How do I overcome this?

  • 6
  • Question
  • Updated 5 years ago
  • Answered
I am attempting to complete my profile.  IMDb refuse to list six of my early films.  These films date back before there were any URLs.  IMDb will not proceed without URLs proving the existence of these films.  I cannot make any headway although I have tried by adding my own Company URL and then explaining that no URLs existed in 1960 etc.  IMDb just keep sending the same page,"supply URLs showing links to publicity, proof of screenings" etc.

IMDb has readily accepted some titles from the same year(s) but no matter how much extra information I supply, it will not accept these 6 genuine productions.
Photo of Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 6 years ago

  • 6
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7582 Posts
  • 9761 Reply Likes
Bruce: What films are they, and what kind of distribution or release did they get? (Theatrical, film festivals, television, video, etc.?)

URLs aren't supposed to be required for films released before 2000, so I'm not sure what the exact problem is. Please post your last full data submission for one of the films here on this message board. You can copy it out of the receipt you would have received from IMDb by e-mail immediately after sending it in. Some of the regulars on the board may review it and, if they can, they may provide suggestions as to how to improve the submission to get it included in the database. (Also, please include the submission reference number -- it's an 18-digit number that will look something like 140123-123456-789000.)
Photo of Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thanks Gromit

The films vary from short subject Cinema releases through to TV documentary


This submission is a TV pilot which didn't get a market

Reference 141030-011853-436000


The Bush Bunch (1981) (TV)
New Title - Add
Plain Title: The Bush Bunch
Type: tv
Sub-Type: unsold
Status: released
Year: 1981
Source: ...producer/director/writer

Release Dates - Add
Country: Australia
Date: 1982

Country of Origin - Add
Australia

Languages - Add
English

Color / Black & White - Add
Color

Genres - Add
Adventure

Directors - Add
Name: McNaughton, Bruce

Budget - Add
Currency: AUD
Amount: 45,000

Distributors - Add
Company: Aranda Film Productions [au]
Attribute: (1981-) (Australia) (TV)

Production Companies - Add
Company: Aranda Film Productions [au]

Cast - Add
Name: Hutton, Ric
Character: Airforce Major

Name: Carman, Michael
Character: Wireless operator

Name: Pym, Walter
Character: Old man

Name: Michael, Barry

Name: Kluger, Garry

Writers - Add
Name: Hopgood, Alan

Producers - Add
Name: Herbert, Colin (IV)
Occupation: executive producer

Name: McNaughton, Bruce
Occupation: producer

Composers - Add
Name: Brady, Mike (I)

Cinematographers - Add
Name: Bilcock, Peter

Editors - Add
Name: Green, Bruce (XV)

Running Times - Add
Time: 26

Filming Locations - Add
Melbourne Australia

Sound Mix - Add
Mono

Aspect Ratio - Add
4:3

Sound Department - Add
Name: McNaughton, Bruce
Occupation: sound re-recording mixer
Photo of DavidAH_Ca

DavidAH_Ca, Champion

  • 3263 Posts
  • 2925 Reply Likes
The URL does not have to be to a site about the movie. It can be to a scan of a newspaper ad showing that the film was shown or of a newspaper  or magazine review of the film.
Photo of Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Totally understood.  But no URLs in 1960 means no links to anything.  And physical newspaper cuttings etc are long gone
Photo of DavidAH_Ca

DavidAH_Ca, Champion

  • 3263 Posts
  • 2925 Reply Likes
A Google search did find the following item that appears to indicate that this item was produced  :
http://www.austlit.edu.au/austlit/page/C474227?mainTabTemplate=workFilmDetails

However, the problem is that (at least in the non-subscription pages) there is no indication that it was ever "made available to the public" as is required for an item to be eligible. As the Submission Guide: Adding a New Title notes in the Eligibility rules section :
For a work to be eligible for inclusion in the database it must be of general public interest and should be available to the public or have been available in the past. We accept most kinds of films/TV shows, including big screen and direct-to-DVD features; web series; documentaries; video games; experimental films and short films. General public interest is assumed if a work has been:
  • Released in cinemas.
  • Shown on TV.
  • Released on video or the web or prints have been made available to the public.
  • Listed in the catalog of an established video retailer; (e.g. Amazon.com).
  • Accepted and shown on film festivals.
  • Made by a (now) famous artist or person of public interest.
  • Made famous for some reason and is widely talked about/referenced in media or the 'film community' or is now of general historic interest for some reason.
It is most likely evidence of this availability that IMDb is asking for. Sometimes pilots that are not picked up are aired in the summer doldrums, but sometimes they never see the light of day. Only the former are eligible for inclusion on IMDb, and since you do not have a precise Release Date they probably suspect that this is among the latter.
Photo of Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thanks David.  The submission does include a release date.  I specified that it was an un-aired pilot but it did have a number of industry screenings and public screenings...

