DVD Talk Reviewers: Have you ever changed the "Advice" for a review of a DVD?
 

If so which DVD's and from what advice to what advice? or even just changed your opinion of a movie later, but not necessarily changed your "Advice" on a review.

I think this is an interesting topic...

The only one I can remember off the top of my head? The very first one I wrote, for <i>Monty Python's The Meaning of Life</i> back in September 2003. There were a few authoring problems with the first pressing of the disc---enough to make my first review a real headache to update---and the original rating went from "Collectors Series" <i>allllll</i> the way down to "Recommended". It was a great disc (when finally done right), but Universal's God-awful quality control really spoiled the party.

I really don't think I have, or at least I don't remember (I've written over 2,000 in the span of 7+ years). I have changed my opinions of movies or presentations when it comes to multiple reviews of a title over a span of time. I may not feel as strongly/feel more strongly about "Movie X" when it was originally released a few years ago as I do when reviewing it now.

-Aaron.

I have never changed my recommendation after I've submitted the review. There are several times that I've written a reveiw and then sat on it over night to see if I still felt the same way the next day, and I have vasilated back and forth several times, but when I finally submit it, I consider it done.

There are several reasons for that. The main one is I don't want to feel the need to rewrite my reviews constantly. Beleive me, I could; add a sentance or two about the music, rewrite a paragraph here or there, I could constantly re-edit my work. Then I'd never get anything else done though.

I will change a review to correct typos or factual errors, or to include interesting information that I find out about from readers. None of these has made me change my mind about my recommendation though.

I think the only times I've changed something, it was because I found out something more about the technical details (or discovered a mistake). For instance, I originally gave a "rent it" to Harvie Krumpet, but at the time I thought it was not presented in its original aspect ratio. Afterwards, though, I discovered that it really was in its OAR, so I adjusted the video score, and decided that, overall, it merited being "recommended" now instead of just "rent it."

I agree that it could be an interesting topic. My own experience, here and the dozen or so other websites I've reviewed for, has been to very sparingly change my advice although I've probably done so a few times. Most of what I review is adult material and what came out in 1999 that rated a "outstanding" review, may well be only worth a rating of "not bad" nowadays. Like Videophile, I loath continually revising reviews but I do it when a mistake is brought to mind and like Holly, I'm open to suggestions.

The topic has been fresh in my mind though since I started posting some "retro-reviews" of titles I reviewed elsewhere that were released back to me a few years ago (long story). Like Aaron, I've reviewed a lot of titles and my style has improved a whole lot over the years but looking back at those reviews, I find a fresh outlook that is sometimes more appealing to me than my more jaded newer reviews.

Never, but I do allow some time to pass between watching a DVD and writing the review of it...usually 1 to 3 days. This is so I don't give a movie I really liked a higher rating than it might deserve or give a film I really hated a rating lower than what it might deserve. And yes folks, I still think Daredevil is great and I still think The Hulk sucks. ;)

Then you need to see The Hulk again. It and DD succeed (or not) equally well.

no he doesn't because the hulk still sucks.

I agree with MrE: the movies are of equal quality: they were both horrible. Oh well, different strokes I guess.