Submissions

Review Guidelines

Your review should provide a succinct scholarly analysis of the film that includes substantive critical discussion. Suggested areas of critique include program strengths and weaknesses, technical merit, educational or instruction use, appropriate library collections, and comparison with programs of similar content. The primary audience is academic librarians.

It is more important to prove a qualitative assessment that fairly and accurately critiques the program than it is to retell the film in specific detail.

Reviews should be no more than 5000 words in length.  Included in the review text is fit for the Audience Level (see Audience Guidelines) and rating decision for the film's fit with an academic program (see Rating Guidelines). Be sure to format your review in paragraphs, proper APA text formatting (e.g. bold, italics), and embedded URLs where appropriate.

Submission Guidelines

The “Submit Manuscript” link directs to the submission webpage. Please note that you will be prompted to create an online account (e-mail address and password), if you do not have one already.

Follow the guidance below to successfully submit your review to the journal.

Preparing a Submission

Using the guidelines included, your review would be compiled in the following order:

1. Included in the Abstract section
• Film citation.
• Main text of review.
• Awards paragraph or list.
2. Included as part of journal submission system:
• Rating – select one category.
• Audience Level – select one category.
• Keywords - input 2-3 terms from the subject taxonomy that detail the film's main subjects.

Journal Submission Steps

1. Start:

1. Select only one category to denote your rating of the film.
2. Select only one category that best matches the film's intended audience level.
3. Check the submission requirements.
4. Acknowledge the copyright statement.
5. Save and continue

2. Upload Submission

Not used. Any files submitted will be disregarded.

3. Enter Metadata

1. Title: Title of the film
2. Use prefix and subtitle as appropriate
3. Abstract: This is where you will enter your review. Follow the guidelines below for formatting and required elements.
4. Keywords: Use the subject taxonomy to provide two-three subject headings.
5. Save and continue.

4. Confirmation

Submit your review

Style Guidelines

Film Citation Uses Modified APA style:

Director Last Name, Director First Initial. (Director). Producer Last Name, Producer First Initial (Producer). (Production Year). Film Title. Distributor Name. Runtime mins.

Examples:

One Director, One Producer.

Timreck, T. (Director). Timreck, T. (Producer). (2024). Shaker Swamp: Four Seasons in the Medicinal Wetlands of New Lebanon, New York. Bullfrog Films. 54 mins.

Two Directors. Multiple Producers.

More than two directors and/or producers. List first and et. al.

Dickler, D. & Hochendoner, J. (Directors). Hochendoner, J., et al. (Producers). (2021). Fireboys. Good Docs. 83 mins.

Award Guidelines

If the film has won awards include these in the text of the review. Can be a separate paragraph or list at the end of the review.

Examples:

Paragraph

Award Name, Festival/Event; Award Name, Festival/Event; etc.

List

Awards won include:

• Award Name, Festival/Event
• Award Name, Festival/Event
• Etc.

Rating Guidelines

• Highly Recommended
  • Definition: The film is of exceptional quality and value for academic or educational purposes. It strongly supports learning objectives, is accurate, engaging, and well-produced.
  • Use Case: Ideal for inclusion in curricula, research, or scholarly work. Adds significant educational benefits.
• Recommended
  • Definition: The film is good and suitable for educational use. It meets most standards for accuracy, relevance, and production quality, though it may not be outstanding.
  • Use Case: Appropriate for classroom use or supplemental learning, but not essential.
• Recommended with Reservations
  • Definition: The film has educational merit but notable limitations (e.g., minor inaccuracies, dated content, or uneven production quality). It can be useful if paired with discussion or additional resources.
  • Use Case: Use selectively, with caution and context provided by the instructor.
• Not Recommended
  • Definition: The film does not meet academic standards. It may contain significant inaccuracies, poor production quality, or lack relevance to educational goals.
  • Use Case: Should not be used for instruction or scholarly purposes.
  • When writing a ‘Not Recommended’ review, be tactful and professional with your words. If the film is truly unworthy of discussion please contact the editor.

Audience Level Guidelines

• College
  • Definition: Content assumes prior knowledge and supports undergraduate or graduate-level learning.
  • Characteristics: Scholarly depth and rigor; Advanced concepts and terminology; Suitable for classroom instruction, research, or academic discussion
• General Adult
  • Definition: Content is academically valuable but also accessible to non-specialist adults.
  • Characteristics: Accessible language and broad appeal; No assumption of academic background; Often suitable for public libraries or lifelong learners
• All Ages
  • Definition: Content appropriate for children through adults. It can be used in college but also works for broader audiences.
  • Characteristics: Universal themes and clear explanations; Engaging for mixed-age audiences

Keywords

Use the subject taxonomy to provide two-three subject terms.

Editorial Modification

EMRO reserves the right to make necessary modifications to reviews that have been submitted in order to comply with the journal’s content and style. Reviewers of film reviews edited for publication will receive a proof, as it is intended to be published. Reviewers will carefully read the film review and provide a prompt formal response accepting it “as-is” or detailing any necessary changes and corrections. No substantive changes will be made without your approval.