love

Poll

Which club/activity are you interested in participating in regularly?

Movie Dictator Club
8 (12.5%)
Movie of the Week
8 (12.5%)
80s Bracket
8 (12.5%)
Far East Bracket
8 (12.5%)
Retrospots
15 (23.4%)
Greatest Living Actor
5 (7.8%)
Greatest Living Director
6 (9.4%)
Ranking Project
6 (9.4%)

Total Members Voted: 25

Author Topic: Revival Poll  (Read 7574 times)

PeacefulAnarchy

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2132
    • Criticker reviews
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #50 on: April 26, 2016, 02:20:57 PM »
If the process is structured to lead to an outcome then the outcome is the primary purpose, even if the secondary purposes along the way may be more enjoyable. That's not to say the process isn't part of the goal, but to take your NCAA tournament example what meaning does the drama of the upset have if it isn't putting that underdog one step closer to a national title?

I hesitate to comment too much about the brackets because I was never involved with them, but if I understand right what you found most fun was watching and discussing more obscure movies and occasionally seeing an underdog win. If this was what people enjoyed most, then why not just do that? Three people are assigned a communal dictation of 2 films and discuss them and vote. If the overarching bracket structure doesn't bring enough to the table then it's just holding up the actual fun part of watching and discussing movies. If the long form competition does add something people enjoy then it should be respected and followed through on. If the concern is simply that the usual suspects win then take the usual suspects out of the competition, pantheon films need not apply. Again, I didn't participate in the brackets so I can't speak for what would be the right solution. I can only say that while I would consider participating in any of the above variations, my interest in a full bracket would wane if the whole thing took ages to complete.

I think fundamentally I just like to know where things are headed. I can deal with more structure or less structure, I have my preferences but I'm flexible as far as which path to take. But once a path is chosen I want to see it through (or, if necessary, decisively changed if it turns out to have been the wrong decision), otherwise why bother choosing a path in the first place.


pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 33834
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #51 on: April 26, 2016, 03:34:38 PM »
    I feel culpable for half these projects petering out. Life got busy in 2012, guys!

    Here's the vague plan I had for the next bracket (which could be Horror Films, Films of 1999, 1970s US Films, 1990s European Films, 1990s French Films, etc.):

    • Start with a decent sized list of films (300 seems plenty doable, despite precedent to the contrary), with a mix of consensus favorites, personal picks, and semi-obscure titles that have street cred. Maybe avoid titles that are only available in the dark recesses of the internet, or maybe not. (I hate that choice.)
    • Rank all the films, Ratings Project-style.
    • Start with a couple of all play-in rounds, focusing on the least seen and underseen films, plus the least highly rated picks. No need to start involving the big heavyweight films just yet (partly out of efficiency). So, round one might involve the 150 biggest underdogs, with participants able to pair any two films against each other. 75 films would be eliminated, leaving 225 total films. Round two would involve the 150 biggest underdogs remaining, with another 75 films eliminated, leaving 150 total films. Round three would then involve all films, with participants forced to pair a film in the top half of the bracket against a film in the bottom half.
    • After each round (including play-in round), films would all be rerated (taking account new ratings earned during the round and disregarding ratings from anyone who didn't participate in that round). A small percentage of losing films would be resurrected each round based on having the highest new ratings (assuming the film had not been resurrected previously). There'd be incentive here to campaign for your favorite losing films and get other film to watch them. So, say my round one matchup presented an agonizing decision between two little seen films that I rate a 9.0. I have to kick out one of them. But if I can convince other people to watch the losing film during the round (not as part of a matchup), their rating could give my beloved loser a chance at being resurrected. This process could extend multiple rounds, meaning a film kicked out of the bracket after round one could become a cause célèbre months later and find itself resurrected into round four.
    • Once we got to a final bracket of say 32 films, resurrections would cease and matchups would be assigned almost completely randomly, with one person per matchup (or possibly three, for the final four, but it gets into a herding cats type situation). Thus, even before the final matchup was decided, the random assignment would already have determined who would be responsible for that matchup. Total luck of the draw. Matchups would be forfeited after two weeks and reassigned randomly. Rewatches of films previously reviewed for the bracket (or slightly before) would not be essential.

