Jump to content

Discussion of voting process


Recommended Posts

Regarding other ties from Round 1, might it be simpler to just list those as a tie? So, for instance, if there were two films tied at #65, the next number listed would be #67. I think Sight & Sound does this in their Top 250 for ties—#17 on the 2012 list is both Seven Samurai and Persona, followed by #19. This assumes we're okay with having ties on the list, while still having a limit of 100 films.

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

Top Posters In This Topic

5 minutes ago, kenmorefield said:

 

Yes, but I think Christian's question is whether it is okay for people who have only seen one of the films to choose the "no vote" or can he only use that if he hasn't seen either one? I think if the no vote option is available, voters should be allowed to pick it for whatever reaso

 

Yes, this is what I meant. I'll proceed accordingly. Thank you.

"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
3 minutes ago, Joel Mayward said:

Regarding other ties from Round 1, might it be simpler to just list those as a tie? So, for instance, if there were two films tied at #65, the next number listed would be #67. I think Sight & Sound does this in their Top 250 for ties—#17 on the 2012 list is both Seven Samurai and Persona, followed by #19. This assumes we're okay with having ties on the list, while still having a limit of 100 films.

Yes, that is possible, though I'd be reluctant to not give each film its own entry for blurb...which raises the question of which is listed first. I'm also a bit concerned that it will look like a misprint...hey they've got two different films at #3... unless it says 3(Tie) and I'm not sure the app allows anything but a number in the rank position. So it's a possibility, but it might take some thought how to present it. 

Also, I feel like because of the lower number of voters (25), there were a *lot* of ties. One or two might be interesting, but I wonder if have 10-15 will look awkward?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kenmorefield said:

Also, I feel like because of the lower number of voters (25), there were a *lot* of ties. One or two might be interesting, but I wonder if have 10-15 will look awkward?

Ah, I didn't realize there were so many ties! And yes, I agree, and I think each film needs a blurb attached to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So at the risk of straining everyone else's patience, I realized today that I am regretting speaking or deciding hastily about not having the Rd 2 option if the 1-film list won. I wonder if anyone else is still open to that possibility or the ship has sailed? 

I will confess that it really bothers me that the Bresson film is outside the Top 10 and that I honestly think that the Bresson, Dardennes, Bergman (and maybe Kurosawa) films were depressed in rankings because some voters (me, Darren...maybe others) distributed limited ourselves to giving one "6" to a film from the same director while not everyone did. Since there wasn't always agreement about *which* film we preferred among those, with multiple nominations, I think it split the vote and pushed some of those down. I *love* First Reformed, and I am not surprised to see it in the Top 20, but I have a hard time understanding how it should be above some of the films by auteurs that so clearly influenced Schrader.

If we don't have the option of the optional Round 2 re-ranking, it won't be tragic. I don't know--and we might not know for several years--whether this list is more of an anomaly or marks a transition in tastes, values, and canonical convictions of the members. So if people are fed up with additional tweaks, I'm willing to move forward. But I spent a lot of energy last week inviting feedback, listening, and trying to practice discernment...and I forgot to advocate for what *I* want. It may be too late to do anything about that...but I know I'll feel better in the long run if I at least put it out there.. If we did have an option Round 2 and very few people participated in the reranking (of say the Top 20) or even if several people did but the results were largely the same -- I would feel better that the top of the list represents what we really want and wasn't just an accident of the voting process.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Andrew said:

I'd still like to re-rank the Top 25, once we've decided which film by Kurosawa, Miyazaki, Bresson, the Dardennes, et al have made the Top 100.  The 2010s are clearly (IMO) over-represented in the Top 10.

Yes, I think that is a function of them being esteemed as films, but also not from having serious vote splitting for other Beauvois or Scorsese or Schrader films.

There was no way to know changes we would make, but if I had it to do all over again (the whole "learning" part of the wheel") and knew we were going to do a 1 film per director list, I think it would have made more sense to make the vote off between films by same directors the preliminary. 

I gave Two Days, One Night a 6. I think I gave The Son a four (and Kid with a Bike a 5). But I absolutely would have given any of them a six if I had known that it would be the Dardennes representative. Ditto with High & Low and Ikiru and Red Beard or Stalker and Andrei Rublev. 

Most of the arguments for the 1 film list seemed to focus on diversity and how that was improved *at the bottom of the list.* I get that, and I have no problem that those concerns carried the day. 

