Filmspotting Forum

Filmspotting Message Boards => Filmspotter Pantheon => Topic started by: ferris on March 24, 2010, 10:55:35 AM

Title: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 24, 2010, 10:55:35 AM
Hello and welcome!  If you haven't found it yet, here's a link for the Rules and FAQ (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=7568.msg425697#msg425697).  You'll find an empty ballot and ballot instructions there as well.  

If you have and questions, comments or concerns feel free to post them here or PM one of us.

Please consider: 'Noke, smirnoff, Bondo and myself have thoroughly discussed every detail of this event. No feature was added or category removed without first weighing the pros and cons. We hope, fellow Filmspotters, that you'll trust our judgement (or, if that doesn't work, give us a chance to explain our reasoning). :)

Enjoy! And remember THE DEADLINE FOR BALLOTS IS MIDNIGHT ET TUESAY MAY 4TH!

Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on March 24, 2010, 08:16:58 PM
This is gonna be great!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Thor on March 24, 2010, 08:50:34 PM
Wow. Just what the doctor ordered.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 24, 2010, 08:52:11 PM
I hope that means ferris can expect a ballot from you at some point Thor :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on March 24, 2010, 11:11:09 PM
I love how 1SO gets kudos for all his lists when I have the exact same films being praised beforehand.  :P
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 1SO on March 24, 2010, 11:19:46 PM
Neatly organized lists are much easier to read.  8)


I just like how much we agree.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 24, 2010, 11:23:34 PM
I love how 1SO gets kudos for all his lists when I have the exact same films being praised beforehand.  :P

Ha!  I just noticed I did it to you twice!!  Oops sorry!



Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on March 24, 2010, 11:30:46 PM
It doesn't matter. I just thought it was funny. As long as the films are getting some support. ;)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Tim on March 25, 2010, 12:42:21 AM
Best Ensemble Performance of the Decade?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 25, 2010, 04:43:24 AM
Quote
you may only vote once for any film/performance/person in a given category.

So, say, I have two supporting performances by one actor in two unrelated films.  In that case, I can vote for him twice in the supporting actor category, right?

Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 25, 2010, 05:59:52 AM
Quote
you may only vote once for any film/performance/person in a given category.

So, say, I have two supporting performances by one actor in two unrelated films.  In that case, I can vote for him twice in the supporting actor category, right?



Absolutely.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 25, 2010, 09:37:13 AM
Ok.  For you Lord of the Rings fans.  How do you want to work things?

Do you fans just want to all quietly and informally agree to pick one of the three films to "accept on behalf" of the series to avoid splitting votes for things, do you want to consider all three films one big epic, or should be just consider each on its own merit like we would a Harry Potter film.

I'll accept that LOTR is a different animal than really anything else released this decade.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 25, 2010, 09:48:10 AM
Of course you could always consider ignoring LotR completely.  ;D
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 25, 2010, 10:28:40 AM
There's no gap in the time line from where one film stops and the next film starts. Er, there is but it's no greater than when it cuts from one scene to the next. In my mind I consider it one work. In reality it exists as three separate films.

It depends what people want to see. Either we call LOTR one film and pretty much guarentee it a spot on "the best" list, or we break it up and potentially have all three films make it into the winners circle.
Title: Re: FYC: Best Supporting Performance - Female
Post by: Clovis8 on March 25, 2010, 11:30:07 AM
Ann Savage - My Winnipeg
Can you have a "best performance" for a documentary? If that's the case I'm heading to Lead Actor and nominating Timothy Treadwell ;)  (kidding....well....kinda)
Well, I'm one of the few around here who doesn't consider My Winnipeg a documentary. But broadly speaking, you're right that documentary subjects are to one degree or another performing. With that said, I don't think he belongs here, but if other Filmspotters do want documentary performances included we should probably discuss that.

But Ann Savage IS playing a role. She is doing a performance. Treadwell is just kinda being himself.
Yeah, Savage is an actress hired to play a role.

The more I think about it the more I am actually leaning Matt's way. I have probably seen My Winnipeg more than anyone on these boards, and also probably rank it highest. It's on my top 100. It's pretty clear that more of the film is fiction than non-fiction and it is a documentary in style only. It's as much a documentary as Best In Show. I would be fine with it being disqualified from the documentary category.

mode edit (clovis): I moved this post here as I figured it should be more a general discussion.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on March 25, 2010, 11:33:52 AM
Ehh, I dunno. It came out in three distinctly separate parts and each person seems to have their favorite.

But I can go either way on this thing.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Jared on March 25, 2010, 11:54:42 AM
lotr should be counted as three movies.

id also perfer counting Kill Bill as 2 movies if anyone cares
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 25, 2010, 12:54:01 PM
lotr should be counted as three movies.

id also perfer counting Kill Bill as 2 movies if anyone cares

I forgot about Kill Bill.  Good point.

Keeping them three (or in the case of KB - two) movies eliminates complaints of an uneven playing field. 
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on March 25, 2010, 12:55:36 PM
Beau Travail didn't have an American release (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0209933/releaseinfo) until 2000. Is it a 1999 or 2000 film? Metacritic  (http://www.metacritic.com/video/titles/beautravail?q=beau%20travail)has it as 2000, but IMDB  (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0209933/)has it as 1999.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 25, 2010, 01:01:12 PM
Beau Travail didn't have an American release (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0209933/releaseinfo) until 2000. Is it a 1999 or 2000 film? Metacritic  (http://www.metacritic.com/video/titles/beautravail?q=beau%20travail)has it as 2000, but IMDB  (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0209933/)has it as 1999.

My rule of thumb has always been the first non-festival US release as listed on IMDB.  In this case it would be March 2000 in New York.  (Of course, if a film never gets past the festival circuit that my rule of thumb is screwed.)

This is not a "ruling", just the start of discussions...

Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 25, 2010, 01:04:19 PM
Hmm that's a tricky one. Looking at the Awards section on imdb, more of the nominations were given in 2001 than 2000 by a count of 6 to 3.

Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on March 25, 2010, 01:06:51 PM
thoughts on My Winnipeg? (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=7570.msg426556#msg426556)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Jared on March 25, 2010, 02:01:31 PM
is there any reason not to do an actor/actress "body of work" award as well?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Jared on March 25, 2010, 02:38:35 PM
Che. one movie or two?

I feel like it should count as one, but I really only would consider voting for the first part.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 25, 2010, 05:12:29 PM
is there any reason not to do an actor/actress "body of work" award as well?

Two things...that would mean more awards and thus more work. Secondly, we kind of felt an individual film based Best Director would probably mirror Best Film too much so switching to body of work made it more interesting. I don't think performances suffers as much from that.

Che. one movie or two?

I feel like it should count as one, but I really only would consider voting for the first part.

Since I'm lobbying to count Red Riding Trilogy as a single movie for Filmspots this year, I'd be happy to take all these multi-parters into one; especially if it only means wasting one spot on LOTR. I think the key to counting it as a single work is if it was released at one time. I think that is true of Che, not true of LOTR or Kill Bill (though the latter was certainly intended as such originally).
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 25, 2010, 05:24:21 PM
I tend to think in each case we err on the side of individualizing the films. 

If fans of a certain series want to lobby others to funnel all the votes into one film from the series - making it the "representative" - I think that's perfectly fair.  I think that will probably happen for Che and for LOTR.  For Kill Bill I think people would rather differentiate the best they can.  I'm not voting one vote for any of these so I don't exactly have a dog in the fight.

After a bit more debate the mods will meet and conclude definitively one way or the other and share that with the group. 
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ses on March 25, 2010, 05:54:04 PM
Maybe there can be a thread where people posts their lists for best film or whatnot, so everyone just isn't posting in the FYC film thread with a lot of repetitive nominations.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 'Noke on March 25, 2010, 05:59:29 PM
Maybe there can be a thread where people posts their lists for best film or whatnot, so everyone just isn't posting in the FYC film thread with a lot of repetitive nominations.

there does need to be.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 25, 2010, 07:05:28 PM
Ok folks here's the results of the last powwow:

-Foreign films will be defined as Foreign language films. For example Once will not be eligible, but Passion of the Christ would be. Exception type films: Inglorious Bastard is not eligible, The Band's Visit is. Generally speaking just try to stick to the "standard approach". The function of this event is not to redefine what's normal.

-What's animated and what's not: Waking Life, Wallace and Gromit, Team America, Waltz With Bashir, Scanner Darkly are all animated. I'm not going to try to define what animation is, but if you need a guide then look at the above examples and use your best judgement.

-My Winnipeg. It is not a documentary. The performances are eligible in the relevant performance categories.

-The decade cutoff. We will use the IMDB standard. Whatever date appears next to the film title is what date we will use.
(http://i39.tinypic.com/k2fvro.jpg)

-What's supporting and what's lead. Basically what we're gunna do is this, if you feel a performance is lead than put it as a lead in your ballot. If someone else feels it's a supporting part, they can vote supporting. When the ballots are tallied the results will be combined. Whichever side has more votes will be how the role is defined.

example. if 5 people vote for Tommy Lee Jones as lead in No Country, and 10 people vote for him as supporting, then he will earn 15 votes and the role will be defined as supporting.

The effect of this will be that some people will have selected 19 people for lead and 21 for supporting without meaning to. That's just the way it goes. But please don't try to get an extra vote for, say, Christian Bale in Dark Knight by voting for him as a supporting character when he is clearly a lead. We'll be watching for obvious abuse...

Also, do not try to vote for Tommy Lee Jones as both a supporting performance AND lead performance in the same role on your ballot. If you do he will come to your house and bite off your nose.



-Are animated films eligible for best cinematography? No. There may be a good argument for it, but it's not it's not a widely accepted position yet, so we're going to stick with the standard. And again, the function of this event is not to redefine what's normal.

If decide to include an animated film on your cinematography ballot anyways, because your awesome like that, that's fine. It just won't count for anything.

-Split 'em up or keep 'em together? LOTR is 3 separate films. Kill Bill is 2 separate films. Che is 1 film that sucks.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 25, 2010, 10:38:47 PM
-My Winnipeg. It is not a documentary.

Lame.

It's a non-fiction film with fantasy sequences.  Just like Bowling for Columbine.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 25, 2010, 10:49:47 PM
-My Winnipeg. It is not a documentary.

Lame.

It's a non-fiction film with fantasy sequences.  Just like Bowling for Columbine.

Lame is the new awesome
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 25, 2010, 10:58:20 PM
Zing!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 26, 2010, 03:07:29 AM
So that means Waltz with Bashir and 24 City (in addition to Bowling for Columbine) can't be documentaries either, right?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 06:01:00 AM
Bashir I've seen, but never would've thought to consider it a documentary. It seems like a stretch to me. Do you feel that strongly about it or are you just making a case for the sake of making a case? For the record I'm not strongly opposed to it or Winnipeg, we had to draw the line somewhere though.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 26, 2010, 12:14:12 PM
So that means Waltz with Bashir and 24 City (in addition to Bowling for Columbine) can't be documentaries either, right?

I know you are making the argument that all of these are documentaries rather than saying they aren't, but to suggest that Bowling for Columbine belongs anywhere near this discussion seems absurd to me. He uses stunts and there is an animated bit in the film meant to make an argument, but it is not in the least bit close to not being a documentary.

I haven't seen My Winnipeg so I can't really say there but to me, Waltz with Bashir is decidedly a "based on a true story" fiction film, not a documentary. I'm hesitant to say if it is even possible to have an animated documentary. What's next, calling Waking Life a documentary because real people had those discussions? But by the Waltz and (apparently) My Winnipeg distinction, Waking Life is a documentary. As for 24 City...I'd be hard pressed to call that a doc either. Once you have actors performing from a script that seems to be going a bit far.

Anyway, can someone make a logically coherent definition of documentary that includes these three films but excludes something in a faux-documentary style like The Office. My logically coherent definition to the contrary is a film that portrays real life events or arguments primarily using footage of people as themselves.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on March 26, 2010, 12:25:56 PM
I'm the one who originally poopooed My Winnipeg's eligibility, but I wasn't fighting tooth and nail over it. I don't think it's a documentary but it doesn't matter to me if the group wants it included.

Waltz and 24 City stretch the definition in some ways, but were both eligible for the documentary Filmspot. For the sake of simplicity that should be good enough to make them eligible here, unless somebody is really uncomfortable with their inclusion.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on March 26, 2010, 12:32:12 PM
I'm glad you spared me the trouble of having to rank everything. Time to dig in on these 00 films!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 26, 2010, 12:39:19 PM
My logically coherent definition to the contrary is a film that portrays real life events or arguments primarily using footage of people as themselves.

This is a far too reductive definition of "documentary", caused by the influence of a particular type of non-fiction film, cinema-verite.  The idea that the documentary had to be an "objective" depiction of reality, without the interference of the filmmaker.  This is both practically impossible (the filmmaker always interferes in the depiction of reality, if only in the act of editing) and extremely limiting.  None of Werner Herzog's non-fiction films would qualify as documentaries (he often coaches his subjects on what to say, which is the same thing as scripting what actors say).

