Silent : Why does IMDb allow rating lost films?

Why does IMDb allow rating lost films?

The thread on lost films had me looking at SILENTERA's very inclusive list. As I went to some of their IMDb pages, to read more, I saw that many had ratings. Shouldn't that option be closed?

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Why does IMDb allow rating lost films?

If I would be that one 100 year old guy that actually saw these films in the theatre back then and would want to rate them on IMDB now it would really piss me off. However I think the amount of people that actually saw the films is incredibly low and the ratings only cause confusion as what users rate are often documentaries, existing fragments or perhaps even their expectations. If the films in question should once resurface the IMDB rating would be utterly useless as most lost films wouldn't attract enough voters to render the existing votes unconsequential for the final rating. I'd say IMDB should probably remove the ratings on films which have been lost long ago (say 85 years or more ago). However if the movie was list fairly recently there's still a chance that a considerable ammount of people will have seen it.

Re: Why does IMDb allow rating lost films?

It might just be too cumbersome for imdb to program in something that would prevent people from rating and/or posting reviews of 'lost' films.

- You may have come on no bicycle, but that does not say that you know everything.

Re: Why does IMDb allow rating lost films?

I have reviewed several lost films. The feedback I receive on past reviews/comments of lost films is positive. What I try to do is provide information about the film and keep interest in finding these lost films high. Most importantly, I make it clear the film I'm commenting on is lost. I see whatever fragments or reels are available. I read contemporary reviews and look at the filmmakers' work from the era.

Several old movie magazines provided very detailed accounts of then popular films - and checking with available films reveals several of these writers are quite dependable. They turned films into written "movie stories" for readers' entertainment.

The new version of London After Midnight got me interested in seeking out stills from lost films; while old stills provide good visuals, the still photographer sometimes "tells" a different story, so these can sometimes be more untrustworthy than a first-hand written account.

In sum, the most important thing is to let readers know what exactly is available and what is lost at the time of your writing about a lost, or partially lost film.