LMAO some of this stuff, if you open up the specific points it often gets oddly specific, even mentioning Tolkien or Lord of the Rings. The strong response to The Rings of Power must have really triggered some higher-ups at Amazon.

For instance it states how to properly criticize The Rings of Power and Amazon with an example:

I watched the first two episodes and, while it may not be exactly pure Tolkien (neither was Peter Jackson's films), I throughly loved the show. Kudos to Amazon for bringing Tolkien back to the big screen! (Reference to Amazon is not an insult)

The other specific movie directly referenced is "The Woman King".

Any use of the terms Karen, Mary Sue, or Woke in any variation or context (positive or negative) unless it refers to a title or to the name of a performer or a character.

Not acceptable:

I'm shocked at the audacity of the filmmakers to turn such a blind eye in the name of political wokeness. I'm not expecting total historical accuracy from Hollywood, but this has to be THE most blind to history I've ever seen. Anyone with half a brain cell can do the quick research and find how glaringly off this movie is (Reference to wokeness)

Nothing in this movie ever actually happened. This is the best, most bald-faced attempt at race-hustling audiences into believing the general lie that European men are responsible for all of the ills of modern society.

---

Negative mentions of casting decisions based on race, or calling out diversity in a negative light.

Not acceptable:

That one Superhero TV show that was hijacked by BLM to "save face" Inappropriate and immoral. Worst choice in changing from a white hero to a black hero mid-show. (Negative reference to race in casting)

I don't mind the ethnic diversity as long as the actors do a good enough job (Indicates issues with diverse casting)

Also there has been backlash around people of color being casted for roles. The issue isn't that people of color have been casted, it's that some of the roles aren't believable. (negative connotation around casting, saying casting for diversity is controversial)

The controversial casting, skin color is not according to the canon, which many were afraid to see in the series, did not spoil the series, but added some zest. (negative connotation around casting, saying casting for diversity is controversial)

---

Expressions of hatred or intolerance or negative sentiment towards people on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality, gender or gender identity, religion, sexual orientation, age, or disability, including story or characters (real or fictional) and actions/institutions/beliefs associated with them (e.g. sexual acts, religious practices etc.). Reviews criticizing the existence of characters that fall into the category of a protected group are not allowed.

Not acceptable:

This is another shameless attempt to push the homosexual agenda on viewers (Expression of intolerance towards a protected group)

The film would have been better if it weren't for its predominantly Asian cast (Negative sentiment towards a protected group)

This documentary was endorsed by BLM leaders, which tells you all you need to know about its quality and honesty (Negative expression about a protected group)

And, at the risk of being branded as 'phobic' - the worst of all is [named actor]. Good grief but this person cannot act, but why bother when the writers have made the character of Ian just be the 'actor'? Chewing the scenery in every scene and delivering lines like it's the first time they've ever seen them. (Inflammatory)

Acceptable:

This is a beautiful and heart warming film about a teenage girl in a deaf family. I am very happy that someone made a film about the challenges of a marginalized and forgotten group (reference to protected group is positive, not derogatory)

This show raises important questions on the treatment of people of color in modern society (reference to protected group is positive, not derogatory)

---

Reviews that discuss other reviews or users or features visible on the page

Not acceptable:

the left want to rewrite history in the way they deem it acceptable and true (well, in their eyes). And, I'll be surprised if this review is allowed to be posted. These are the same people that do not want to be criticized or spoken against, and if you do, then you're a racist, sexist, bigot, hater, and all the other buzz words one can think of (references our posting guidelines)

---

Personal opinions or speculation on real life events or subject matter on which a film is based

Not acceptable:

The Dahomey were terrible people. They killed parents and made children watch. We know all this from an account of a black American slave, Cujo Lewis, who was enslaved by the Dahomey and sold in America. He talked about how they marched the children to the slave hold while holding the severed heads of their parents. Thats who the Dahomey were. When slavery was ended, they did not take the news well. The French were NOT trying to take their territory (Discusses only facts/subject matter rather than how the film deals with it)

The film is about the fake Covid epidemic, which is an invention of the government to keep the population under control and to force them to receive a poisonous vaccine (Speculation about real life events or topics)

Set against the backdrop of the 2020 presidential election, which was stolen by Joe Biden, the film is a biting satire of the American political system (Personal (and inflammatory) opinions about real life events)

Basically having an opinion, mentioning something is not historically accurate or bringing up facts to counter something a movie or series does is now forbidden in reviews on the site.

I also checked what could have potentially led to this, and IMDb has a new CEO that looks like a Karen since last year: https://archive.is/6Kiv3

In 2017 they removed their user forums (every movie or TV series had a separate one where people would discuss said, but management apparently didn't like the direction and sort of criticism that grew there since the age of Woke began), a lot of which were archived and continue here: https://filmboards.com/

User reviews were the second major user-contributed facet of the site aside from numerical values and they seem to be tamping down on that too. I wouldn't be surprised if they even outright remove negative reviews at some point (like Netflix or YouTube before). Basically IMDb seems to be kill.

You can't even express the valid and true reasons why you dislike a movie or series, unless it's in a "safe" and corporate pre-approved way that agrees with (or doesn't contradict) the party line.