Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
kenmorefield

2015 Arts & Faith Ecumenical Jury

Recommended Posts

Amy was inadvertently left off the final ballot. If you've already voted and would like to send me your vote for this film as a supplemental message, I will tally it manually. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Peter T Chattaway said:

kenmorefield wrote:
: Amy was inadvertently left off the final ballot.

Eh? It's #6 on the ballot I got.

I believe Ken updated the ballot to add it. It wasn't on the ballot when I initially clicked the link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey all, below is a draft of a press release I was going to put out. Could you all help me with proofreading? (I'm traveling, and mysteriously the laptop I am on has spell-check disabled...since I have a former detached retina that impairs vision, I sometimes miss real obvious typos and such.)

Colin, would you be willing to take the responsibility to forward the press release to any of the reps who offered screeners? (Particularly Film Movement since they put a film on final list). I will send it to Allied-THA (who handles major studios), so don't worry about that.

Ken

***********************************

January 4, 2016

 

***For Immediate Release***

 

***Image Magazine to announce resuts of 2015 Arts & Faith Ecumenical Jury Awards.***

 

The 2015 Arts & Faith Ecumenical Jury Awards have a decidedly international flavor. Six of ten films recognized by the Image sponsored discussion forum (http://artsandfaith.com) were foreign-language films.

 

 Perhaps because of that international flavor, this year’s list of films specifically recommended for Christian audiences looked beyond representations of Christianity and included an Israeli film about a Jewish divorce trial, an historical drama set in 7th century China, and three films set in contemporary states predominated by Islam.

 

 Two films looked back on American history, showing the positive impact of the Roman Catholic church on one community and the devastatingly painful impact some of its adherents and administrators had on another.

 

 This marked the second year that an animated film received recognition, with Pixar’s Inside Out receiving a spot the jury’s short list.

 

 The jury expanded from twelve to fifteen members this year. Jury members represented a variety of evangelical press outlets including Christianity Today, Crosswalk, Sojourners, Christ and Pop Culture, and Image. The panel nominated and seconded seventy-eight films that had first-time festival, theatrical, or DVD releases in the last calendar year. Jury awards were then given to the ten eligible films with the highest average score from voting members.

 

 In addition to promoting the Arts & Faith  discussion forum, the Ecumenical Jury’s mission is to challenge, expand, or explore what it means to specifically recommend a film for Christian audiences.

 

The ten finalists are: About Elly, The Assassin, Brooklyn, Gett: The Trial of Viviane Ansalem, Inside Out, The Look of Silence; Love & Mercy, Spotlight, Stations of the Cross, and Timbuktu.

 

Image Magazine will count down the winners and announce the jurors' honorable mentions at its "Good Letters" blog. To review last year’s selections, please visit Image Magazine at: http://old.imagejournal.org/page/blog/arts-faith-ecumenical-jury-awards-the-top-ten-films-of-2014.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks good, Ken. The only catch I noticed is that there were seventy-nine films nominated, not seventy-eight.

Edited by Evan C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mountains May Depart wasn't on the ballot. I guess I missed it, because I didn't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Evan C said:

Mountains May Depart wasn't on the ballot. I guess I missed it, because I didn't see it.

Ah, sorry about that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

: . . . and three films set in contemporary states predominated by Islam.

Is "predominated" a verb like that?

: . . . with Pixar’s Inside Out receiving a spot the jury’s short list.

... a spot *on* the jury's short list. (Also, "short list" is sometimes spelled as one word, "shortlist", but it doesn't have to be here.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Press release write up.

As a reminder from last year's discussion...please refer to the jury as the Arts & Faith Ecumenical Jury rather than simply the Ecumenical Jury so as to avoid any implied affiliation with or connection to Interfilm. 

Ken

P.S. Deadline for blurbs (for films or your honorable mentions) is Friday at noon. After that I need to get the write up to Image web master. Please let me know if you anticipate being unable to make that deadline so that I can reassign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part I of the write up at Image (Good Letters Blog) should be up later this week. In the meantime, here are some rough numbers to chew on to consider how we might tinker with procedure going forward if this continues:

Nominated films: 79 (though rest of data will be based on 78 since I inadvertently left Mountains May Depart off ballot until it was too late.

Number of films nominated not seen by 8 or more jurors (and thus ineligible for final prize): 29

Average number of votes per nominated film: 8.7

Number of nominated films seen by juror/percentage: 19, 48, 78, 63, 29, 64, 62, 50, 34, 37, 58, 56, 57, 19, 40 (Counted manually, so may be a slight margin for error.)
Average percentage of nominated films seen by juror: 61%

Median percentage of nominated films seen by jurors: 71% (difference between average an median means that jurors who viewed less than average tended to did so by a grater margin than people who viewed more than average. That's to be expected.)

Films seen by most juurors: Mad Max/Ex Machina (15-100%)

Films seen by fewest jurors: Kaili Blues; Learning to Drive; Right Now, Wrong Then; The Witch (3-20%)
 

Do those numbers affect anyone's thoughts about procedural issues? There was some chatter about weighting votes based on how many films a juror has seen, though I confess I personally am against that. Should there be a juror eligibility threshold? (I'm not sure that would have had a huge impact on the result, though it *might* have impacted the -9-10 spots. But I also think there are other factors that contribute to juror value.) Should it be harder to nominate a film? (Perhaps a film could/should need a third as well as a second, but then I not sure how many that would eliminate.). Any thoughts or suggestions?

EDIT: The biggest impact would be by lowering the number of jurors that have to have seen a film for it to be eligible, since these are based on average score of jurors who screened it. But that also runs risk of making the choices too esoteric.

EDIT 2: I suppose another possibility, which would entail having to vote slightly earlier, would be to have two rounds of voting, the first to determine 10-15 finalists and the second asking jurors to rank them. That would give a second chance of a juror to see a film he/she missed or tweak his votes relative to competition.

Edited by kenmorefield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part One is up.

Does anybody else think that the word "film," "movie," or "cinema" should appear in the title of this event? People scanning headlines won't have any clue that these awards relate to motion pictures.

Edited by Overstreet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colin, some on my Facebook page is challenging the inclusion of Gett, and since I haven't seen it I wonder if you might respond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rest of the winners announced at Image. Can read blurbs here

The final list:
10) About Elly

9) Inside Out

8) Brookllyn

7) Gett: The Trial of Viviane Amsalem

6) The Look of Silence

5) Love & Mercy

4) Spotlight

3) Timbuktu

2) Stations of the Cross

1) The Assassin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Superb job all around.  I've linked to it on my Secular Cinephile Facebook page, and time permitting, will write a blog post on your efforts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On January 12, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Overstreet said:

Colin, some on my Facebook page is challenging the inclusion of Gett, and since I haven't seen it I wonder if you might respond.

Jeff, I visited your page and added some thoughts to the conversation. I think @M. Leary did enough beforehand to alleviate that commenter's befuddlement, so I just piggybacked and supported his response. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A round of applause for Ken. This year's list looks excellent, and the blurbs are all nice. 

 

And thanks so much Colin for getting screeners arranged, which made this a far more realistic process of consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...