Robert Flaherty's Nanook of the North is one of the most famous and influential documentaries of all-time.  Every class on the subject starts with this film.  Almost all of it consists of footage staged (and therefore scripted) by Flaherty.  Errol Morris's The Thin Blue Line was famously rejected for Academy Awards consideration because it featured recreations of actual (and hypothetical) events, in other words, it featured scripted actions performed by actors.

The "animated documentary" even has its own wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animated_documentary) page.  It has a history going back to 1918.

Ken Burns's The Civil War, like most his other documentaries, feature actors reading letters written by the documentary subjects.  This is essentially the same thing Jia Zhang-ke does in 24 City, where he has actors relate actual stories from actual people.

The documentary is a non-fiction film.  That is all.  Waking Life is a fictional story, like This is Spinal Tap or Slacker.  Ray is a fictional film based on actual events, as is Saving Private Ryan.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 02:29:08 PM
My logically coherent definition to the contrary is a film that portrays real life events or arguments primarily using footage of people as themselves.

This is a far too reductive definition of "documentary", caused by the influence of a particular type of non-fiction film, cinema-verite.  The idea that the documentary had to be an "objective" depiction of reality, without the interference of the filmmaker.  This is both practically impossible (the filmmaker always interferes in the depiction of reality, if only in the act of editing) and extremely limiting.  None of Werner Herzog's non-fiction films would qualify as documentaries (he often coaches his subjects on what to say, which is the same thing as scripting what actors say).

Coaching real people what to say is not the same as an actor reading a script. It's not even close. Actors get paid to do the job. They say whatever you pay them to say. And at the end of the day they are not accountable for what they said because it was just an act. Real people are accountable for what they say. Coaching them doesn't mean forcing them to lie. I suspect Herzog is simply priming them for what questions he'll be asking, so they can get prepare an answer without stuttering and humming and hawing.

"the filmmaker always interferes in the depiction of reality, if only in the act of editing"

This I absolutely agree with, but there's only so much you can do with editing before things get fishy and the story you're telling loses all credibility.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 03:00:19 PM
sdedalus, while I see what you're getting at I'm having a hard time imagining a documentary category that doesn't operate under the "reductive definition" you mentioned. If all a film needs to be a documentary is to be loosely based on true events it doesn't seem like a particularly worthwhile category.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 26, 2010, 03:34:56 PM
This isn't 'nam, there are rules.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 03:41:35 PM
(http://i43.tinypic.com/25yyfl3.jpg)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 26, 2010, 04:23:44 PM
If Waltz with Bashir isn't eligible I quit. :P
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 26, 2010, 04:33:11 PM
How about changing the documentary category to something like Documentary and Experimental Documentary; Documentary, Essay, etc.; Documentary: Non-fiction and Fiction Hybrids?  Or create separate categories like Experimental Documentary, Unconventional, or Unclassifiable...or something?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 04:34:46 PM
Good suggestions. We're going over the options right now...
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on March 26, 2010, 04:50:21 PM
It's probably all for naught.

I think sdedalus and I are the only people who love My Winnipeg. :D It wont be winning anything.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 26, 2010, 04:54:25 PM
sdedalus, while I see what you're getting at I'm having a hard time imagining a documentary category that doesn't operate under the "reductive definition" you mentioned. If all a film needs to be a documentary is to be loosely based on true events it doesn't seem like a particularly worthwhile category.

That is the opposite of what I proposed.

Quote
The documentary is a non-fiction film.  That is all.  Waking Life is a fictional story, like This is Spinal Tap or Slacker.  Ray is a fictional film based on actual events, as is Saving Private Ryan.

24 City and Waltz with Bashir and Grizzly Man are all non-fiction films, it's just that their depiction of their actual events doesn't follow the strict guidelines of one (severely flawed) school of documentary filmmaking.  A school that unfortunately became so dominant as to become synonymous with the entire form in people's minds.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 26, 2010, 05:00:04 PM
It's probably all for naught.

I think sdedalus and I are the only people who love My Winnipeg. :D It wont be winning anything.

I'm trying to help you, fans, out.   :) By keeping the discussion going, a couple of people might think along the lines of checking out the film partly to see where they fall in line in regards to the discussion of categorization and partly to see what the fuss is about.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 26, 2010, 05:03:12 PM
My logically coherent definition to the contrary is a film that portrays real life events or arguments primarily using footage of people as themselves.

This is a far too reductive definition of "documentary", caused by the influence of a particular type of non-fiction film, cinema-verite.  The idea that the documentary had to be an "objective" depiction of reality, without the interference of the filmmaker.  This is both practically impossible (the filmmaker always interferes in the depiction of reality, if only in the act of editing) and extremely limiting.  None of Werner Herzog's non-fiction films would qualify as documentaries (he often coaches his subjects on what to say, which is the same thing as scripting what actors say).

Coaching real people what to say is not the same as an actor reading a script. It's not even close. Actors get paid to do the job. They say whatever you pay them to say. And at the end of the day they are not accountable for what they said because it was just an act. Real people are accountable for what they say. Coaching them doesn't mean forcing them to lie. I suspect Herzog is simply priming them for what questions he'll be asking, so they can get prepare an answer without stuttering and humming and hawing.

I assure you Herzog doesn't give a crap about the true depictions of events in his documentaries.  What he claims to be after is what he calls "ecstatic truth", which essentially means he's after bigger questions than whether he he's showing is real or not, or whether the people in his films are saying their ideas or his own.

And since when is acting lying?  A good script tells the truth, in fiction and non-fiction films.

And how are we to know if documentary subjects get paid?  That doesn't seem a very good dividing line for fiction/non-fiction film.  A lot of actors in low-budget film don't get paid, that doesn't make them documentaries.

As for accountability, people's words get distorted in documentaries all the time (see any argument about Michael Moore).  I hardly think Charlton Heston would think that he, and not Moore, is accountable for the editing tricks of Bowling for Columbine.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 26, 2010, 05:13:07 PM
24 City and Waltz with Bashir and Grizzly Man are all non-fiction films, it's just that their depiction of their actual events doesn't follow the strict guidelines of one (severely flawed) school of documentary filmmaking.  A school that unfortunately became so dominant as to become synonymous with the entire form in people's minds.

How is this anything but over-broad? What if instead of animating the war scenes in Waltz they filmed it live-action with actors and fake explosions and everything. Would it still be non-fiction? How is this different from what any other narrative feature film based on reality does. Are all biopics documentaries? Ray? Malcolm X? These films depict real people, real moments, real conversations. Bloody Sunday? That depicts a real event, reenacted. Why are these not documentaries if Waltz With Bashir is? Its version of events is just as patched together from reality as these films. You've officially made the category documentary utterly meaningless.

I don't think any rational movie watcher considers the fundamental distinction between documentary and non-documentary to be based on reality and based on imagination. The bar for documentary is higher than simply being an interpretation of something that really exists. It is in some way an actual depiction of reality.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 26, 2010, 05:20:23 PM
24 City and Waltz with Bashir and Grizzly Man are all non-fiction films, it's just that their depiction of their actual events doesn't follow the strict guidelines of one (severely flawed) school of documentary filmmaking.  A school that unfortunately became so dominant as to become synonymous with the entire form in people's minds.

How is this anything but over-broad? What if instead of animating the war scenes in Waltz they filmed it live-action with actors and fake explosions and everything. Would it still be non-fiction?

That would be The Thin Blue Line.

How is this different from what any other narrative feature film based on reality does. Are all biopics documentaries? Ray? Malcolm X? These films depict real people, real moments, real conversations. Bloody Sunday? That depicts a real event, reenacted. Why are these not documentaries if Waltz With Bashir is? Its version of events is just as patched together from reality as these films. You've officially made the category documentary utterly meaningless.

I've written twice now (I had to quote it after it was ignored the first time) that Ray and films like it are fictional accounts of non-fiction events. 

I don't think any rational movie watcher considers the fundamental distinction between documentary and non-documentary to be based on reality and based on imagination. The bar for documentary is higher than simply being an interpretation of something that really exists. It is in some way an actual depiction of reality.

All films are, in some way, an actual depiction of reality.  All films are based on imagination.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on March 26, 2010, 05:24:19 PM
I think sdedalus and I are the only people who love My Winnipeg.
Slow down there, buster. I have it number 2 of 1998 (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=3848.msg215589#msg215589), and number 90 all-time (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=6317.msg290820#msg290820). And it has other fans too, jbizz, ses, FroHam, and edgar, I think.

sdedalus makes a good case for its inclusion and reminds us not to be so conservative about this type of filmmaking. If the group decides to make it eligible for this category, I wont think it's an outrageous decision because a sound case can be made for its inclusion. 

My feeling has always been that My Winnipeg is not a documentary because so much of it is BS and Maddin knows it's BS. It's a collection of urban myths, half-truths, and personal recreations. Despite its pseudo documentary form, in my mind it's not that much more of a documentary than The Saddest Music in the World (Maddin's other attempt at mythologizing Winnipeg).

It's true that all documentaries are constructions of their makers, but in this case, despite the presence of (some) actual footage, it didn't meet my standard of non-fiction. Don't ask me to quantify that standard because I'll readily admit that it's pretty arbitrary, but for me there was just too much fiction in it. If Grierson's definition of documentary is "creative treatment of actuality", in this case there wasn't enough actuality for me.

Perhaps we should poll this.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 26, 2010, 05:26:45 PM
I think it's as much a documentary as F For Fake, which has more than its share of scripted, acted scenes and outright lies.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 26, 2010, 05:28:21 PM
I've written twice now (I had to quote it after it was ignored the first time) that Ray and films like it are fictional accounts of non-fiction events. 

So is Waltz With Bashir. The human mind is not capable of recreating in full non-fiction glory, an event. That is why we have photography.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 26, 2010, 05:33:02 PM
The accounts in Waltz are actual.  Their depictions are animated, often of actual interviews with actual people.  The account in Ray is a fictionalization of the life of an actual person.

Nothing can recreate "in full non-fiction glory" an event.  Certainly not photography.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on March 26, 2010, 05:36:18 PM
The accounts in Waltz are actual.  Their depictions are animated, often of actual interviews with actual people. 
I can dig that. I'd vote for Bashir's eligibility.

The account in Ray is a fictionalization of the life of an actual person.
I'd argue that My Winnipeg is the fictionalization of an actual place.  :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 26, 2010, 05:48:01 PM
The accounts in Waltz are actual.  Their depictions are animated, often of actual interviews with actual people.  The account in Ray is a fictionalization of the life of an actual person.

How do you think they write biographies? They have actual interviews with actual people in order to capture the various events and conversations of an individual's life. They delve into news archives and the like to find background. A script for a biopic takes these accounts in order to film re-creations of them.

Anyway, I'm done with this conversation. I simply can't find this line that you are drawing and find it renders the concept of documentary almost entirely valueless. Ultimately we'll let the votes decide what is a documentary or not a documentary. I'm hoping we can draw some distinction between a great film that may be documentary and a great documentary.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 05:52:17 PM
So if the grandfather and the grandson in Princess Bride were real people, the film would be a documentary?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on March 26, 2010, 06:51:11 PM
I think sdedalus and I are the only people who love My Winnipeg.
Slow down there, buster. I have it number 2 of 1998 (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=3848.msg215589#msg215589), and number 90 all-time (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=6317.msg290820#msg290820). And it has other fans too, jbizz, ses, FroHam, and edgar, I think.

It's true, I like My Winnipeg quite a bit. It would certainly make my doc list.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on March 26, 2010, 06:59:28 PM
Dammit I thought I was being indie cool by liking My Winnipeg.  ;)

Seriously though I am glad I was mistaken. Now I will be pushing for it.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 'Noke on March 26, 2010, 07:01:41 PM
I think sdedalus and I are the only people who love My Winnipeg.
Slow down there, buster. I have it number 2 of 1998 (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=3848.msg215589#msg215589), and number 90 all-time (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=6317.msg290820#msg290820). And it has other fans too, jbizz, ses, FroHam, and edgar, I think.

It's true, I like My Winnipeg quite a bit. It would certainly make my doc list.

Same here.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 26, 2010, 07:36:36 PM
Waltz with Bashir is about real people and real events. The animated format is used communicate the experiences as the people remember them, not as they necessarily were. It's what makes it so awesome. Using a limited definition of "truth" and "reality" that excludes this kind of exploration is silly.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 07:59:44 PM
Result of Powwow #2

-What is a documentary? The line between what is and isn't a documentary is too fuzzy to be used as a blanket rule, so instead it's up to you to decide what qualifies. If you feel My Winnipeg is a doc, go ahead and vote for it. If you feel it isn't a doc, but still love it... well, it's up to you what you do. There's always the Best Film category. But anyways, we're not going to tell you who you can and can't vote for in this category. Unless, of course, you're just being silly.

Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on March 26, 2010, 08:17:30 PM
That's probably the best solution. Thanks, guys.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 26, 2010, 08:27:03 PM
Good call. Thanks. :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 'Noke on March 26, 2010, 08:29:15 PM
Result of Powwow #2

-What is a documentary? The line between what is and isn't a documentary is too fuzzy to be used as a blanket rule, so instead it's up to you to decide what qualifies. If you feel My Winnipeg is a doc, go ahead and vote for it. If you feel it isn't a doc, but still love it... well, it's up to you what you do. There's always the Best Film category. But anyways, we're not going to tell you who you can and can't vote for in this category. Unless, of course, you're just being silly.