Although this 1981 title does have the database URL that you found, none of my other (1960s) submissions is so lucky.  In each case I submitted a release date.  Strange that many titles breezed through with identical submission details and no [impossible due to age] independent proof of  releases.
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7582 Posts
  • 9760 Reply Likes
Bruce: To me, at least, it might be difficult to get the unaired pilot listed in the database. Do you want to try posting your data submissions for the other films that received a more public release?
Photo of Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
What interests and concerns me is the inconsistency in the way that the titles have been 'assessed.'  For example I submitted two titles of television programmes aired in 1966 and these went through.  I then submitted a third in the series with identical details and it was blocked.

I submitted a couple of short films that had 'limited' public screenings and they went through but the film (below) which had a nation-wide cinema release through a national cinema chain distributor, was blocked...

I also tried unsuccessfully to upgrade a tv documentary series which was already listed as 'unknown episodes.'  I listed and submitted the titles of all eight episodes but that has disappeared into the ether without any response from IMDb.

141030-033753-195000 (second updated submission)


All the love (1966)
New Title - Add
Plain Title: All the love
Type: film
Sub-Type: short
Status: released
Year: 1966
Source: ...producer/director/writer

Release Dates - Add
Country: Australia
Date: 1966

Country of Origin - Add
Australia

Languages - Add
English

Color / Black & White - Add
Color

Genres - Add
Documentary

Directors - Add
Name: McNaughton, Bruce

Budget - Add
Currency: AUD
Amount: 10,000

Distributors - Add
Company: Greater Union Film Distributors [au]
Attribute: (1966) (Australia) (theatrical)

Production Companies - Add
Company: Aranda Film Productions [au]

Cast - Add
Name: McDonald, Margaret
Character: Mother

Name: Robinson, Malcolm
Character: Father

Name: Kaye, Norman (I)
Character: Doctor

Writers - Add
Name: McNaughton, Bruce

Producers - Add
Name: McNaughton, Bruce
Occupation: producer

Composers - Add
Name: Dreyfus, George (I)

Cinematographers - Add
Name: McNaughton, Bruce

Editors - Add
Name: Kavanagh, Brian (I)

Running Times - Add
Time: 20

Filming Locations - Add
Melbourne Australia

Sound Mix - Add
Mono

Aspect Ratio - Add
1.85 : 1

Sound Department - Add
Name: Carrick, Lloyd
Occupation: sound recordist

Name: McNaughton, Bruce
Occupation: sound re-recording mixer
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7582 Posts
  • 9760 Reply Likes
Bruce: I recommend re-submitting this film with the following updates. The most significant update is likely to be the Miscellaneous Links.

Title: I recommend using standard title capitalization, which would make this film All the Love instead.

Cast and Keywords: Although this is a documentary, all the cast members are listed as playing roles. If they were playing roles in an otherwise nonfiction production rather than appearing as themselves, I recommend submitting the keyword reenactment to indicate that this documentary included actors playing roles. However, if the cast members really were a mother, father, and doctor appearing as themselves nonfictionally, their character names should be given as "Herself - Mother", "Himself - Father", and "Himself - Doctor".

Filming Locations: The city name is not formatted correctly for IMDb's filming location purposes. It should be given as:
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

See http://www.imdb.com/updates/field/locations/value?M where you will find it in the list of locations.

Plot Summary and/or Plot Outline: Since you are the writer/director/producer of this film, I recommend that you include a Plot Summary and/or a Plot Outline so that IMDb users will be able to know what this film is about.

Miscellaneous Links: I have found two Miscellaneous Links which I would recommend that you submit:

URL: http://www.aacta.org/winners-nominees/1958-1969/1966.aspx
Description: Australian Film Institute Awards - see under Public Relations - Bronze Award winner

URL: http://books.google.com/books?id=1403AAAAIAAJ&q=%22all+the+love%22+mcnaughton&dq=%22all+the+love%22+mcnaughton
Description: Australian Films - book by National Library of Australia

I can't guarantee that the film will be accepted into the database with these changes, but having the two Miscellaneous Links may get it an additional review by an IMDb staffer and give the film a boost toward inclusion.

I hope this helps. Good luck!

(Also, I have given you a "me too" in this thread in the hope of getting an IMDb staffer to view this thread and give you additional advice.)
(Edited)
Photo of ljdoncel

ljdoncel, Champion

  • 906 Posts
  • 1947 Reply Likes
In addition to the official link of the AACTA provided by gromit, here's the image of an article from The Canberra Times (24 Nov 1966) supporting the existence of the film:


Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7582 Posts
  • 9760 Reply Likes
Good job finding that article, ljdoncel.
Photo of Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Yes excellent work, both of you for finding these bits of history that I had no idea existed.

It is so frustrating to learn that a submission can be rejected by using or not using a capital letter, or the wrong shaped brackets...

Also frustrating is the lack of categories.  This film is not a documentary but it does not fit any other of the very broad film types.  Being listed as a documentary and having actors, as you suggest , could flag another rejection.  But these actors simply advance the narrative, as would a commentator. 

As for the filming location, I have successfully submitted 'Melbourne, Australia' several times. Each time I am told that it is not in the data base although it certainly is in clear print in my listed titles.

I will re-submit this title with as many of your suggestions as possible Gromit, with thanks.  However without winning awards for the remaining rejected titles, I doubt that I can satisfy the narrow and restrictive IMDb criteria.
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7582 Posts
  • 9761 Reply Likes
Bruce: A few comments.

