kenmorefield

2016 Arts & Faith Ecumenical Jury -- Nominations and Discussion

Which Voting Format Do You Prefer?   13 members have voted

  1. 1. Which Voting Format Do You Prefer

    • 1 Ballot where members rank each nominated film using a Likert (1-5) scale; winners are films with highest average from critics who have screened film.
      3
    • 1 Ballot where critics select their 10-15 favorites, unranked, from all nominees; winners are determined by second ballot where critics rank the 10/15 finalists.
      10

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

166 posts in this topic

Ballots have been sent...let me know if you did not get yours (or check your e-mail spam folder). 

We're gonna see how many people saw Silence and how close it is to eligibility before making a final call on that front. 

FWIW, we nominated substantially less films this year, like 50 instead of 70. Not sure how, if at all, that should effect voting.

Also new this year: you have the option of ranking the 10 finalists. This allows you to distinguish between films in the same grouping (Strongly Agree, Agree) but where you prefer one over the other. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kenmorefield wrote:
: I don't think anyone is advocating for that. Did I miss something?

I was responding to Evan's suggestion (not that he proposed it per se, but he mentioned it as a possibility) of giving voters the choice of saying "I trust Peter and SDG's assessment."

: Ballots have been sent...let me know if you did not get yours (or check your e-mail spam folder). 

Do we have the option of voting on the films we've seen, saving the survey, and then coming back to it when we've seen more films? Or do we have to do all our voting in one go?

Josh Hamm wrote:
: Also, does anyone have a screener for The Mermaid...

It's on DVD at the Vancouver library, possibly others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Peter T Chattaway said:

kenmorefield wrote:
: I don't think anyone is advocating for that. Did I miss something?

I was responding to Evan's suggestion (not that he proposed it per se, but he mentioned it as a possibility) of giving voters the choice of saying "I trust Peter and SDG's assessment."

What I meant was that if we lowered the minimum number of jurors needed for a film to be eligible, so Silence could make the cut, that would very likely put it at #1, and I threw out that option as a way of saying we were or weren't okay with that.

Share this post


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

 

Do we have the option of voting on the films we've seen, saving the survey, and then coming back to it when we've seen more films? Or do we have to do all our voting in one go?

 

I am not aware of how to do that with SurveyGizmo, sorry. The actual filling out of the ballot is supposed to take between 5-10 minutes, so maybe keep a tally on paper or separte file until ready to complete? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, two  of the jury members who don't post here regularly (and have voted) have seen Silence in addition to Peter and SDG (who haven't voted yet). That's a minimum of four. I *might* have an opening to see the film on the 4th. (Don't know if I could take a +1, but if I do, might be able to talk Gareth into coming. Even if not,  if two other jurors are in areas that could see it on the 3rd, that would be a plurality of seven which is the normal threshold for a film to be eligible to be a finalist.) 

So I'm leaning towards working on two lists, one with Silence and one without. That way, if a plurality is hit in middle of the week, it wouldn't set the whole list back and results would/could still be ready for end of the week...January 5th or 6th.

Is everyone alright with that? Or is that bending the rules too much to serve one film?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate you not wanting to bend the rules for any one film, but, unless I'm missing something, I don't see any groundswell saying we should move forward with a list without Silence being a factor. The wild card appears to be how many of us will be able to see it by the extended deadline (and will prioritize seeing it if given the chance). I'm confirmed now for the January 3 screening in my market, but I've already voted for the list and will have to read back over recent posts here to figure out how I'm going to be able to vote for / rate Silence. (By second-ballot request, I'm thinking.)

Meanwhile, having already participated, I'm eager to see how the first-ballot vote on all the other nominees comes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm jumping on a train shortly to go to New York and see Silence today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Christian said:

I appreciate you not wanting to bend the rules for any one film, but, unless I'm missing something, I don't see any groundswell saying we should move forward with a list without Silence being a factor. The wild card appears to be how many of us will be able to see it by the extended deadline (and will prioritize seeing it if given the chance). I'm confirmed now for the January 3 screening in my market, but I've already voted for the list and will have to read back over recent posts here to figure out how I'm going to be able to vote for / rate Silence. (By second-ballot request, I'm thinking.)

Meanwhile, having already participated, I'm eager to see how the first-ballot vote on all the other nominees comes out.

Anyone who has voted for everything else already is welcome to send me an amendment with vote for Silence if/when they see prior to publication of list. 

I hear you. Maybe it's just me.  I already feel my own irritation growing and being directed to the movie -- like the kid who misses the final exam and says, "I can take a make up, surely?"

 I'm also concerned that the more we bend the rules, the more pressure there is on the people who see it to endorse it. Both because it's a smaller pool (votes have a bigger impact), and it's easier to deduce who voted in which way. I didn't much care for the Departed and I absolutely despised Wolf of Wall Street, so maybe I'm just being contrarian, but while I could see Silence making the list, I'm a bit skeptical that it is a slam dunk.  I loved Endo's book, but nothing in Last Temptation of Christ makes me confident in Scorsese as the guy to do it. Movies like Noah and Spotlight have seemed obvious choices to some and turned off others. The whole thing *feels* a little circular: we have to make adjustments b/c of course everyone will vote for Silence: we have to vote for Silence because the fact that we made adjustments for it means it must be good, right?

That said, the fact that Jess and Noel had both seen it helps; they are largely outside the A&F echo chamber and give some perspective. And I've appreciated thus far that juror members have given input and expressed preferences while avoiding settling in to camps. I'm cautiously optimistic that we can work through a difficult situation in a way that addresses most everyone's concern. For me, it's about giving the movie every opportunity to make the list without presuming it will/should. The line between those two goals is admittedly fuzzy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2016 at 2:47 AM, Joel Mayward said:

I will second this request. If anyone has contacts for those particular films, please email or DM me.

Janus just sent screening links to "Voting Critics" for Cameraperson, so I'll send you contact information. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll have time to watch one more film before I vote; if anyone has a screener for Newtown or Things to Come that they're free to share, I'd love to watch either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be interested in seeing Things to Come, too. I was going to catch it at the VanCity Theatre this month, but then the snowpocalypse came.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IFC did sent digital screening link to some critics' groups for Things to Come, but unfortunately they did not answer my inquiries about sharing it with jury members. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Juror members please don't neglect to fill out your ballots tonight if you haven't already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Per Greg Wolfe, results will be published at Image Good Letters blog on Feb. 22 and 23rd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our list has gone public! Feel free to share with your social media networks:

Part One: https://imagejournal.org/2017/02/22/arts-faith-top-10-films-2016-part-1/

Part Two: https://imagejournal.org/2017/02/23/arts-faith-top-10-films-2016-part-2/

The final ten films:

1) Arrival

2) Silence 

3) Our Little Sister 

4) Hail Caesar! 

5) Knight of Cups

6) Hell or High Water

7) Loving

8) Queen of Katwe

9) A Monster Calls

10) Tower

Thanks to everyone who nominated, voted, and wrote blurbs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now