I'm voting Inglourious Basterd as a documentary
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 08:42:21 PM
I'm voting you off the island :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on March 26, 2010, 08:44:15 PM
Holy smokes, you guys are mods now!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 09:14:31 PM
Only within the confines of this sub-forum (which will be deleted after this event wraps up). But yeah, we're mods for now ;)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on March 26, 2010, 09:20:24 PM
Holy smokes, you guys are mods now!

It feels like a moment to break out a West Wing quote.

She reports to ME, & she reports to Toby

She reports to ME, & she reports to Toby


 ;)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 26, 2010, 09:22:58 PM
And I'm gunna quote Full House:

Kimmy called me a geek-burger.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on March 26, 2010, 09:57:47 PM
She reports to ME, & she reports to Toby
I never missed Mandy.

And I'm gunna quote Full House:
Kimmy called me a geek-burger.
:)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on March 26, 2010, 10:00:42 PM
She reports to ME, & she reports to Toby
I never missed Mandy.



I agree she was pretty much the only character I never really liked.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 27, 2010, 01:07:43 AM
Thanks for reconsidering guys.  Sorry if I got too worked up over this.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 'Noke on March 27, 2010, 05:07:33 AM
Only within the confines of this sub-forum (which will be deleted after this event wraps up). But yeah, we're mods for now ;)

I love how Bondo, who isn't even an elite member yet, is one of the few people who has been given moderator powers. It's very awesome.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 27, 2010, 09:31:09 AM
Thanks for reconsidering guys.  Sorry if I got too worked up over this.

Not at all. It was an interesting discussion :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 27, 2010, 10:05:15 AM
Only within the confines of this sub-forum (which will be deleted after this event wraps up). But yeah, we're mods for now ;)

I love how Bondo, who isn't even an elite member yet, is one of the few people who has been given moderator powers. It's very awesome.

I'm a child prodigy  ;D It will be sad when this ends and I go back to my boring, ordinary stars.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ¡Keith! on March 29, 2010, 02:47:53 AM
any chance of adding screenplays and editing (since cinematography is there) to the list?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 29, 2010, 09:16:01 AM
any chance of adding screenplays and editing (since cinematography is there) to the list?

With all likelihood too close to best film. With a desire to provide some limitation on the number of categories (due to the work involved) we had to choose the ones that would give us something distinct.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 29, 2010, 08:00:29 PM
I'm considering devoting my Best Film list to negative votes.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 29, 2010, 08:02:00 PM
I have about five films in mind for negative votes.  But actually I wish I could use like 10 negative votes for the same film. 
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 29, 2010, 08:03:27 PM
I have about five films in mind for negative votes.  But actually I wish I could use like 10 negative votes for the same film. 

LOL

I wish negative votes are allowed for the Best Director list.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 29, 2010, 08:04:06 PM
Which film do you hate that you think will need 10 neg votes?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 29, 2010, 08:11:09 PM
Negative votes? Eww.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 29, 2010, 08:27:07 PM
Negative votes? Eww.

It isn't as bad as it sounds. It just seems reasonable that a love/like movie should be considered a better representation of Filmspotting Best of the Decade than a love/hate movie.

I have 5-6 films likely to get negative votes.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 29, 2010, 08:30:27 PM
Okay, maybe, I guess...I know I won't be using any. I'd rather push for a film I love than poop on one that other people love. It seems a vindictive exercise.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 29, 2010, 08:54:36 PM
Okay, maybe, I guess...I know I won't be using any. I'd rather push for a film I love than poop on one that other people love. It seems a vindictive exercise.

It's not any more vindictive than posting a negative write-up of a film or saying one didn't like a Filmspotter's chosen film for you for the MDC.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 29, 2010, 08:59:00 PM
Okay, maybe, I guess...I know I won't be using any. I'd rather push for a film I love than poop on one that other people love. It seems a vindictive exercise.

It's not any more vindictive than posting a negative write-up of a film or saying one didn't like a Filmspotter's chosen film for you for the MDC.

Just to clarify, I think none of them are vindictive in and of themselves. 

Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 29, 2010, 09:19:30 PM
I don't think that's the same thing at all. I have no problem with people voicing their honest opinions in a respectful way, but this seems more like going out of your way to try and sabotage films you know other people love (because if they don't, what's the point?). When I make my best of list, I want to celebrate films I love, I'm not sure how this fits that spirit.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 29, 2010, 09:25:54 PM
I don't think that's the same thing at all. I have no problem with people voicing their honest opinions in a respectful way, but this seems more like going out of your way to try and sabotage films you know other people love (because if they don't, what's the point?). When I make my best of list, I want to celebrate films I love, I'm not sure how this fits that spirit.

Oh.  yeah.  I guess I can see that.  "negativity" wasn't really the spirit that was intended (although I say that realizing the irony of the fact that its negative by definition!)

It was meant just to a fun twist on things

The Filmspots and FS100 are both taken pretty seriously in these parts, and this excersize was a bit more light so it might be a fun twist to try.   

It'll be interesting to see how or if people use the negative votes.  I'm a bit surprised I haven't seen more comment on it...
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 29, 2010, 09:32:41 PM
It's hard to judge the exact motives behind negative votes, and I think even harder to predict just how it's going to play out. Maybe divisive films make take a hit, and films that are hard to passionately hate may find themselves in contention. And rightly so perhaps.

I think when it comes down to actually filling out a ballot people will consider the full effect each vote might have. Especially with the unranked system we're using.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on March 29, 2010, 09:47:30 PM
I don't think that's the same thing at all. I have no problem with people voicing their honest opinions in a respectful way, but this seems more like going out of your way to try and sabotage films you know other people love (because if they don't, what's the point?). When I make my best of list, I want to celebrate films I love, I'm not sure how this fits that spirit.

I doubt I'll have any negative votes on mine, simply because I have no problem coming up with 50 films I'd like to support.

Though if I were to use a negative, it'd be for Crash.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: tinyholidays on March 29, 2010, 09:52:59 PM
I don't think that's the same thing at all. I have no problem with people voicing their honest opinions in a respectful way, but this seems more like going out of your way to try and sabotage films you know other people love (because if they don't, what's the point?). When I make my best of list, I want to celebrate films I love, I'm not sure how this fits that spirit.

I doubt I'll have any negative votes on mine, simply because I have no problem coming up with 50 films I'd like to support.

Though if I were to use a negative, it'd be for Crash.

You said it, jbissell.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FifthCityMuse on March 29, 2010, 09:57:51 PM
any chance of adding screenplays and editing (since cinematography is there) to the list?

With all likelihood too close to best film. With a desire to provide some limitation on the number of categories (due to the work involved) we had to choose the ones that would give us something distinct.
I think you're way off base with this one. I'm coming round to the decision on the directing categories, but I'm finding the leaving out of screenplays really, really frustrating. I don't necessarily agree that they would be that similar to the best film categories. Of course there would be crossover, but there's gonna be crossover everywhere.

I think there's something really foul about us saying that music is more important in film than writing. And I know that's not the intent, but it is the outcome of including score and soundtrack categories, and ignoring screenplay.

And to confirm, I think it would be a very different list. The screenplay for A Serious Man would make my list higher than the film would make the list, or potentially even the Coens, as I'm not that familiar with their body of work. I'm not sure the screenplay for Yi Yi would be as high on my list as the film either.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on March 29, 2010, 10:20:11 PM
I think there's something really foul about us saying that music is more important in film than writing. And I know that's not the intent, but it is the outcome of including score and soundtrack categories, and ignoring screenplay.

That did seem a bit odd to have 2 music categories and none for writing. I guess I can understand not splitting between adapted and original but it does seem a little odd not to have any.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 29, 2010, 11:04:16 PM
I don't think that's the same thing at all. I have no problem with people voicing their honest opinions in a respectful way, but this seems more like going out of your way to try and sabotage films you know other people love (because if they don't, what's the point?).

My issue with your reasoning is assuming malicious intent behind a negative vote.  And along the lines of what Ferris said, the mods should rename that aspect of this project thing because it does sounds malicious, honestly.  

When I make my best of list, I want to celebrate films I love, I'm not sure how this fits that spirit.

I agree, but what I gather from the mods' comments, they feel that that's not all what this project is about.  It's about a collective representation of what Filmspotters think of the decade.  Part of that is respectfully voicing that, say, Film A is top 26-50 material but not top 25.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 29, 2010, 11:16:57 PM
I don't think that's the same thing at all. I have no problem with people voicing their honest opinions in a respectful way, but this seems more like going out of your way to try and sabotage films you know other people love (because if they don't, what's the point?).

My issue with your reasoning is assuming malicious intent behind a negative vote.  And along the lines of what Ferris said, the mods should rename that aspect of this project thing because it does sounds malicious, honestly.  

When I make my best of list, I want to celebrate films I love, I'm not sure how this fits that spirit.

I agree, but what I gather from the mods' comments, they feel that that's not all what this project is about.  It's about a collective representation of what Filmspotters think of the decade.  Part of that is respectfully voicing that, say, Film A is top 26-50 material but not top 25.

I'm just trying to figure out the thought process here. If I were to cast a negative vote, I wouldn't waste it on something that doesn't stand a good shot of making the list in the first place. That leaves films that are widely loved. If they're widely loved, that means I'm in the minority. If I'm in the minority, why do I want to deny everybody else from having that movie on the list? And if I'm the only one that doesn't like it, does keeping it off of the list make it "representative" of the Filmspotting whole?

I apologize for complaining about this, I appreciate the work being done by the group of people organizing it. I just see the only use of this rule being contrary to the spirit of a community celebration.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 29, 2010, 11:36:14 PM
How about instead of calling it a negative vote we called it a counter vote. There is all kinds of strategy you can use in your voting if you so desire to help make more off your favorite movies make it and fewer of the movies you don't like.

First off, you might not include a film you love if it is an obscure one that isn't likely to get much love from anyone else (for me this might be Bend It Like Beckham...not sure that many people who have seen it dislike it, but I've not known many other people to consider it great). This would be like voting for Nader...you aren't going to win but your second favorite might lose, so you focus on those with more chance of winning.

Also, you aren't likely to use a counter-vote on just any film you dislike, because many of those probably aren't in the running for a spot either, especially at the cost of a voting slot. Thus you will tend to focus your counter-vote on something that has a good chance of making it in hopes of knocking it from first to second tier or out altogether. I just don't see what is so controversial about saying that if there is a film (let's take Crash since I like that film) where five people put it in but another five are so passionate that they'd be willing to use a counter-vote. Shouldn't this film be considered worse than a film (say Howl's Moving Castle) that seems like it could get five votes but isn't likely to draw counter-votes? This lets less divisive films prosper but also lets less well seen films prosper. If a film only has five people who have seen it in that last scenario but all of them love it, that would seem more important than a film with 20 viewers where 5 love it, 10 are in the middle, and 5 hate it.

At the end of the day, it is not about being negative but about getting a more accurate view of what is actually preferred, it just takes knowing what people don't like to do that.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 30, 2010, 12:21:34 AM
How about instead of calling it a negative vote we called it a counter vote. There is all kinds of strategy you can use in your voting if you so desire to help make more off your favorite movies make it and fewer of the movies you don't like.

First off, you might not include a film you love if it is an obscure one that isn't likely to get much love from anyone else (for me this might be Bend It Like Beckham...not sure that many people who have seen it dislike it, but I've not known many other people to consider it great). This would be like voting for Nader...you aren't going to win but your second favorite might lose, so you focus on those with more chance of winning.

I've always subscribed to the train of thought that the best way to handle your ballot is to just be honest about it. Figuring out the best way to game the system doesn't appeal to me. My list of best films will actually be the list of films I like best. That's probably why I'm so opposed to this idea.

By the way, will there be negative voting in all categories or just best film?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 30, 2010, 12:34:56 AM
By the way, will there be negative voting in all categories or just best film?

Just best film. There are more votes in that category so it seemed the place to introduce it.

I'd still like some of those more averse to the concept to take head on the hypothetical voting outcomes. Counter-voting promotes lesser seen but highly loved and love/like films over love/hate films. Does this not make sense when collating a forum-wide best of list rather than promoting films with relatively mixed or even tepid (lower percentage of those seeing it voting for it) responses that just happen to have been seen a lot?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: sdedalus on March 30, 2010, 04:07:58 AM
I would hope that people would be able to come up with 50 films over ten years that they loved.  That's only five per year.  Even if not, we're not required to use all 50 spots, right?  If that's the case, then no one should be voting for films they only kinda tepidly like.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 30, 2010, 04:13:14 AM
I've always subscribed to the train of thought that the best way to handle your ballot is to just be honest about it. Figuring out the best way to game the system doesn't appeal to me. My list of best films will actually be the list of films I like best.