I don't exactly know what it is that caused your earlier submission of All the Love to be rejected, and as I stated above I am hoping that an IMDb staffer will comment here. It could have been capitalization or punctuation or it could have been something completely different.

If you don't consider your film to be a documentary, and you can't fit it into any of the other genres listed by IMDb, then I would recommend leaving the Genre section empty. The list of genres recognized by IMDb is not all-encompassing. Not every work that is or could be listed by IMDb fits into one of the existing genres. But if you do consider your film a documentary, having actors is not something that should cause a rejection. There are other documentaries that include actors, and from time to time such actors from documentary films post on this board to ask how to get their credits listed in the Actor section instead of the Self section. As I mentioned previously, the answer is to list the keyword reenactment for the film.

There are 80 titles in the database which list the filming location "Melbourne, Australia", but there are 1,579 titles that list the filming location "Melbourne, Victoria, Australia". The latter is preferred, because it makes it possible to search for titles filmed in the state of Victoria and find the ones filmed in Melbourne among them.

As regards the other rejected titles -- you never know what information may turn up, as evidenced by the image from the Canberra Times mentioning your film which appeared in Ljdoncel's post less than an hour after your previous posting.
Photo of Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Title:  All the Love

Well I re-submitted this film using the excellent suggestions and links that you made/found and I received a response this morning.

It was the same stale old page that asked for links

It seems that the provided links and embellishments were not noticed, read or believed

Or was this response a standard reply generated by a computer?

You can understand my frustration when other titles that I submitted with only basic information and without any outside confirmation of completion or release, have sailed through this inconsistent and discordant process.
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7582 Posts
  • 9760 Reply Likes
Bruce: I don't have any further solutions that are likely to be helpful at this time. I think we need IMDb staff to intervene and examine your submissions, because something appears to have gone wrong and it is probably something out of your control. 

I am going to bump this thread from time to time until you get a staff response, and I hope other regulars here will do so too. In addition, I encourage anyone reading this to give this thread a "Me Too" vote.
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7582 Posts
  • 9760 Reply Likes
I'm bumping this thread now.
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7582 Posts
  • 9760 Reply Likes
Bump.
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 13308 Posts
  • 10784 Reply Likes
Hi Bruce -

I was able to see that the title submission for "All the Love (1966)" was rejected because our editors needed more evidence to verify that this title (a) exists and (b) is completed.

The article screen grab ljdoncel posted certainly will help confirm both of the above.  I will reach out to our title managers directly and share this information with them.  If they need you to provide anything further I will let you know.
Photo of Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Dear Michelle

I am impressed that with the invaluable assistance of two 'regulars' this has now reached you.

If you read back through this thread you cannot miss my frustration at the inconsistency of this title acceptance process.

I have six other titles (which did not win awards and therefore did not receive any media notice) which you have rejected.  I have no 40 years old (media or other) URL evidence of their existence.  I did offer collaborational (other crew member URLs) to substantiate their validity, and film archive contact information, but to no avail...

Balanced against this I submitted other titles with minimum information and you accepted these instantly without question.

And then there is the problem of not being able to discuss anything with IMDb people.


Regards
Bruce
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7582 Posts
  • 9761 Reply Likes
Bruce: Granted that it has taken a while, but at least you have gotten the attention of an IMDb staffer. You might as well post at least the titles and submission reference numbers of the other films that you have not been able to get listed yet, and hopefully Michelle will take a look at them. You could even try posting the other submissions here in hopes that one of the regulars here will be able to dig up other URLs for them.
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 13308 Posts
  • 10784 Reply Likes
Following up here, the article evidence was exactly what our editors needed and the title should be live on the site shortly!

Also, Bruce - our editors will review your submission history and re-check the non accepted items.  As gromit82 suggested, if there is anything specific you would like our staff to look at please feel free to post those submission reference numbers here.
Photo of Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Dear Michelle

I am so grateful to gromit82 for advancing this and to you for taking it up.

Just so we have the same list, here are the outstanding submissions:

141102-074543-637000
141011-233401-089000
141029-223210-821000
141011-235101-954000
141011-232622-193000
141011-232228-035000

I note that the first two of these titles are television series pilots, completed and screened to the public but not taken up by any network.  Although gromit82 suggests that an un-aired pilot may not qualify, your 'new title' submission block includes and specifies an 'unsold' status sub-type for TV pilots...

And the third title (141029-223210-821000) is one of three TV specials, the first two of which have been already approved by IMDb

Thanks Michelle
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 13308 Posts
  • 10784 Reply Likes
Hi Bruce -

Apologies for the long delay in replying here.

Our data editor had confirmed that the updates you referenced were rejected, primarily due to little or no information provided within the title submission, as well as our staff receiving no HelpDesk response our emails.

Many of the titles were rejected because there were either no supporting links provided or in some instances there were links but they weren't relevant to the title.

For future submissions, keep in mind that supporting evidence is required with valid direct links to the material. For old films web material doesn't always exist but an alternative solution could be to post some pictures into a drop box account (password protect if required) and share the password in the comments section whilst resubmitting.
(Edited)