Author Topic: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions  (Read 1399 times)

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 27696
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #20 on: November 15, 2017, 03:13:46 PM »
Everybody else is calling it her directing debut, right? Seems like a good time to go with the consensus.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2017, 05:19:54 PM by Junior »
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10173
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #21 on: November 15, 2017, 04:22:59 PM »
I'm with Junior. Gerwig deserves the recognition, and it doesn't look much like a slippery slope to me.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17715
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #22 on: November 15, 2017, 05:05:14 PM »
I want her to be recognized, but if we say this one is her debut, does that deny her work on the previous film?  If she did some co-director work on a previous film, doesn't that build up toward her work on this one?  I want to see her get an award as much or more than the next person and our award is SO prestigious, but I think we should recognize that this isn't her debut.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10173
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #23 on: November 15, 2017, 05:11:09 PM »
I think in light of recent events we should make an effort to promote women more and be more inclusive. If she was not recognised in the credits up to this point, that is one more instance of women being put down by the system that we could correct by allowing her to be nominated in one more category.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Corndog

  • Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 16110
  • Oo-da-lolly, Oo-da-lolly, golly what a day!
    • Corndog Chats
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #24 on: November 17, 2017, 09:34:02 AM »
I am leaving the FYC for Debut Feature for Lady Bird. I think it is worthwhile for it to maintain its eligibility within the category.
"Time is the speed at which the past decays."

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 29446
  • Marathon Man
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #25 on: November 17, 2017, 10:07:01 AM »
I am leaving the FYC for Debut Feature for Lady Bird. I think it is worthwhile for it to maintain its eligibility within the category.
I would suggest if it gets nominated for Best Director that it not be in this category as well.

Corndog

  • Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 16110
  • Oo-da-lolly, Oo-da-lolly, golly what a day!
    • Corndog Chats
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #26 on: November 17, 2017, 11:30:35 AM »
Are there any precedents for this pixote? Any past debates regarding a film's Debut eligibility based on previous co-directorial work?
"Time is the speed at which the past decays."

pixote

  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 32580
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #27 on: November 17, 2017, 12:41:54 PM »
Everybody else is calling it her directing debut, right?

I think they're mostly including "solo" in there, for accuracy.

Are there any precedents for this pixote? Any past debates regarding a film's Debut eligibility based on previous co-directorial work?

The Pixar example is the only one I remember offhand, plus the retroactive realization that one actual nominee in this category (John Carney, Once) should not have been eligible (causing us to temporarily change the category to "Debut or Breakthrough Feature" until we sorted out eligibility requirements). At other times we've determined that made-for-TV movies did not count towards eligibility, nor films that played at festivals but never received US theatrical distribution.

But, yeah, the only direct precedent is Lee Unkrich's nomination for Toy Story 3, despite his co-director credits on Toy Story 2, Monsters Inc., and Finding Nemo, all of which had a separate credited director.

So, yeah, a gray area.

pixote
« Last Edit: November 17, 2017, 12:43:35 PM by pixote »
I think I'd love how awkward it'd be, or how awkward it should be.

Corndog

  • Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 16110
  • Oo-da-lolly, Oo-da-lolly, golly what a day!
    • Corndog Chats
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #28 on: November 17, 2017, 12:57:27 PM »
The other argument to be made is the fact it only played for 1 week in 1 theater. I know we use the playing in over 100 theaters for a film to be re-eligible the following year for filmspots. So not sure how to evaluate this as a "theatrical" release. As a straight interpretation, clearly it was released theatrically, but in the spirit of the rule I believe it would be more open to interpretation...
"Time is the speed at which the past decays."

pixote

  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 32580
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Filmspots 2017: Eligibility Questions
« Reply #29 on: November 17, 2017, 01:35:07 PM »
The other argument to be made is the fact it only played for 1 week in 1 theater. I know we use the playing in over 100 theaters for a film to be re-eligible the following year for filmspots. So not sure how to evaluate this as a "theatrical" release. As a straight interpretation, clearly it was released theatrically, but in the spirit of the rule I believe it would be more open to interpretation...

The re-eligibility guidelines and the debut feature guidelines were never meant to overlap like that, unfortunately. Any sort of true, US, theatrical release (as opposed to a festival screening, a one-night engagement, or a television/home video release) was meant to count towards Debut Feature eligibility, even if it was just one theater in NY/LA.

That being said, I'd still be okay with making a one-time exception. These are our awards and, within reason, we should celebrate the films we want to celebrate. In the past, with similar situations, we've listed the film in the FYC threads with the appropriate caveat and left it up to individual voters to gauge eligibility. I worry, though, that just by virtue of making something an option, that biases things in favor of eligibility. And as fair as I want to be to Gerwig, I want to be just as fair to someone like Jordan Peele.

I'm curious if anyone has seen Nights and Weekends and can at all sense a second directorial voice influencing Swanberg's. I'd also like to find an interview with Gerwig where she discusses her contributions to that film.

pixote
I think I'd love how awkward it'd be, or how awkward it should be.