While the negative votes are included on one's ballot for Best Film, it's not really a part of one's Best Film list.  For example, someone has listed 1 to 47 all the films of the decade that he/she loves and has included 3 negative votes.  The 47 films comprise the Best Film list.  The 3 negative votes are not part of said person's Best Film list.  So, that person's ballot is as honest as can be.  It's not about sabotaging or gaming the system.  You mention this is a project of celebration.  By the inclusion of the counter-vote/negative vote, it's a celebration with an element of evaluation.


I don't think that's the same thing at all. I have no problem with people voicing their honest opinions in a respectful way, but this seems more like going out of your way to try and sabotage films you know other people love (because if they don't, what's the point?).

My issue with your reasoning is assuming malicious intent behind a negative vote.  And along the lines of what Ferris said, the mods should rename that aspect of this project thing because it does sounds malicious, honestly.  

When I make my best of list, I want to celebrate films I love, I'm not sure how this fits that spirit.

I agree, but what I gather from the mods' comments, they feel that that's not all what this project is about.  It's about a collective representation of what Filmspotters think of the decade.  Part of that is respectfully voicing that, say, Film A is top 26-50 material but not top 25.

I'm just trying to figure out the thought process here. If I were to cast a negative vote, I wouldn't waste it on something that doesn't stand a good shot of making the list in the first place. That leaves films that are widely loved. If they're widely loved, that means I'm in the minority. If I'm in the minority, why do I want to deny everybody else from having that movie on the list? And if I'm the only one that doesn't like it, does keeping it off of the list make it "representative" of the Filmspotting whole?

Collective representation are poor choices of words on my part.  It's a compiled result.  You see the counter-vote as an act of sabotage, politics, and/or denial; I see it as someone respectfully and honestly saying "if this is making it, I don't agree or think that it should be that high" (yes, it's conjecture).  It reflects one Filmspotter's opinion of the decade in film and I think that should be factored since the final results are a compilation of the participants' opinion via shorthand (i.e., lists).

At the same time, I don't think there will be many counter-votes cast, anyway.  Though, I do think it's more interesting to get a result that is arrived at via taking into account what people think are the best films and what people think aren't the cream of the crop as opposed to arriving there just by what people think are the best because I think the former is more critical to the extent that a list can be.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 30, 2010, 07:23:12 AM
I would hope that people would be able to come up with 50 films over ten years that they loved.  That's only five per year.  Even if not, we're not required to use all 50 spots, right?  If that's the case, then no one should be voting for films they only kinda tepidly like.

You don't have to use all the spots and I wasn't meaning to imply that an individual person would be giving a positive vote to a film they only tepidly like (I certainly could vote 50 positives without hesitation, but will probably opt to use 5 of those for counter-votes). I was speaking at a macro level. In a positive-vote only rule, a film with a mixed response (many who love, many who hate) or a tepid response (many who have seen but relatively few who love) would rate stronger than those with generally good responses (some love without hate) or strong response (few who have seen but relatively many who love).

P.S. While our official results will incorporate the counter-votes, I am sure we will be running calculations without the counter-votes to see what impact the counter-voting had. Obviously the people using counter-votes might have used those slots to vote for something else in a way that could make a difference and we won't be able to take that into account, but for those who don't like counter-voting, you can at least have that to chew on.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 30, 2010, 08:05:36 AM
You just have to ask yourself "do I want to see Juno in a Best of the Decade list which I had a say in?" You will have to live with that for the rest of your life... unless of course you did something about it :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 30, 2010, 10:06:08 AM
Collective representation are poor choices of words on my part.  It's a compiled result.  You see the counter-vote as an act of sabotage, politics, and/or denial; I see it as someone respectfully and honestly saying "if this is making it, I don't agree or think that it should be that high" (yes, it's conjecture).  It reflects one Filmspotter's opinion of the decade in film and I think that should be factored since the final results are a compilation of the participants' opinion via shorthand (i.e., lists).

At the same time, I don't think there will be many counter-votes cast, anyway.  Though, I do think it's more interesting to get a result that is arrived at via taking into account what people think are the best films and what people think aren't the cream of the crop as opposed to arriving there just by what people think are the best because I think the former is more critical to the extent that a list can be.

I understand what is trying to be achieved, but I think the counter-voting is a really messy and inaccurate way of achieving it. In order to accurately and fairly account for what people really think, I suggest this: after accepting initial ballots every film that receives x amount of votes (to be determined based on level of participation and how those nominations are spread) gets turned into a final ballot where each person scores every movie. That way everyone's opinion of every movie gets represented. Movies that are loved by some and liked by others will naturally rise higher than those that are more divisive.

I think this would solve my problems with the counter-vote system, while still allowing people to affect the outcome of movies they don't like.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on March 30, 2010, 10:19:14 AM
melvil, I'm guessing that the vast majority of us won't bother with counter votes but I do understand and mostly agree with what you're saying. I have no interest in employing any kind of strategy with my top 50 (it'll just be the 50 I love most) and I'm guessing most people feel the same way. I'm always more interested in the individual lists with these things anyways.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Jared on March 30, 2010, 01:44:17 PM
must say, Im not a huge fan of the counter votes either and doubt Ill use any.

They are only going to be used on movies that are locks on this list in an "all positive votes" system that are also devisive. I see movies like Lost in Translation or LOTR being potential casulties, in favor of the movies with the 51st and 52nd most positive votes, which really doesnt seem right.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FLYmeatwad on March 30, 2010, 01:58:57 PM
If anyone doesn't want to use their counter votes I will be glad to take them off of your hands.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 'Noke on March 30, 2010, 02:05:24 PM
I made all of these points earlier but none of the other Moderators listened to me:

You just have to ask yourself "do I want to see Juno in a Best of the Decade list which I had a say in?" You will have to live with that for the rest of your life... unless of course you did something about it :)


I'm not mad at myself that FMF won best picture this year *glares*.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 30, 2010, 02:15:20 PM
Heh FLY, remember, there aren't designated counter-votes...you get 50 votes total and can decide how many of them to devote to positive votes and how many to counter-votes. I rather think those opposed to counters would prefer to keep those votes to vote in the affirmative on something.

which really doesnt seem right.

I find your definition of right to be confusing. So for you "right" means the 50 that get the most positive votes win? Isn't it just as easy to claim that right is that the 50 with the highest net regard win?

Again, lets say there are 50 participants and one film is seen by all of them while another film is seen by only ten. The first film shows up on 15 lists while the second shows up on all 10. Should the first film be the one honored? It wouldn't in the filmspots. What if that film also has 6 people who would be willing to spend a vote to counter it (the other not having any)? Shouldn't the second now especially be the one that wins out?

The filmspots can afford to ask who has seen what (because there is a limited slate of nominees) but that format does not make sense for this list. Thus counter-voting is a second best alternative. Just a straight positive vote would not be at all "right" in my mind, mitigated, perhaps, if votes were ranked.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FLYmeatwad on March 30, 2010, 02:26:42 PM
My pressing question is: can I use my number 1 vote, instead of on There Will Be Blood, Sweeney Todd, George Washington, or I'm Not There, as a counter vote for The Incredibles, thus knocking it down significantly more than if it was a counter vote at number 50?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 'Noke on March 30, 2010, 02:27:36 PM
My pressing question is: can I use my number 1 vote, instead of on There Will Be Blood, Sweeney Todd, George Washington, or I'm Not There, as a counter vote for The Incredibles, thus knocking it down significantly more than if it was a counter vote at number 50?

Votes are not ranked.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FLYmeatwad on March 30, 2010, 02:32:37 PM
But I can submit a list of 50 counter votes, presumably for different films, correct?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on March 30, 2010, 02:37:44 PM
But I can submit a list of 50 counter votes, presumably for different films, correct?

Sure, if you want to be a total asshat.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: roujin on March 30, 2010, 02:38:37 PM
Never underestimate FLY.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FLYmeatwad on March 30, 2010, 02:59:57 PM
Just doing my part in the democratic process.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 30, 2010, 03:39:21 PM
There are two kinds of lists: Personal lists and Group Lists. Filmspotting's Best Films of the Decade is a group list. It will define us, not as individuals, but as a community.

When people look at the list they will not see your ballots. They will not see those films which never stood a chance but you included anyway. So then,  would it not be to the betterment of the group list (i.e. make it more accurate) for you to weigh in on a film that was actually in contention? We are not making personal top 50's here remember. Why not keep the unlikely candidates for another time... like an official, personal top 50 list thread? A place where things can be properly indexed and referenced, instead of being lost amid the shuffle of this project... on a ballot nobody will remember. There will be better opportunities to honour obscure films.

I'm not saying that you should entirely forget about making a ballot with any integrity. I'm saying this is a good time to compromise a little, for the greater good. Of course, we'll all have a few films which we love too much to drop (myself included, Rambo), but surely there's at least a couple that you are willing to budge on? Don't think of it as dropping a good film, think of it as weighing in on a bad one. A negative opinion is no less worthy than a positive one.

I like to imagine a new member coming to the boards... The Best Films of the Decade list will certainly be one of the first things he checks out. He will gage our community by looking at it. Was it compiled by weighing the pros and cons, or just the pros?

That's my 2 cents on it.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on March 30, 2010, 03:45:48 PM
Personally, I look at these things as a chance to find out about some movies that I need to checkout, which is why the composite lists never hold too much appeal to me. I bet all of us could predict more than 50% of the films that will make the final list. As for those films which might be borderline that I would like to see make the list, we all probably won't know how close they actually are until after the results are in.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 30, 2010, 03:48:01 PM
Personally, I look at these things as a chance to find out about some movies that I need to checkout, which is why the composite lists never hold too much appeal to me. I bet all of us could predict more than 50% of the films that will make the final list. As for those films which might be borderline that I would like to see make the list, we all probably won't know how close they actually are until after the results are in.

I think that's where the counter-voting could really shine. It's those borderline films that will slip in when one of the sure shots gets negative voted into oblivion. (muahaha)

So in some ways I think it levels the playing field
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on March 30, 2010, 03:49:26 PM
I understand what is trying to be achieved, but I think the counter-voting is a really messy and inaccurate way of achieving it. In order to accurately and fairly account for what people really think, I suggest this: after accepting initial ballots every film that receives x amount of votes (to be determined based on level of participation and how those nominations are spread) gets turned into a final ballot where each person scores every movie. That way everyone's opinion of every movie gets represented. Movies that are loved by some and liked by others will naturally rise higher than those that are more divisive.

I think your proposal is about equal with the current counter-vote system because I think the temptation to play politics after actually seeing the pool of films to score maybe more alluring in that case (i.e., proposal).  However, that is calling into question motive, admittedly.  The current counter-vote system and what you propose are, in my mind, both more critical ways of looking at the decade which is something I probably prefer.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 30, 2010, 04:42:48 PM
There are two kinds of lists: Personal lists and Group Lists. Filmspotting's Best Films of the Decade is a group list. It will define us, not as individuals, but as a community.

When people look at the list they will not see your ballots. They will not see those films which never stood a chance but you included anyway. So then,  would it not be to the betterment of the group list (i.e. make it more accurate) for you to weigh in on a film that was actually in contention? We are not making personal top 50's here remember. Why not keep the unlikely candidates for another time... like an official, personal top 50 list thread? A place where things can be properly indexed and referenced, instead of being lost amid the shuffle of this project... on a ballot nobody will remember. There will be better opportunities to honour obscure films.

I'm not saying that you should entirely forget about making a ballot with any integrity. I'm saying this is a good time to compromise a little, for the greater good. Of course, we'll all have a few films which we love too much to drop (myself included, Rambo), but surely there's at least a couple that you are willing to budge on? Don't think of it as dropping a good film, think of it as weighing in on a bad one. A negative opinion is no less worthy than a positive one.

I like to imagine a new member coming to the boards... The Best Films of the Decade list will certainly be one of the first things he checks out. He will gage our community by looking at it. Was it compiled by weighing the pros and cons, or just the pros?

That's my 2 cents on it.

I just want to add, that's merely my justification for negative votes. I'm not arguing against making a personal ballot in general. Mine will be very personal.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 30, 2010, 04:55:41 PM
I just want to add, that's merely my justification for negative votes. I'm not arguing against making a personal ballot in general. Mine will be very personal.

Same, I found very little space pressure. I don't want more negative votes than I have and the list of in contention films I love did not fill up the rest so that gave me plenty of opportunity to pick non-contention films I love (so that basically I had my top 40 plus a couple that jumped the queue). I'd rather pick a personal love than a in contention like because I might boost that in-contention like over an in-contention love.

On all the other categories (except Director where I have ten solid loves most of which I'd say are in contention) I can't even begin to fill the ballot with things I feel strongly about that are in-contention so I can make those lists very personal. I also probably won't use all my votes in those categories (again, don't want to push something I'm meh about over something I actually care about).
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on March 30, 2010, 05:05:47 PM
Sounds like we're in the same boat :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 30, 2010, 05:18:36 PM
I think your proposal is about equal with the current counter-vote system because I think the temptation to play politics after actually seeing the pool of films to score maybe more alluring in that case (i.e., proposal).  However, that is calling into question motive, admittedly.  The current counter-vote system and what you propose are, in my mind, both more critical ways of looking at the decade which is something I probably prefer.

