Jump to content

Discussion of voting process


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Darren H said:

> Takes deep breath. Closes eyes. Utters a silent prayer that Film 100 not be Rounders or Fever Pitch....nods in assent.

Turns out the film that jumped into the top 100 is the second film by a director, so the bumped film is actually his third highest point getter (which I'm a little bummed about).

I want to do a couple more error checks before sharing anything, but it's looking like the #100 film is . . .

 

. . . and I'm not making this up . . .

 

. . . Magnolia!

Hilarious.  One Hundred Is the Loneliest Number.

I haven't participated in any of the voting procedure/stat discussion, so feel free to disregard this, but I think that a second vote to reorder the Top 25 really seems like a natural fit.  I know that if I was sitting down to make my own personal Top 25, I wouldn't have six of the top nine films be by three directors.  It'd strike me as a little too fanboyish, even if it actually approximated what I consciously think my preferences are.  Nah, I would keep all six of them in the Top 25, but I'd make some hard choices and probably put 10 slots or so between each of the director's films.  Now, maybe the results don't change much, but you don't know until you try.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 214
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

7 minutes ago, Russ said:

One Hundred Is the Loneliest Number.

Perfect! I take back what I wrote earlier: If Magnolia makes the final list at #100, Russ' quip would be a good entry for the film.

"What matters are movies, not awards; experiences, not celebrations; the subjective power of individual critical points of view, not the declamatory compromises of consensus." - Richard Brody, "Godard's Surprise Win Is a Victory for Independent Cinema," The New Yorker

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Jeremy Ratzlaff said:

edit: or wait, did I read that wrong and Phantom Thread just narrowly missed? 

Rohmer is actually the filmmaker who was affected by the decision to stick with 5 votes as the cutoff point. PT Anderson has only one film in the top 100.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Darren H said:

Just to clarify, Ken, the plan is for me to send out the top 100 today via email, correct?

I made the meeting time longer, so we wouldn't be rushed if we wanted to wait until tomorrow to announce them, but I'm fine either way.

"Anyway, in general I love tragic artists, especially classical ones."

"Even the forms for expressing truth can be multiform, and this is indeed necessary for the transmission of the Gospel in its timeless meaning."

- Pope Francis, August 2013 interview with Antonio Spadaro

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jeremy Ratzlaff said:

Speaking from the perspective of someone for whom the Top 100 list has been unspeakably formative in the journey of disovering international film to begin with - 

While I think making a one-film-per-director rule for the top 25 has a merit, especially after imagining the list in a curated book format as Daren mentioned, the Ordet/Joan problem is exactly what would make a rule like that seem particularly disappointing to me given the nature of those two films. Other than sharing the same director, they could hardly be more distinct from each other. If the concern is representing more diversity in selection, I would think a scenario that pushed Joan to #26 would have the opposite effect if it were to suddenly leave the Top 25 without such a rich example of cinema's silent era. (I imagine Sunrise might still be up there, but that's just an example!)

I confess I find this point persuasive. There are all sorts of different kinds of diversity. Also, someone in a PM quoted back to me something I said in the pre-vote discussion about the possibility of having a white or male centric list: we are who we are. 

So I think I'm landing towards leaving the Top 25 intact until after Round 2. 

If it make a difference, the organization of the book that was pitched was:

I) Introduction
2) Essays about history and process, terms and definitions.

3) Essays about themes, genres...i.e. that address more than one film.
4) Essays on specific films. 

Of course, however we organize here or in the book, one of the first places a reader is going to look is at the list itself..

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darren H said:

> When we announce the results tomorrow, can we include the third and fourth (and maybe fifth) films by directors where they originally fell? I'm very curious to see the difference the two films per director rule made.

Looks like there are 18 directors with two films in the top 100. Thirteen of those had additional films that I cut out of the list.

*says a prayer two of them are Kieslowski and Lynch and none of them are von Trier*

"Anyway, in general I love tragic artists, especially classical ones."

"Even the forms for expressing truth can be multiform, and this is indeed necessary for the transmission of the Gospel in its timeless meaning."

- Pope Francis, August 2013 interview with Antonio Spadaro

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Darren H said:

Just to clarify, Ken, the plan is for me to send out the top 100 today via email, correct?

Yes. That is/was my hope. 
Based on these discussions, I think what I'd like to do is send out the Top 100 with the 2 film/director limit but no reshuffling. Also, please indicate the meeting time for Zoom and that we'll be sending out the optional Round 2 ballot on Wednesday morning. That way, people who are voting in Round 2 should know what other tweaks we are making. 