I guess the one downside is that if we did allow a round 2 reranking, (and if Red Beard beat Ikiru in Round 1a) then theoretically someone *could* rank a film #1 that originally came in 90th...that sounds really bad at first, but isn't part of experimenting (with your process or in the laboratory) *refining* your process as prelimiary results bring to light issues that you hadn't anticipated?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm up for a Round 2 to rank the Top 25. I'm fine with the ranking as it is, regardless of the date or director.  I know I for one would want to rank whichever Bergman film we have higher than 25 (assuming that the chosen film goes into the director's highest ranked slot). That said, if we do this, I think we should use the criteria that (I think) we agreed on earlier: make it optional but where non-voting count as a positive vote for keeping the order as it is.

Watching The Music Room will be a priority for me this coming week!

Edited by Rob Z
Link to post
Share on other sites

We now have a working list. Yeah! 

But as I mentioned earlier, I do want to allow for one last ballot to rerank the Top 25. I think this is important because of shuffling caused by Round 2 as well as the way Round 1 may have disproportionately affected the Top 25. 

Because today is Saturday and I don't want this to drag on, I'll make the deadline for Round 3 Tuesday at Midnight. I'll try to get the Round 3 ballot out today so that people have weekend (assuming Darren doesn't want to volunteer for this, but if he does, I'm fine with that, look for it from him.) 

Remember, if you don't vote in Round 3, your ballot will be counted as letting the Round 1 and 2 order stand...no changes in the Top 25. If you do vote, you may move films within the Top 25 but not in and out of it. 

Sometime today, I'll make a RESULTS! thread that lists 26-100. We're almost there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night, I night tried watching A Hidden Life before voting. I fell asleep and woke up after the deadline. Oh well, it's a great list. Has anyone listed which films won for situations (at least Dreyer and Malik) with two films from the same director in the top 25? If so, where can I find that? All I could find this morning was the list of 26-100.

I definitely like the idea of one more round of voting for the top 25. I'll try to make it in time this time!

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ed Bertram said:

Last night, I night tried watching A Hidden Life before voting. I fell asleep and woke up after the deadline. Oh well, it's a great list. Has anyone listed which films won for situations (at least Dreyer and Malik) with two films from the same director in the top 25? If so, where can I find that? All I could find this morning was the list of 26-100.

I definitely like the idea of one more round of voting for the top 25. I'll try to make it in time this time!

Yes, it's in the Round 2 voting thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy to do it, Ken. Do these rules make sense?

1. Assign the original rank to every film you have not seen. For example, I haven't seen Silence, so I will rank it #4.

2. Reassign the rank of all remaining films however you please. Take care to use each number (1-25) only once.

3. We have 23 active participants in the process. We will grandfather in the original ranking for everyone who doesn't vote.

4. New ranking will be based on average score (total divided by 23). Ties will go to whatever film was ranked higher in the original list.

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

Happy to do it, Ken. Do these rules make sense?

1. Assign the original rank to every film you have not seen. For example, I haven't seen Silence, so I will rank it #4.

2. Reassign the rank of all remaining films however you please. Take care to use each number (1-25) only once.

3. We have 23 active participants in the process. We will grandfather in the original ranking for everyone who doesn't vote.

4. New ranking will be based on average score (total divided by 23). Ties will go to whatever film was ranked higher in the original list.

I'm interpreting the instructions as suggesting that one could watch a film one hasn't seen -- I still haven't seen Sophie Scholl -- and then move it. I hadn't originally intended for rule #1, but I'm looking at the Excel sheet from Round 1 and think this might be a good idea. The Round 1 results have frequency bias built in, so I assumed that films that less people had seen woudl be lower anyway, but rule #1 does appear to require a person to watch the film if they want to move it (up or down), so I am okay with that.

Now, I guess I need to go watch Sophie Scholl today.

I was thinking Tuesday at midnight for deadline, but I'm flexible on that part. I suppose some people way want to watch a film or two--but I could also see some people getting a little tired at the process being drawn out and would like to have resolution. (I'm in both camps). 

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

rule #1 does appear to require a person to watch the film if they want to move it (up or down), so I am okay with that.

Exactly. I don't like the idea of people reranking films they haven't seen, especially if non-voters are being treated as supporters of the original list. I haven't seen three of these films and likely won't have a chance before the deadline.

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...