Right, it could still be easily gamed (asshats and all), but I like to think most of our members are above that. Where I think it's a superior alternative is in giving everyone an equal chance to weigh in, and avoiding all the variables that I see making the counter-vote system such a crapshoot.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 30, 2010, 06:32:28 PM
This discussion really has me wondering where the film/vote curve is going to start to level out

For instance, here's a sample trajectory.  The films listed by rank (keeping in mind, we're not anouncing winners by rank) and the number of votes each:
(http://i42.tinypic.com/9fuq87.png)

In this example we have like three basic tiers, 1-10, 11-31 and 31-50.  It's right about at film 38 where the vote levels out where we're getting only around 4-5 votes per film.

Now this is just an example. I have no idea what this curve is actually going to look like.  But in this example its films #38 through probably around #62 that stand to get impacted the most, either positively or negatively, by our use of negative votes. 

So really the question people should be asking themselves is - who's in that window? 



Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on March 30, 2010, 07:34:39 PM
nerd ITT :D
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on March 30, 2010, 08:48:10 PM
So really the question people should be asking themselves is - who's in that window? 

I was asking do I feel lucky.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on March 30, 2010, 08:49:09 PM
This thread really needed more charts. You the man, ferris. ;D
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on March 31, 2010, 01:33:54 AM
LOL - ok ok.  Well just for that I'm inflicting you with one more:

(http://i39.tinypic.com/10xdit3.png)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on March 31, 2010, 01:58:40 AM
 ;D
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 01, 2010, 05:52:07 PM
A ways back we had a "best scenes of the decade" thread in another subforum.  Even though we aren't doing a Bod Award for "best scene" it might be worthwhile to move that thread to this subforum and revive it just for the fun of the discussion while the decade is fresh on everyone's mind

EDIT: done
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on April 11, 2010, 03:36:40 AM
Quite a few of my favourite 00 films will not trouble the scorers so I'm looking to make a splash in the negative arena. I desperately want to say what I'll be targeting, but that will generally prove counter-productive when people subsequently get behind it. One of my toughest dilemmas at the moment is deciding if I need to waste a negative vote on Dogvillle.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 11, 2010, 10:05:47 AM
As much as it deserves it, I reckon not. :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: tinyholidays on April 12, 2010, 12:17:25 PM
All of the unviewed Best of the Decade contenders that I have in my Netflix Watch Instantly queue look depressing. After watching Mulholland Dr. yesterday, I need a bit of recovery period.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 12, 2010, 12:30:18 PM
All of the unviewed Best of the Decade contenders that I have in my Netflix Watch Instantly queue look depressing. After watching Mulholland Dr. yesterday, I need a bit of recovery period.

Happy-go-lucky! :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: tinyholidays on April 12, 2010, 12:41:21 PM
All of the unviewed Best of the Decade contenders that I have in my Netflix Watch Instantly queue look depressing. After watching Mulholland Dr. yesterday, I need a bit of recovery period.

Happy-go-lucky! :)

I've already seen it. Might settle for some Korean horror. Thanks anyway, smirnoff.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 12, 2010, 02:31:00 PM
All of the unviewed Best of the Decade contenders that I have in my Netflix Watch Instantly queue look depressing. After watching Mulholland Dr. yesterday, I need a bit of recovery period.

Happy-go-lucky! :)

I've already seen it.

I should've known, you're cool like that.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 16, 2010, 05:28:52 PM
Believe it or not there are only TWO WEEKS left for ballots on the Best of the Decade.  

I have received only TWO BALLOTS up to this point!  Time to get scurrying!

BALLOTS ARE DUE APRIL 30th AT MIDNIGHT
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on April 16, 2010, 07:11:42 PM
Eek! I had no idea.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on April 16, 2010, 07:25:01 PM
I'll be heavily leaning on the FYC threads...and then kicking myself a week later when I realize all the tings I should have voted for.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 16, 2010, 07:28:19 PM
I'm gunna try to complete one category a day on my ballot. That should do the trick.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on April 16, 2010, 08:40:23 PM
My ballot is basically ready to go. Just been hanging out to see if anything comes in FYC threads to fill up vacancies. But I guess I can finish it up so you don't feel so lonely ferris.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on April 17, 2010, 04:13:41 PM
Going by the write-ups in the Write About the Last Movie... thread, the FYC threads haven't sparked that much interest in catching up with unseen films in time for the deadline  :(

Seems like mostly everyone is set with their ballots?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 17, 2010, 05:16:30 PM
Going by the write-ups in the Write About the Last Movie... thread, the FYC threads haven't sparked that much interest in catching up with unseen films in time for the deadline  :(

Seems like mostly everyone is set with their ballots?

I took a ton of recommendations last september and have worked through about 65 films from the decade since then - so the only thing left is my April dictation of The White Ribbon.  Other than that I think I'm about as close as I'm going to get.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on April 17, 2010, 05:38:13 PM
I did a 00s marathon as well, though not based on specific recommendations from this thread. The filmspots is a much longer process and only covers a year so I think the concept of trying to catch everything is slightly more practical. I considered the FYC threads as being to jog the memory or make a push on the borders of one's ballot; not so much for a completist pursuit of new films. It will be great if people do explore some of these (especially those that end up on the list) and I'm sure there will be some use for it in the future (00s bracket, future revision, etc).
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Emiliana on April 17, 2010, 06:01:55 PM
I hope to get to Ratcatcher, Morvern Callar, Synecdoche NY and Let the Right One In before I submit my ballot.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on April 17, 2010, 06:50:59 PM
I considered the FYC threads as being to jog the memory or make a push on the borders of one's ballot; not so much for a completist pursuit of new films.

Nah, I don't wish more people were trying to be a completist.

I hope to get to Ratcatcher

It's eligible?

Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on April 17, 2010, 06:51:36 PM
Going by the write-ups in the Write About the Last Movie... thread, the FYC threads haven't sparked that much interest in catching up with unseen films in time for the deadline  :(

Seems like mostly everyone is set with their ballots?
Well, I started this marathon thingy so I probably won't catch up on much of anything.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Emiliana on April 17, 2010, 06:56:34 PM
I hope to get to Ratcatcher

It's eligible?



I completely forgot to check when it was made, for some reason I was convinced it was from the 2000s. So it's probably not eligible then, even though I don't really know. I will still try and see it, though, as preparation for Morvern Callar, and because some people here seem to like it quite a bit. ;)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on April 17, 2010, 07:27:31 PM
I hope to get to Ratcatcher

It's eligible?



I completely forgot to check when it was made, for some reason I was convinced it was from the 2000s. So it's probably not eligible then, even though I don't really know. I will still try and see it, though, as preparation for Morvern Callar, and because some people here seem to like it quite a bit. ;)

In that case, I hope you see it very soon!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on April 17, 2010, 09:19:53 PM
Ratcatcher is not eligible as we use imdb years and it is 1999.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 19, 2010, 11:55:43 AM
Let me if we you notice if we are getting behind on updating the indexes on anything and we'll try to get them caught up. 
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: tinyholidays on April 20, 2010, 02:55:11 PM
I just noticed that Best Supporting - Female could use an update.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: UberGeekyGirl on April 22, 2010, 12:17:10 PM
What time on the 13th is the live chat? I always seem to be the only one in chat whenever I check. Also, could someone link the actual link to the chat room because maybe I've been going in the wrong one. Thanks.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on April 22, 2010, 12:19:02 PM
What time on the 13th is the live chat? I always seem to be the only one in chat whenever I check. Also, could someone link the actual link to the chat room because maybe I've been going in the wrong one. Thanks.

We may have chat incorporated back into the forum in the near future but right now we use.

http://chat.crackspotting.com/ (http://chat.crackspotting.com/)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 22, 2010, 12:21:53 PM
At the moment the time of the chat is undecided. As it get's closer to the day we'll figure it out and post it some place you're sure to see it.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on April 22, 2010, 02:50:55 PM
We may have chat incorporated back into the forum in the near future
That would be amazing.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on April 22, 2010, 05:54:49 PM
Extremely frustrated that Colossal Youth and In Vanda's Room are on long wait status on my Netflix queue.  Bollocks.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on April 22, 2010, 08:06:20 PM
Fine, I did it.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 22, 2010, 08:07:15 PM
You're the best Corndog

Joe Esposito - You're the Best Around (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Qae_TUTeGo#)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 22, 2010, 09:57:30 PM
Fine, I did it.

You rock!  GOOD MAN!!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on April 23, 2010, 03:38:07 AM
Ballot has been submitted. When I have some time I'll post some pretty pictures of my 50 films. I do enjoy looking at the pretty pictures others have posted.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on April 23, 2010, 08:48:41 AM
Working on mine. I've got 47 films in best picture so far. I actually can't think of three more to add. It's weird.

Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: roujin on April 23, 2010, 08:55:58 AM
Negative votes!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 23, 2010, 09:07:07 AM
Negative votes!

Word!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on April 24, 2010, 09:20:17 PM
Almost done with my ballot. However, I've got a lot of gaps where I need two or three more entries. Wondering if I should fill them or just go ahead and submit it as is.

Negative votes? I dunno. I don't really feel like knocking stuff without backing it up and I don't want to have to do that for every single negative vote.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 24, 2010, 09:36:44 PM
I had a bunch of blanks on my ballot.

Fyi, Negative votes are only for the Best Film category.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on April 24, 2010, 10:05:38 PM
Ah, k. I think I'll actually fill that on easily.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on April 24, 2010, 11:28:23 PM
Negative votes? I dunno. I don't really feel like knocking stuff without backing it up and I don't want to have to do that for every single negative vote.

I don't want to reveal my hand (though I think a few of my negative votes would be pretty apparent at this point) but I would love to have to back up my negative votes  ;D

Anyway, yeah, I had a lot of blanks for supporting performances, animated films, soundtrack/cinematography and didn't even submit anything for score.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on April 25, 2010, 02:26:07 AM
didn't even submit anything for score.

Weirdo.

I have a few categories that are lacking, mostly notably animation. I plan on watching a few more (Spirited Away at the very least) but I definitely won't have more than maybe 15. I'm also low on supporting actresses, but I haven't looked through the FYC thread yet for ones I overlooked on my initial ballot.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on April 25, 2010, 02:18:13 PM
I wish I could have done more homework for this. I feel like I'm forgetting or haven't seen a lot of good stuff.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 25, 2010, 02:44:50 PM
I feel like I.... haven't seen a lot of good stuff.

I think that's just, like, normal. There's no fixing it. :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on April 25, 2010, 09:04:17 PM
My animated category is blank.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 26, 2010, 09:50:51 AM
Looking a ballots so far, there is going to be quite a shake-up caused by negative voting.  Can't reveal more than that.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 26, 2010, 10:35:34 AM
At the bottom of the first post for every FYC thread you will find links to filmspotter's lists (if they've chosen to post one). So far it's only for the Best Films category by the others should be updated soon.

Thanks worm for the suggestion.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: worm@work on April 26, 2010, 01:28:35 PM
At the bottom of the first post for every FYC thread you will find links to filmspotter's lists (if they've chosen to post one). So far it's only for the Best Films category by the others should be updated soon.

Thanks worm for the suggestion.

Thank you SO MUCH all of you :). This is really helpful!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 26, 2010, 04:18:24 PM
On a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being non-stop cartwheels around the house and 1 being comatose) how excited are you guys for the results?

I still haven't looked at any ballots but going by what people have posted in the FYC threads I'm really excited and bracing myself for some surprising and interesting results. I mean there's very few films or performances I feel certain about winning.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on April 26, 2010, 04:24:38 PM
5 - I might do 1 cart wheel
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bill Thompson on April 26, 2010, 04:48:13 PM
Looking a ballots so far, there is going to be quite a shake-up caused by negative voting.  Can't reveal more than that.

Ugh, this is the main reason I was never a fan of the idea of negative voting.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: michael x on April 26, 2010, 05:05:46 PM
Looking a ballots so far, there is going to be quite a shake-up caused by negative voting.  Can't reveal more than that.

Ugh, this is the main reason I was never a fan of the idea of negative voting.

I think it's fair enough, so long as people are honest with themselves and don't try to game the system.

I just wish there was a way to differentiate between the top of my list and the films that barely made it on.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on April 26, 2010, 05:12:49 PM
On a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being non-stop cartwheels around the house and 1 being comatose) how excited are you guys for the results?
11
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on April 26, 2010, 05:32:17 PM
I just wish there was a way to differentiate between the top of my list and the films that barely made it on.

You can certainly post a ranked list in the FYC thread but we simply aren't using a weighted system. And while this may not make sense when you look at an individual ballot, it does make sense when you think about putting together one list from all of them.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on April 26, 2010, 05:36:07 PM
Looking a ballots so far, there is going to be quite a shake-up caused by negative voting.  Can't reveal more than that.

Ugh, this is the main reason I was never a fan of the idea of negative voting.

Especially because I'm afraid that it's going to be the little films that are hurt most (ie. Bondo's distate for films like Yi Yi).
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on April 26, 2010, 05:42:58 PM
Looking a ballots so far, there is going to be quite a shake-up caused by negative voting.  Can't reveal more than that.

