are full of bolded words that don't link to the wiki. That would at the very least make it seem like a Screened review rather than something outsourced.

Because, you know, part of the fun of these Whiskey sites has always been the wiki.

@Brewmaster_Andy said:

@staceywi The Cabin review, for me, was nothing compared to the Dick Clark obituary. The biggest advise review-wise has already been given here - we need to hear the author's voice, and a copy+pasted review as the first review under the "new management" was a terrible, terrible idea. Someone like @litrock puts time into his reviews, clearly cares about film, and is doing it all for free. We don't come to this site for headline grabbers or quick updates on showbiz news - we come for in-depth, thoughtful articles and reviews by writers we have come to know as people. Since the change, I haven't seen that. Threads like this are all well and good, but we get the same line from you over and over - "we hear you". Do you? It doesn't seem that way. We are getting absolute travesties like the piece on Dick Clark. We are not here for showbiz tweets. This is not Twitter. This is a website founded on writing and community interaction, and so far there has been very little of either.

I completely agree with what Andy's saying. The review doesn't have any personality or depth. The main thing someone should get out of a review is a sense of whether they themselves will enjoy the movie or not. The review is really broad and hardly told me anything about the movie. I understand the desire not to "spoil" things, but I would have liked more of an idea of what the film is. I have never seen Dollhouse, so referencing that is completely unhelpful. And such gems as, "The story is well-paced, and constantly manages to have more twists up its sleeve", are lacking in content. Few of the points in the review are backed up so it's difficult to basically take the reviewer's word for it that the movie "feels like the work of a jaded artist". A longer review wouldn't have necessarily been better, one that was more relevant to the reader's needs would definitely have been.

I have been really disappointed with Screened lately. I can understand the reality of the time it takes to make a transition, but I get the sense that nothing's happening. The Cabin review is not very good, but I also haven't seen an original article in a while, it's all just been trailers, recaps, and boring reblogged news bits. There's nothing wrong with the "review system" as @staceywi calls it, I feel there is a broader problem regarding the lack of thoughtful, unique content on the site.

i got to say that though the reviews are leaving something to be desired, the features coming from @staceywi i have enjoyed quite thoroughly though

one thing i think that may help is personalizing yourselves with the community a bit, in the sense that after frequenting the site for sometime, i always felt that i could @ reply rorie, or twitter message him with feedback and put a face to that name and more often than not get a response that didn't feel scripted

maybe some video features would help us get to know the new staff some and help us get to know you better?

Well, I think the idea of hiring or promoting members already here who show a good degree of competence with the ideas and content basis of a movie community is an idea. I personally would love to write stuff for this site if I had more time away from the film projects and I had a reason to take the time to format and edit. I wiil still try. But, people like @litrock and @FinalDasa really work hard here.