    That's more or less what I've been dreaming up for the past two years, mostly with an emphasis on moving the brackets along more quickly without losing the chances for discovery; and also tweaking the resurrection process to encourage promotion of films that might otherwise get loss and got unluckily paired up with something just a little greater (and also be less arbitrary). I think it'll be really good, and I can't wait to test it out .... if you all still trust me, haha.

    pixote
« Last Edit: April 26, 2016, 03:36:54 PM by pixote »
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 33834
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #52 on: April 26, 2016, 03:45:32 PM »
btw, I'm thinking of using the random assignment idea to wrap up the 80s US Bracket in May/June.

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

Beavermoose

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4929
  • Samsonite! I was way off!
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #53 on: April 26, 2016, 08:26:20 PM »
I always liked the brackets because it was always just 2 movies to be watched, usually chosen by the members and it was a collaborative effort. If 10 active members participated in the brackets even for only one or two match ups we could finish them up so quickly. I did MDC for a while a discovered some great films, but I think at some point I wasn't participating in the forum as much nor watching movies as much so all the other projects just seemed overwhelming. So I never joined the top 100 club or list of shame or any of that. Even retro filmspots require the members to try and watch a whole lot of movies.
Filmspots month is special, and I make it a point to watch all those movies somewhat for my ego's sake but it can be quite exhausting. I would never be able to do that every month.

We should probably be finishing up old projects before starting up new ones.
Or as pix seems to be sort of suggesting, find a way of combing a few different projects together. Ratings project + Brackets + Filmspots
« Last Edit: April 26, 2016, 08:29:49 PM by Beavermoose »

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10456
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #54 on: April 26, 2016, 10:16:19 PM »
How much time do you estimate it would take to get through that 300 movie list ? And more importantly, how intense would the movie watching schedule be per participant ? Would this be a two movies a month situation or might one have to get through more than that ?

And should we come up with penalties for laggards ?

Personally I like the idea of discovering gems of cinema in niches that one would usually be loath to get to. If there are 5 truly great Romanian movies out there, I'd like to know about them, and watch them sometime. But I balk at watching tens of potentially mediocre movies (are most movies are) to get to that list.

If 10 people play along, that's 15 movies that they must watch for each one of the three rounds, in however much time they have. Since we're starting with the most underseen and lowest graded there are good chances these will not overwhelmingly be spectacular movies. The heavyweights and mainstream movies may be overwatched and overrated but ultimately they usually still are better than the average.

With the next round brackets, that's an additional ~13 movies each person has to watch. Admittedly, the last ones should be of increasing quality, but that leaves a first batch of 30 movies of random quality that each person must get through plus those extra watches. Then we get to the top 32 but I think by that point the selection should be pretty adequate.

It all sounds a bit daunting. I am sure 1SO, Martin, you pixote and the rest of the uber-knowledgeable cinephages in here could come up with an enlightened 300 movie list for some specific niches, especially the larger ones. But I don't know that there are 300 1990s French movies that are worth being watched.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Corndog

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 16903
  • Oo-da-lolly, Oo-da-lolly, golly what a day!
    • Corndog Chats
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #55 on: May 16, 2016, 02:36:33 PM »
I am in for resurrecting brackets and the ratings project. And I like your idea pixote on using the Ratings project to help formulate the bracket and leaving off well seen picks for later in the bracket, with the "underdogs" as play-ins. It creates a sense of discovery for the first few rounds which may help with participation.

And I think like Beavermoose said, if we get a decent size group, the bracket could go quicker than you think with participation (which I know is traditionally the issue). But with 2 people/matchup, with 10 members participating, that's 5/month considering 1 matchup a month/member. And it'd be even more if we got more than 10. 300 films would still take a while, and maintaining participation for that long is always a challenge however.
"Time is the speed at which the past decays."

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 15500
  • it's all research
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #56 on: May 27, 2016, 06:15:56 PM »
I'm all about this. Let's do it!

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 33834
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #57 on: May 28, 2016, 01:22:52 AM »
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 18720
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #58 on: May 29, 2016, 01:50:21 AM »
So, alongside pix's revival of the 1990s Far East Bracket, 1SO proposes this schedule:

June - LGBT and/or 1999 Discovery
July - 1999 Discovery
August - 1999 Ballots and Top 100 Exploration
Sept - Top 100 Ballots
Oct - Shocktober

I think we should take a break from Noirvember this year.

I think this is a reasonable schedule for this year.  Any other thoughts?
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 33834
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Revival Poll
« Reply #59 on: May 29, 2016, 01:59:26 AM »
Typically we'd want a month of discovery between Retrospot nominations ballots and Retrospot final ballots. I'm not sure if that's accounted for above, unless we're thinking July 31st for the former and August 31st for the latter.

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

 

love