Ugh, this is the main reason I was never a fan of the idea of negative voting.

Especially because I'm afraid that it's going to be the little films that are hurt most (ie. Bondo's distate for films like Yi Yi).

This is where I rather hope people try to game the system. I'm not even sure what being "honest" with negative voting would be. I'm not putting my six least favorite films of the decade, they are probably bad films that no one would vote for; I'm putting six of the films I disliked strongly that most people seem to love. I didn't cast a negative vote for Yi Yi. This is partly because I was saving it for films that irked me rather than just didn't interest me but also because I was saving it for films that are more mainstream and thus that much more likely to make the list. Not sure how many people have posted their negatives (I did relent and posted them) but I didn't see too many small films.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: michael x on April 26, 2010, 05:44:08 PM
I just wish there was a way to differentiate between the top of my list and the films that barely made it on.

You can certainly post a ranked list in the FYC thread but we simply aren't using a weighted system. And while this may not make sense when you look at an individual ballot, it does make sense when you think about putting together one list from all of them.

Sight & Sound does the same thing, I believe. Any system will have weaknesses and I really appreciate the guys that are putting this together. I just wanted to offer some feedback for consideration.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on April 26, 2010, 09:47:04 PM
Ballot sent. I doubt I'll post all my stuff. Got a ton of stuff to do this week.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 27, 2010, 02:56:37 PM
DEADLINE EXTENDEDED

(http://i42.tinypic.com/1zdabzc.jpg)

...to participate in the BEST OF THE DECADE voting here on The Filmspotting Message Boards as a contingency in case there are outages due to forum upgrades this week.  Since these upgrades are in very good hands, the likelihood of outages are low, but technology being what it is, you hope for the best and plan for the worst.  Either way this will give people the opportunity to squeeze in a few more films this weekend!!

Ballots are now due by MIDNIGHT E.T. TUESDAY MAY 4TH!!!

If you haven't submitted anything yet, please consider submitting at a bare minimum an (unranked) list of your favorite 20-50 films from the last 10 years and PM them to me (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?action=pm;sa=send;u=5720).  If you’re worried you’ve forgotten some titles, check this great list (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=7571.msg425711#msg425711). 

If you are interested, there are a bunch more optional categories to vote on  - in fact, there’s a whole forum dedicated to them (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?board=24.0), each with great starter lists!  Real go-getters should post a full ballot!

Winners will be announced over the course of 10 days in starting Friday May 7th - click here (http://www.filmspotting.net/boards/index.php?topic=7568.0) for full rules and ballot.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on April 27, 2010, 03:20:33 PM
Whew! That will make things a bit easier for me. :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FLYmeatwad on April 27, 2010, 03:21:09 PM
Whew! That will make things a bit easier for me. :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on April 27, 2010, 03:49:10 PM
Well that's good timing since I'm going out of town on the 5th. Plus now I have an extra weekend of viewing.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: THATguy on April 27, 2010, 04:36:26 PM
My ballots already in, and I'm going to miss all week of work due to a allergic reaction/bronchitis/throat angina/whatever it actually is (3 diagnoses in one week!), but I really didn't plan on watching stuff for the ballot.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 27, 2010, 04:41:22 PM
Yikes, hope you feel better soon! Thanks for the ballot :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Emiliana on April 28, 2010, 06:55:50 AM
The extendeded deadline helps me a lot! I need to rewatch one or two films, and still need to get to Morvern Callar at least.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Wilson on April 28, 2010, 05:32:50 PM
So before I submit my list:

Casey Affleck - Assassination of Jesse James.. - lead or supporting?  I'd argue lead, but I want to go with the popular vote so it gets recognised.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 28, 2010, 05:45:18 PM
So before I submit my list:

Casey Affleck - Assassination of Jesse James.. - lead or supporting?  I'd argue lead, but I want to go with the popular vote so it gets recognised.

Supporting.

(FYI: We'd decided to reconcile in a reasonable way any cases where the same performances were found as nominated in both categories)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on April 28, 2010, 05:54:52 PM
So before I submit my list:

Casey Affleck - Assassination of Jesse James.. - lead or supporting?  I'd argue lead, but I want to go with the popular vote so it gets recognised.

Supporting.

(FYI: We'd decided to reconcile in a reasonable way any cases where the same performances were found as nominated in both categories)

It really feels like a lead role to me, but his Oscar nomination was for Supporting. I feel the same way about Ruffalo in You Can Count On Me.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: worm@work on April 28, 2010, 05:58:15 PM
So before I submit my list:

Casey Affleck - Assassination of Jesse James.. - lead or supporting?  I'd argue lead, but I want to go with the popular vote so it gets recognised.

Supporting.

(FYI: We'd decided to reconcile in a reasonable way any cases where the same performances were found as nominated in both categories)

It really feels like a lead role to me, but his Oscar nomination was for Supporting. I feel the same way about Ruffalo in You Can Count On Me.

I have him on my lead list currently since that's how the role seemed to me as well. But I'll switch him to the supporting list now.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 28, 2010, 06:02:47 PM
I'm sorry....I take it back.  Use LEAD instead of supporting for Casey Affleck in Jesse James.

(although, honestly - like I said, it shouldn't matter)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bill Thompson on April 28, 2010, 06:07:17 PM
I'm sorry....I take it back.  Use LEAD instead of supporting for Casey Affleck in Jesse James.

(although, honestly - like I said, it shouldn't matter)

You're killing me smalls, I'm switching him back to lead now...
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on April 28, 2010, 06:12:13 PM
A Sandlot reference of which I approve. I mean, in last year's Top 100, I had it directly in front of There Will Be Blood if that tells ya anything. Ya heard?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bill Thompson on April 28, 2010, 06:15:18 PM
A Sandlot reference of which I approve. I mean, in last year's Top 100, I had it directly in front of There Will Be Blood if that tells ya anything. Ya heard?

Funnily enough I have never seen Sandlot, yet I say "you're killing me smalls" all the time, this is actually the first time I've heard it's from that movie.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on April 28, 2010, 06:36:20 PM
A Sandlot reference of which I approve. I mean, in last year's Top 100, I had it directly in front of There Will Be Blood if that tells ya anything. Ya heard?

Funnily enough I have never seen Sandlot, yet I say "you're killing me smalls" all the time, this is actually the first time I've heard it's from that movie.

Uh, you're killing me Smalls. WATCH IT!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: THATguy on April 29, 2010, 11:21:52 PM
After some recent watchings, I really feel guilty about not revising my ballot, but I put a lot of work into my original and I'm kind of feeling lazy and entitled now.  Arghghgh.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 29, 2010, 11:24:26 PM
After some recent watchings, I really feel guilty about not revising my ballot, but I put a lot of work into my original and I'm kind of feeling lazy and entitled now.  Arghghgh.

The feeling is common!  A lot of people (including myself) have sent revisions!  I love that people are taking this so seriously - it makes me feel less wierd
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Dave the Necrobumper on April 30, 2010, 03:08:40 AM
For better or worse all submitted. Now just looking forward to the results.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ses on April 30, 2010, 10:09:23 AM
I am glad the deadline is extended, that means I can fit in a few more movies this weekend, I hope everyone is putting together their ballots this weekend!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on April 30, 2010, 10:13:01 AM
We have quite a few ballots in, but to be honest we'll need quite a few more to consider this "representative". 
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Woodpecker from Mars on April 30, 2010, 03:15:23 PM
I am glad the deadline is extended, that means I can fit in a few more movies this weekend, I hope everyone is putting together their ballots this weekend!
The extension gave me time to watch Morvern Callar, glad I did.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Thor on April 30, 2010, 06:10:25 PM
When Saltine calls, I listen. My ballot will be submitted soon.

Cloudy with a chance of meatballs needs my help.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on April 30, 2010, 06:49:30 PM
(http://i30.tinypic.com/301hehe.jpg)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 03, 2010, 11:54:42 PM
There are two different deadlines posted here (http://filmspotting.net/forum/index.php?topic=7568.0): 12 am EST Wednesday May 5th (in red font in the first post) and 12 am EST Tuesday May 4th (in bold in the third reply).
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FifthCityMuse on May 04, 2010, 01:15:03 AM
Ballot submitted. I'll post some of my decisions in the coming days.

I will admit to not submitting an animated list. And totally forgetting Persepolis. Damn.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 04, 2010, 09:21:46 AM
There are two different deadlines posted here (http://filmspotting.net/forum/index.php?topic=7568.0): 12 am EST Wednesday May 5th (in red font in the first post) and 12 am EST Tuesday May 4th (in bold in the third reply).

OOOPS!  D'OH!

Not sure how I missed that.  It is CERTAINLY midnight tonight (May 4th)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: edgar00 on May 04, 2010, 11:38:17 AM
My ballot has been sent in, a cool 11 1/2 hours before the deadline.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bill Thompson on May 04, 2010, 12:59:42 PM
Hey, when filling out the ballot do I need to actually fill in the numbers, like,

1. Film A
2. Film B

Or can I just copy and paste my entries as such,

Film A
Film B

If you want it done the first way I'll do it that way no problem, just wondering if I can save myself some time.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on May 04, 2010, 01:00:50 PM
No you can skip doing the number thing if that's easier for you.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 04, 2010, 01:59:27 PM
Hey, when filling out the ballot do I need to actually fill in the numbers, like,

1. Film A
2. Film B

Or can I just copy and paste my entries as such,

Film A
Film B

If you want it done the first way I'll do it that way no problem, just wondering if I can save myself some time.

Oh shoot.  I wish this question came up sooner.  Removing the numbers would make it easier for you and for us!  The only reason we kept them in was to help people keep track of how many they were submitting
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ses on May 04, 2010, 07:30:14 PM
Crap, deadline tonight. Hopefully I can put something together before then.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 04, 2010, 07:31:59 PM
There are two different deadlines posted here (http://filmspotting.net/forum/index.php?topic=7568.0): 12 am EST Wednesday May 5th (in red font in the first post) and 12 am EST Tuesday May 4th (in bold in the third reply).

OOOPS!  D'OH!

Not sure how I missed that.  It is CERTAINLY midnight tonight (May 4th)

In that case, it's May 5th :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on May 04, 2010, 09:13:55 PM
Crap, deadline tonight. Hopefully I can put something together before then.

Yeah, after I'm done packing I need to make some cuts from a lot of my lists. It might be tough.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ses on May 04, 2010, 10:16:16 PM
Crap, deadline tonight. Hopefully I can put something together before then.

Made it with 45 min to spare!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 04, 2010, 10:55:12 PM
Just sent my ballot in.  The most regrettable deletion - Munyurangabo at #51  :(
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FarfetchFilm on May 05, 2010, 04:32:44 AM
interestingly i had no black and white films in my list?

my fav, Dark Horse i'd have to say.

Yours...?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on May 05, 2010, 06:45:52 AM
Can't wait for the lists!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: THATguy on May 05, 2010, 03:04:52 PM
interestingly i had no black and white films in my list?

my fav, Dark Horse i'd have to say.

Yours...?

You should be shunned for your lack of The White Ribbon.

That is all. :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FarfetchFilm on May 06, 2010, 12:09:23 AM
i really liked The White Ribbon, but i could happily never watch that film again, unlike say Un Prophet much more subtext.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 06, 2010, 01:27:08 AM
Voting is closed and talleying is COMPLETE!

:)

Just a reminder we're posting the best films over a 10 day period (two films per day) then going a live chat for the anouncement of the remaining categories after that 10 day period as long as it doesn't coincide with Lost!!!

We are scheduled to start the announcments on Friday morning.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 06, 2010, 11:23:46 AM
By the way, when counting all the individual votes across categories, we received 9212 votes all together.  That's pretty good!!!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Emiliana on May 06, 2010, 04:22:18 PM
Could you tease us with a few other fun facts and statistics? For example: Are there films that didn't make the cut because of negative votes? How many negative votes did the most "hated" film get? How many positive votes were necessary to make the final list? How many individual films received votes?

Stuff like that would be great - if you have the time, of course, and if your nifty little program makes this data easily available to you ;)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on May 06, 2010, 04:31:22 PM
Voting is closed and talleying is COMPLETE!

:)

Just a reminder we're posting the best films over a 10 day period (two films per day) then going a live chat for the anouncement of the remaining categories after that 10 day period as long as it doesn't coincide with Lost!!!

We are scheduled to start the announcments on Friday morning.

Jesus you guys are teases. We are men (well some of us), foreplay sucks.  ;)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 06, 2010, 07:31:23 PM
Some tidbits about negative votes:

- There were a total off 88 negative votes cast across 59 different films.  
- (For comparison's sake there where 2515 positive votes in the category)

- Half of the films in the Top 20 garnered at least one negative!
- 23 of the films in the Top 50 garnered at least one negative!

- Two films just missed the top 20 due to negative votes!
- Two other films  just missed the top 50 due to negative votes!

So - like 'em or not, the negative votes did make an impact....
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on May 06, 2010, 07:36:40 PM
I'll be interested in hearing what those two films are.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 07, 2010, 12:27:54 AM
Voting is closed and talleying is COMPLETE!

