love

Poll

Which year should the next Retrospots cover?

1943
4 (21.1%)
1945
9 (47.4%)
Surprise me!
6 (31.6%)

Total Members Voted: 19

Author Topic: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection  (Read 11739 times)

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #70 on: January 12, 2017, 04:28:17 PM »
I'm bothered by IMDb's listing of Ivan the Terrible, Part I as a 1945 film. I swear it's going to switch back to 1944 right before this project is done. Should we include it?

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

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #71 on: January 12, 2017, 06:37:50 PM »
I'm leaning towards a Best Surprise category, even though that's always a bit of a controversial one.

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

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26795
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #72 on: January 12, 2017, 07:59:03 PM »
I'm bothered by IMDb's listing of Ivan the Terrible, Part I as a 1945 film. I swear it's going to switch back to 1944 right before this project is done. Should we include it?

pixote
Trust IMDB for now and include it.

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26251
    • smirnoff's Top 100
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #73 on: January 12, 2017, 11:58:16 PM »
I'm leaning towards a Best Surprise category, even though that's always a bit of a controversial one.

pixote

Hah, being so far in the past it adds another layer to the already numerous ways to interpret the category. Do it!

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 36128
  • Marathon Man
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #74 on: January 14, 2017, 11:46:02 PM »
Art Direction

Wanted to ask something about this category. For me, the clear winner and a special prize should go to The Horn Blows at Midnight. Putting aside the argument of opinions, let's say that the film really is on the level of Blade Runner and Metropolis. What chance does the film have against more popular fare like Picture of Dorian Gray and Leave Her to Heaven? How many people are likely to watch a Jack Benny movie - a mediocre Jack Benny movie - simply to have an opinion about the Art Direction?

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #75 on: January 14, 2017, 11:53:26 PM »
Yeah, I think that's a tricky thing, even in the current Filmspots. In reality, the award aren't really for all the films released during the year but rather just the subset of films that we were collectively interested in seeing.

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

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #76 on: January 17, 2017, 07:44:41 PM »
Any preference between a somewhat intentionally murky "Best Surprise" category and something like a "Best Underseen Film" category, which would be limited to films with less than 5,000 votes on IMDb, thus only excluding the following:

Children of Paradise
Brief Encounter
Rome, Open City
A Tree Grows in Brooklyn
The Lost Weekend
Mildred Pierce
Scarlet Street
Dead of Night
Leave Her to Heaven
'I Know Where I'm Going!'
The Picture of Dorian Gray
Spellbound
And Then There Were None
Ivan the Terrible, Part I
Christmas in Connecticut
The Bells of St. Mary's
Detour
The Body Snatcher
They Were Expendable
Anchors Aweigh


It might amount to the same thing. Either way, I'd restrict nominees to films that wouldn't nominated in other 'film' categories.

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

mañana

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 20862
  • Check your public library
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #77 on: January 17, 2017, 10:36:57 PM »
I like "Best Underseen Film", but I'm not picky.

Interesting that you'd eliminate films that were nominated in other categories. For the '74 RetSpos, the coalescing of support in big categories around Un homme qui dort was a highlight for me. To my mind that film was undoubtedly the best underseen film /  discovery of the project. It only has 1,400 ratings on IMDB.
There's no deceit in the cauliflower.

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17864
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #78 on: January 17, 2017, 11:24:49 PM »
I like "Best Underseen Film"

Ditto. How about calling it "Best Hidden Gem"?

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Retro Filmspots IV: Year Selection
« Reply #79 on: January 17, 2017, 11:29:24 PM »
I like "Best Underseen Film", but I'm not picky.

Interesting that you'd eliminate films that were nominated in other categories. For the '74 RetSpos, the coalescing of support in big categories around Un homme qui dort was a highlight for me. To my mind that film was undoubtedly the best underseen film /  discovery of the project. It only has 1,400 ratings on IMDB.

My thinking is that if it's seen enough to earn a nomination for, say, Best Picture, then maybe its otherwise deserved spot in the Best Hidden Gem category should shine a light on a different film. But now you have me doubting that.

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