If you care to, I have no objection to your attaching what the 1 film/director list would look like, and we can make that part of the discussion in zoom or subsequently.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Darren H said:

Lynch has zero films on the list (not surprisingly, Blue Velvet has one of the highest per-film standard deviations!). Kieslowski fared a bit better.

I confess I'm stunned, even if I was only able to go as high as a 3 for BV. I think that goes to show that the discussion here (in the forum) was a smaller subset of the voters than we realized. On the other hand, the fact that The Straight Story went from #1 in Growing Older to not even nominated suggests to me that it was the "safe" choice for people who didn't know/weren't passionate about Lynch even if it was not the preferred film of his advocates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Darren H said:

Rohmer is actually the filmmaker who was affected by the decision to stick with 5 votes as the cutoff point. PT Anderson has only one film in the top 100.

I bet LE RAYON VERT got the shaft.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Darren H said:

Lynch has zero films on the list

Wow. I confess I'm disappointed. But I'm intrigued to see the Top 100!

I do think that a second round of voting on the Top 25 would bring about some diversity into the top 10 in terms of directors. Who knows? Maybe a Dreyer film doesn't even end up in the top spot.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not too surprised about Lynch even though I am disappointed. Initially, remembering Blue Velvet from when I saw it years ago, I was going to give it a 2, but Darren's advocacy talked me up to a 4/5, and then after rewatching it, I decided to give it a 6.

"Anyway, in general I love tragic artists, especially classical ones."

"Even the forms for expressing truth can be multiform, and this is indeed necessary for the transmission of the Gospel in its timeless meaning."

- Pope Francis, August 2013 interview with Antonio Spadaro

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Joel Mayward said:

 

I do think that a second round of voting on the Top 25 would bring about some diversity into the top 10 in terms of directors. Who knows? Maybe a Dreyer film doesn't even end up in the top spot.

 

That strikes me as unlikely, but what do I know? (Nothing apparently.) 
In my experience with Ecumenical Jury or critics' organizations, when it gets down to the #1 in a close field, it ends up being about which film has the fewest detractors/nay-sayers rather than which film has the more admirers. I'm clearly in a feedback bubble, but my *perception* is that Malick and Tarkovsky have a few more voters for whom their films don't resonate at all rather than those who say, "Well, I love this film but not quite as much as Ordet..."

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, kenmorefield said:

That strikes me as unlikely, but what do I know? (Nothing apparently.) 
In my experience with Ecumenical Jury or critics' organizations, when it gets down to the #1 in a close field, it ends up being about which film has the fewest detractors/nay-sayers rather than which film has the more admirers. I'm clearly in a feedback bubble, but my *perception* is that Malick and Tarkovsky have a few more voters for whom their films don't resonate at all rather than those who say, "Well, I love this film but not quite as much as Ordet..."

I'm pretty sure that's exactly how Parasite beat A Hidden Life at least year's Ecumenical Jury.

"Anyway, in general I love tragic artists, especially classical ones."

"Even the forms for expressing truth can be multiform, and this is indeed necessary for the transmission of the Gospel in its timeless meaning."

- Pope Francis, August 2013 interview with Antonio Spadaro

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Evan C said:

I'm pretty sure that's exactly how Parasite beat A Hidden Life at least year's Ecumenical Jury.

I was just looking at the nominees for Best Narrative in the NCFCA last year:

Quote

 

BEST NARRATIVE FILM

**Parasite**

The Irishman

Jojo Rabbit

Marriage Story

Once Upon a Time in
Hollywood

 

I haven't gone back and looked at the individual ballots (I voted for Jojo) but my recollection from chatting at film festivals or social media is that each of the four other nominees had loud and persistent detractors. Maybe less so here, but award-campaigning has become like politics -- trying to cut down the front runners and hoping to time the market. Same think happened in 2017 (at NCFCA) where Three Billboards fans and Shape of Water fans started tearing down their main competition and Get Out won Best Narrative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Though I'm tempted, I won't reveal the rankings, but I will say that the pre- and post-voting in round 2 for the EJ Top 10 last year were *very* different, and that the #1 film by a large margin before the second round wasn't even in the top 3 in the second round. And that's just for 10 films. With 25 films, I imagine those rankings could change even more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Joel Mayward said:

Though I'm tempted, I won't reveal the rankings, but I will say that the pre- and post-voting in round 2 for the EJ Top 10 last year were *very* different, and that the #1 film by a large margin before the second round wasn't even in the top 3 in the second round. And that's just for 10 films. With 25 films, I imagine those rankings could change even more.

Conversely, 25 gives more of a built in cushion for the film that starts at 1, and more voters makes any individual naysayer less of an influence. 

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.


×
×
  • Create New...