:)

Just a reminder we're posting the best films over a 10 day period (two films per day) then going a live chat for the anouncement of the remaining categories after that 10 day period as long as it doesn't coincide with Lost!!!

We are scheduled to start the announcments on Friday morning.

Jesus you guys are teases. We are men (well some of us), foreplay sucks.  ;)

It's like the stand-up comedian that comes out before....PINK FLOYD
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on May 07, 2010, 04:18:34 AM
Great spice talk ferris. Gimme more!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: pixote on May 07, 2010, 05:09:24 AM
It's like the stand-up comedian that comes out before....PINK FLOYD

Pink isn't well, he stayed back at the hotel ...

pixote
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on May 07, 2010, 05:22:39 AM
It's like the stand-up comedian that comes out before....PINK FLOYD

Pink isn't well, he stayed back at the hotel ...

pixote

The band is just fantastic, that is really what I think. Oh by the way, which one's Pink?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Emiliana on May 07, 2010, 07:38:30 AM
Some tidbits about negative votes:

- There were a total off 88 negative votes cast across 59 different films. 
- (For comparison's sake there where 2515 positive votes in the category)

- Half of the films in the Top 20 garnered at least one negative!
- 23 of the films in the Top 50 garnered at least one negative!

- Two films just missed the top 20 due to negative votes!
- Two other films  just missed the top 50 due to negative votes!

So - like 'em or not, the negative votes did make an impact....


Exciting! I'm sure you'll tell us which films these are as soon as you've revealed the whole top 20, won't you?!?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: worm@work on May 07, 2010, 07:46:05 AM
Also, you may have mentioned this already but can you share stats on the number of people who sent in a ballot (as opposed to total number of votes)?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on May 07, 2010, 09:30:05 AM
Exciting! I'm sure you'll tell us which films these are as soon as you've revealed the whole top 20, won't you?!?

I'm not sure of the exact plan but I would caution to say that we are not planning on releasing information that would suggest a ranking within the top 20 or second 30 pools. Saying the two that missed the top 20 due to negative votes would naturally suggest their place higher in the secondary set.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 07, 2010, 09:33:02 AM
Exciting! I'm sure you'll tell us which films these are as soon as you've revealed the whole top 20, won't you?!?

I'm not sure of the exact plan but I would caution to say that we are not planning on releasing information that would suggest a ranking within the top 20 or second 30 pools. Saying the two that missed the top 20 due to negative votes would naturally suggest their place higher in the secondary set.

Yep - exactly.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Emiliana on May 07, 2010, 09:33:17 AM
Also, you may have mentioned this already but can you share stats on the number of people who sent in a ballot (as opposed to total number of votes)?
ferris posted the full list of people who sent in ballots here (http://www.filmspotting.net/forum/index.php?topic=7568.msg446171#msg446171). By my count, that's 57 of us :)


Exciting! I'm sure you'll tell us which films these are as soon as you've revealed the whole top 20, won't you?!?
I'm not sure of the exact plan but I would caution to say that we are not planning on releasing information that would suggest a ranking within the top 20 or second 30 pools. Saying the two that missed the top 20 due to negative votes would naturally suggest their place higher in the secondary set.
Ah, I see, it would spoil the whole idea of listing them unranked...
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: worm@work on May 07, 2010, 09:51:50 AM
Also, you may have mentioned this already but can you share stats on the number of people who sent in a ballot (as opposed to total number of votes)?
ferris posted the full list of people who sent in ballots here (http://www.filmspotting.net/forum/index.php?topic=7568.msg446171#msg446171). By my count, that's 57 of us :)

Thanks! I totally missed that post. It's so nice to see that so many people sent in ballots. Yay to faceboy for sending in one even when he's not around. Otoh, not seeing Thor's name on that list makes me sad :-\.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 07, 2010, 10:01:55 AM
Also, you may have mentioned this already but can you share stats on the number of people who sent in a ballot (as opposed to total number of votes)?
ferris posted the full list of people who sent in ballots here (http://www.filmspotting.net/forum/index.php?topic=7568.msg446171#msg446171). By my count, that's 57 of us :)



Your count is correct :)

Filmspotters voting in each category

(http://i42.tinypic.com/dq3h8j.png)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 07, 2010, 04:28:14 PM
Otoh, not seeing Thor's name on that list makes me sad :-\.

I see that Holly Harry and skjerva didn't participate as well.  Would've been nice to know that I'm not the only one who had The Best of Youth and The Man Without a Past somewhere on the ballot.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on May 07, 2010, 04:31:47 PM
Would've been nice to know that I'm not the only one who had...The Man Without a Past somewhere on the ballot.
Have it on my foreign ballot.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 07, 2010, 04:33:31 PM
Would've been nice to know that I'm not the only one who had...The Man Without a Past somewhere on the ballot.
Have it on my foreign ballot.

Good, matt the awesome movie list maker.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: pixote on May 07, 2010, 04:34:36 PM
Otoh, not seeing Thor's name on that list makes me sad :-\.

I see that Holly Harry and skjerva didn't participate as well.  Would've been nice to know that I'm not the only one who had The Best of Youth and The Man Without a Past somewhere on the ballot.

I had The Man Without a Past on my ballot.  :)

pixote
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 07, 2010, 04:38:33 PM
Otoh, not seeing Thor's name on that list makes me sad :-\.

I see that Holly Harry and skjerva didn't participate as well.  Would've been nice to know that I'm not the only one who had The Best of Youth and The Man Without a Past somewhere on the ballot.

I had The Man Without a Past on my ballot.  :)

As a negative vote, right?  Or am I misremembering?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: pixote on May 07, 2010, 04:39:59 PM
As a negative vote, right?  Or am I misremembering?

I didn't publish my negative votes, so you must be misremembering. ...correctly.  :)

pixote
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on May 07, 2010, 04:41:23 PM
You're a sly fox.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: pixote on May 07, 2010, 04:42:04 PM
I tried to be honest about my negative votes, by the way, which is why I wasted (more than) one on a film with no chance of making the top fifty.  Strategically, I should have voted for something like Moon instead, but I didn't vote negatively for any film that I kinda sorta like.

pixote
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 'Noke on May 07, 2010, 04:47:24 PM
I tried to be honest about my negative votes, by the way, which is why I wasted (more than) one on a film with no chance of making the top fifty.  Strategically, I should have voted for something like Moon instead, but I didn't vote negatively for any film that I kinda sorta like.

pixote

 :(
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 07, 2010, 04:49:09 PM
I tried to be honest about my negative votes, by the way, which is why I wasted (more than) one on a film with no chance of making the top fifty.  Strategically, I should have voted for something like Moon instead, but I didn't vote negatively for any film that I kinda sorta like.

^ A hater with integrity.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on May 07, 2010, 05:08:35 PM
Like Matt Santos, I refused to go negative.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 07, 2010, 05:18:10 PM
About a 1/3 of voters chose to use negative votes.  (18 of 57 = 32%)

Of those, almost all of them used 5 or fewer slots for negative votes.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on May 07, 2010, 05:19:17 PM
Like Matt Santos, I refused to go negative.

Nice reference sir.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: pixote on May 07, 2010, 05:24:57 PM
About a 1/3 of voters chose to use negative votes.  (18 of 57 = 32%)

Of those, almost all of them used 5 or fewer slots for negative votes.

What was the maximum number of negative votes on a ballot?

pixote
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 07, 2010, 05:27:07 PM
About a 1/3 of voters chose to use negative votes.  (18 of 57 = 32%)

Of those, almost all of them used 5 or fewer slots for negative votes.

What was the maximum number of negative votes on a ballot?

pixote

20  (which means FLY didn't turn in a ballot after-all!)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on May 07, 2010, 07:19:42 PM
About a 1/3 of voters chose to use negative votes.  (18 of 57 = 32%)

Of those, almost all of them used 5 or fewer slots for negative votes.

 8)

No one could have guessed who would cause the almost in this statement.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on May 07, 2010, 09:32:38 PM
About a 1/3 of voters chose to use negative votes.  (18 of 57 = 32%)

Of those, almost all of them used 5 or fewer slots for negative votes.

What was the maximum number of negative votes on a ballot?

pixote

20  (which means FLY didn't turn in a ballot after-all!)

After that comment about 5 or fewer, I thought I was a monty with 9!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Tim on May 07, 2010, 10:29:53 PM
are you going to announce the 5 films with the most negative votes?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on May 10, 2010, 12:33:06 AM
Had I done negative votes Before Sunset, Juno, and (500) Days of Summer would have been the top contenders. I might have also considered The 40-Year-Old Virgin, The Queen, or Pan's Labyrinth.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on May 10, 2010, 12:36:37 AM
Had I done negative votes Before Sunset

 ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

 :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on May 10, 2010, 12:37:22 AM
I'm pretty sure we've talked about this before.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Clovis8 on May 10, 2010, 12:38:32 AM
I'm pretty we've talked about this before.

I've programmed myself to instantly forget any negative talk about this film. It took years of meditation and 3 surgeries.  ;)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on May 10, 2010, 12:45:43 AM
 :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: roujin on May 10, 2010, 12:46:10 AM
Hmmm, if I had used negative votes they've might gone toward the following films: A Serious Man, Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Gladiator, Grizzly Man, Hot Fuzz, Inglourious Basterds, Let The Right One In, Any Lord of the Rings, Once, Shaun of the Dead, Slumdog Millionaire, United 93.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on May 10, 2010, 12:47:42 AM
Any Lord of the Rings,
Yeah, I knew I was forgetting something.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on May 10, 2010, 01:15:41 AM
Hmm, if I would have considered negative votes, I would have killed myself on the spot.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Dave the Necrobumper on May 10, 2010, 01:32:42 AM
Hmm, if I would have considered negative votes, I would have killed myself on the spot.

You know it is hard to shoot yourself with an arrow.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 10, 2010, 05:23:05 AM
I'm kind of crushed to see the films (in red) listed by you guys.  I'm ambivalent towards the other films being listed.

Had I done negative votes Before Sunset, Juno, and (500) Days of Summer would have been the top contenders. I might have also considered The 40-Year-Old Virgin, The Queen, or Pan's Labyrinth.

Hmmm, if I had used negative votes they've might gone toward the following films: A Serious Man, Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Gladiator, Grizzly Man, Hot Fuzz, Inglourious Basterds, Let The Right One In, Any Lord of the Rings, Once, Shaun of the Dead, Slumdog Millionaire, United 93.

I thought you liked Inglourious Basterds.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on May 10, 2010, 06:40:23 AM
Hmm, if I would have considered negative votes, I would have killed myself on the spot.

I'd killed myself on the CINECAST!ing spot. On the CINECAST!ing spot. I would've stuck the gun in me mouth. On the CINECAST!ing spot!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on May 10, 2010, 07:25:07 AM
Someone please tell me what that's from... I can't remember.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on May 10, 2010, 07:34:18 AM
Someone please tell me what that's from... I can't remember.

If I tell you, will you promise to (re)watch it?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on May 10, 2010, 07:44:50 AM
That's a risky proposition. It sounds like a British movie...
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on May 10, 2010, 07:48:48 AM
That's a risky proposition. It sounds like a British movie...

Haha, if I tell you, will you promise to (re)watch it?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on May 10, 2010, 08:18:23 AM
Only if Natalie Portman is in it.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on May 10, 2010, 08:28:18 AM
Only if Natalie Portman is in it.

She's not but it is a good movie.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on May 10, 2010, 08:34:49 AM
Only if Natalie Portman is in it.

Alas, she is not present. Colin Farrell, Blendan Gleeson and Ralph Fiennes are though. The film in question, the best of 2008, is In Bruges!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: roujin on May 10, 2010, 10:16:08 AM
I thought you liked Inglourious Basterds.

I do, but it's nowhere near a top 50 of the decade for me. Kill Bill: Volume 1 is the Tarantino choice for this decade. Sari about Jesse James, I should really rewatch it.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ¡Keith! on May 10, 2010, 10:25:10 AM
I thought you liked Inglourious Basterds.

I do, but it's nowhere near a top 50 of the decade for me. Kill Bill: Volume 1 is the Tarantino choice for this decade. Sari about Jesse James, I should really rewatch it.

thought you were just channeling Cher...

Cher - Just Like Jesse James (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU-ZrXaJxgw#)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on May 10, 2010, 10:32:34 AM
Only if Natalie Portman is in it.

Alas, she is not present. Colin Farrell, Blendan Gleeson and Ralph Fiennes are though. The film in question, the best of 2008, is In Bruges!

God, of course! I JUST watched that last month.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on May 10, 2010, 12:27:54 PM
I'm kind of crushed to see the films (in red) listed by you guys.  I'm ambivalent towards the other films being listed.
Had I done negative votes Before Sunset, Juno, and (500) Days of Summer would have been the top contenders. I might have also considered The 40-Year-Old Virgin, The Queen, or Pan's Labyrinth.

Yeah, I'm not a fan. I think it succeeds in moments because of Steve Carell's personal charm, but by the time that chick is splashing around in the tub, I kinda hated it. I didn't much like the supporting cast at the electronics store either. I never got the critical acclaim. Although I didn't love it, I think Knocked Up is much better.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: pixote on May 10, 2010, 12:35:21 PM
I'm kind of crushed to see the films (in red) listed by you guys.  I'm ambivalent towards the other films being listed.
Had I done negative votes Before Sunset, Juno, and (500) Days of Summer would have been the top contenders. I might have also considered The 40-Year-Old Virgin, The Queen, or Pan's Labyrinth.

Yeah, I'm not a fan. I think it succeeds in moments because of Steve Carell's personal charm, but by the time that chick is splashing around in the tub, I kinda hated it. I didn't much like the supporting cast at the electronics store either. I never got the critical acclaim. Although I didn't love it, I think Knocked Up is much better.

Agreed ... though I hated it by the time of the drunk driving scene.  Whether or not that was before or after the tub scene, I don't remember.

It made my list.

pixote
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 10, 2010, 04:55:17 PM
I'm kind of crushed to see the films (in red) listed by you guys.  I'm ambivalent towards the other films being listed.
Had I done negative votes Before Sunset, Juno, and (500) Days of Summer would have been the top contenders. I might have also considered The 40-Year-Old Virgin, The Queen, or Pan's Labyrinth.

Yeah, I'm not a fan. I think it succeeds in moments because of Steve Carell's personal charm, but by the time that chick is splashing around in the tub, I kinda hated it. I didn't much like the supporting cast at the electronics store either. I never got the critical acclaim. Although I didn't love it, I think Knocked Up is much better.

Agreed ... though I hated it by the time of the drunk driving scene.  Whether or not that was before or after the tub scene, I don't remember.

It made my list.

I think the jokes/gags that miss the my mark badly are more abundant in 40YOV, but, for me, the ones that work the most are also in 40YOV.  (However, I do think there are more jokes that miss in KU).  With KU, I feel that Apatow was trying too hard to shoehorn laughs.  As a result, the editing is weaker in that film.  For example, the labor/delivery scene intercut with Ben's friends fooling around and that game the the guys were playing with Martin.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 10, 2010, 05:34:55 PM
toro913, flieger, and worm@work's lists are the ones that have the most votes that only each of them and I have in common.  With a few votes that the three of us have in common.  I don't think there are any votes that appear on all four ballots.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 11, 2010, 05:54:09 PM
I appreciate the Best of the Decade mods/organizers' efforts and dedication, but I think the revealing stage is too slow.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 1SO on May 11, 2010, 06:00:01 PM
I would agree, even if only because I want to know the complete list before I leave the country this weekend.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 12, 2010, 10:07:03 AM
I appreciate the Best of the Decade mods/organizers' efforts and dedication, but I think the revealing stage is too slow.

Smirnoff is punishing all of us this morning for your discontent yesterday...
;)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on May 12, 2010, 10:08:57 AM
Whoops! Nope, just asleep at the wheel :) Sorry folks.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 14, 2010, 10:27:03 AM
Results so far from the CHAT TIME poll:

(http://i41.tinypic.com/33y6sd0.png)

I was leaning Monday night to begin with, so it's looking like that's the way we're headed.  I'll leave the poll (http://www.filmspotting.net/forum/index.php?topic=8040.0) open for a 4-5 more hours today just in case...
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 14, 2010, 06:37:47 PM
Ok.  It's confirmed:  Chat is Monday  5/17/2010 at 7:30 PM EASTERN (GMT -5)

Here's the link for the chat room (http://chat.crackspotting.com/).  Come a little early.  The room holds only 20 people!

Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: pixote on May 14, 2010, 06:39:38 PM
The room holds only 20 people!

I don't think that's true ... but if that gets people to show up early then by all means ...

pixote
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: ferris on May 14, 2010, 06:40:32 PM
The room holds only 20 people!

I don't think that's true ... but if that gets people to show up early then by all means ...

pixote

LOL - ok.  I heard that at some point.  Glad to hear that's not the case.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Melvil on May 14, 2010, 11:41:08 PM
I won't be able to make it Monday. :-\
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on May 16, 2010, 12:41:53 PM
I can hang out for a little bit but my softball game starts at 10
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on May 17, 2010, 06:22:15 PM
Ok.  It's confirmed:  Chat is Monday  5/17/2010 at 7:30 PM EASTERN (GMT -5)

Here's the link for the chat room (http://chat.crackspotting.com/).  Come a little early.  The room holds only 20 people!

Bump
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: oneaprilday on May 17, 2010, 10:14:11 PM
Thanks to Bondo, 'Noke, ferris, and smirnoff for all your work with BotD - you guys are the best!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on May 17, 2010, 10:28:25 PM
Thanks to Bondo, 'Noke, ferris, and smirnoff for all your work with BotD - you guys are the best!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: mañana on May 17, 2010, 10:30:16 PM
Thanks to Bondo, 'Noke, ferris, and smirnoff for all your work with BotD - you guys are the best!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Dave the Necrobumper on May 17, 2010, 10:34:50 PM
Thanks to Bondo, 'Noke, ferris, and smirnoff for all your work with BotD - you guys are the best!

Yes thank you very much.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: THATguy on May 17, 2010, 10:47:22 PM
Agree with the other remarks...

and as previously stated in the chat, now let's get cracking on the '90s.  :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 17, 2010, 11:05:09 PM
Thanks to Bondo, 'Noke, ferris, and smirnoff for all your work with BotD - you guys are the best!
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: 1SO on May 17, 2010, 11:50:41 PM
Just saw your Best of the Decade Winners (http://www.filmspotting.net/forum/index.php?topic=7908.0).  Don't know how I missed it.

Surprises:
Unfortunately, a vote for the Coen Brothers is a vote for Intolerable Cruelty, Burn After Reading and The Ladykillers.
I love Alfonso Cuaron as a director, but my favorite film by him is a Harry Potter.
I will always treasure Miyazaki and WKW, even if I only treasured 1 of their 3 films.
Tarantino had more features this decade than the previous.  I hope the trend continues.
Greengrass and Nolan.  Seeing them makes me happiest.  (Sorry, Bill).
Herzog didn't make the director's list.

That shot used for 'Marisa Tomei - In the Bedroom' should be an animated .gif so we can watch what happens next.
I expected Filmspotters of all people to see through Mo'nique's one-note performance in Precious.  You disappoint me.


I'm that much of an insecure narcissist that how often I was quoted was as interesting to me as the winners themselves.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Dave the Necrobumper on May 17, 2010, 11:59:05 PM
Where are the 21 -50 best film winners, listed?
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: petu on May 18, 2010, 03:51:18 AM
The post for cinematography winners seems empty to me.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on May 18, 2010, 05:19:02 AM
Rest assured the cinematography and second tier film winners are coming.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: chardy999 on May 18, 2010, 05:31:15 AM
Very nice job guys. Really happy with all the lists so far. Love Leonardo DiCaprio for The Departed.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on May 18, 2010, 05:42:27 AM
Ok, went ahead and put in the winners for those two in the winners thread and they will be prettified when we have a chance. This value added presentation of the lists is a bit of work.

Also, the winners thread will be unlocked for comments.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on May 18, 2010, 05:49:45 AM
I'm that much of an insecure narcissist that how often I was quoted was as interesting to me as the winners themselves.

It was all those polls you started, your intros were very quotable. :)
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bill Thompson on May 18, 2010, 07:51:14 AM
At this point the amount of love this board shows for QT and Nolan sickens me, at least I can justify all the Wes Anderson love in my head because I like Anderson, but those two, ugh.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: smirnoff on May 18, 2010, 07:59:24 AM
I've been impressed with Nolan. I feel like he just gets it.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on May 18, 2010, 08:10:36 AM
At this point the amount of love this board shows for QT and Nolan sickens me, at least I can justify all the Wes Anderson love in my head because I like Anderson, but those two, ugh.

I have never really liked QT and realize I will never "get" Pulp Fiction, and I like Nolan's films, though he seems to be a little hot or miss for me, but it is what it is, I'm not gonna get my panties in a bunch over it.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bill Thompson on May 18, 2010, 08:21:30 AM
At this point the amount of love this board shows for QT and Nolan sickens me, at least I can justify all the Wes Anderson love in my head because I like Anderson, but those two, ugh.

I have never really liked QT and realize I will never "get" Pulp Fiction, and I like Nolan's films, though he seems to be a little hot or miss for me, but it is what it is, I'm not gonna get my panties in a bunch over it.

I'm not either, but I felt the need to get that out there right quick.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on May 18, 2010, 09:22:43 AM
At this point the amount of love this board shows for QT and Nolan sickens me, at least I can justify all the Wes Anderson love in my head because I like Anderson, but those two, ugh.

Now you understand how I feel about both Andersons.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bill Thompson on May 18, 2010, 09:26:06 AM
At this point the amount of love this board shows for QT and Nolan sickens me, at least I can justify all the Wes Anderson love in my head because I like Anderson, but those two, ugh.

Now you understand how I feel about both Andersons.

Yeah, but you hate everything in film.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on May 18, 2010, 10:47:23 AM
Interesting lists. I didn't think there were too many surprises. The most for me were probably in the supporting categories where I was pleased to see Franco listed twice.

Not sure how you guys were tabulating, but I know people are always interested in some kind of Excel sheet to get an idea of who just missed the cut.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Sam the Cinema Snob on May 18, 2010, 11:24:07 AM

Surprises:
Unfortunately, a vote for the Coen Brothers is a vote for Intolerable Cruelty, Burn After Reading and The Ladykillers.
Hence why I didn't vote for him.

That shot used for 'Marisa Tomei - In the Bedroom' should be an animated .gif so we can watch what happens next.
I like the way you think.  ;D
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: jbissell on May 18, 2010, 11:36:00 AM

Surprises:
Unfortunately, a vote for the Coen Brothers is a vote for Intolerable Cruelty, Burn After Reading and The Ladykillers.
Hence why I didn't vote for him.

I voted for them, but of those 3 I've only seen Intolerable Cruelty. The hardest name to not include on my director's list was Herzog because he's an all-time favorite but Grizzly Man was the only of his films this decade that I totally loved.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on May 18, 2010, 11:42:33 AM
I'm not sure how much bad films from directors weighed in to my calculation compared to quantity of good films. Sure, if two different directors had two great films (M. Night and John Cameron Mitchell for example) but one had a number of bad films while the other had none (well, no other films period), the latter will get the vote. But if it is someone like Sodeberg who had say five films that I liked, even with five I didn't like, he'll get favored over the one with the better "net".
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 18, 2010, 01:23:33 PM
toro913, flieger, and worm@work's lists are the ones that have the most votes that only each of them and I have in common.  With a few votes that the three of us have in common.  I don't think there are any votes that appear on all four ballots.

jbissell is another kindred spirit when it comes to performances.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: FroHam X on May 18, 2010, 01:25:56 PM
At this point the amount of love this board shows for QT and Nolan sickens me, at least I can justify all the Wes Anderson love in my head because I like Anderson, but those two, ugh.

I have never really liked QT and realize I will never "get" Pulp Fiction, and I like Nolan's films, though he seems to be a little hot or miss for me, but it is what it is, I'm not gonna get my panties in a bunch over it.

As your BFF I will ignore this.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Corndog on May 18, 2010, 02:58:05 PM
At this point the amount of love this board shows for QT and Nolan sickens me, at least I can justify all the Wes Anderson love in my head because I like Anderson, but those two, ugh.

I have never really liked QT and realize I will never "get" Pulp Fiction, and I like Nolan's films, though he seems to be a little hot or miss for me, but it is what it is, I'm not gonna get my panties in a bunch over it.

As your BFF I will ignore this.

Much appreciated.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 18, 2010, 04:35:28 PM
I think it would be nice if the people who've chimed in with comments along the lines of "didn't like it"/'hated it"/"shouldn't be on the list" post up their ballots.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bill Thompson on May 18, 2010, 04:46:46 PM
I think it would be nice if the people who've chimed in with comments along the lines of "didn't like it"/'hated it"/"shouldn't be on the list" post up their ballots.

I believe I posted every single one of my ballots when I sent them in.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Dave the Necrobumper on May 18, 2010, 04:51:24 PM
I think it would be nice if the people who've chimed in with comments along the lines of "didn't like it"/'hated it"/"shouldn't be on the list" post up their ballots.

I believe I posted every single one of my ballots when I sent them in.

Posted my also
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Verite on May 18, 2010, 04:52:22 PM
I think it would be nice if the people who've chimed in with comments along the lines of "didn't like it"/'hated it"/"shouldn't be on the list" post up their ballots.

I believe I posted every single one of my ballots when I sent them in.

Posted my also

I know you guys did, but there are quite a few who haven't.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Bondo on May 18, 2010, 04:53:04 PM
Just saying, I'd prefer it if ballot posting remained in the relevant FYC threads and not in any of the general discussion threads.
Title: Re: Best of the Decade: General Discussion
Post by: Junior on October 18, 2010, 06:28:04 PM
My friends and I talked about this very thing in this episode of my podcast (http://thewhiteboardpodcast.wordpress.com/2010/10/18/episode-004-top-10-films-of-the-2000s/). Hooray self-whoring.