Author Topic: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors  (Read 17448 times)

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 24468
  • A Monkey with a Gun
    • Creative Criticism
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #20 on: November 13, 2008, 11:31:00 AM »
Can I just list Malick and Kieslowski 20 times?

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #21 on: November 13, 2008, 11:37:05 AM »
No, Mr. Sex, you have to put together a proper list.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

ˇKeith!

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 26756
  • Bitch, I been around since LimeWire.
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #22 on: November 13, 2008, 11:39:34 AM »
A second round would be a huge amount of work and I'm not sure what would be gained from it. Also, it would mean using polls, which would actually dilute the graduation of the points scale I've devised. Not only that, but it eliminates the influence of higher rated directors because in a poll on the for it's not possible to have rankings, only multiple choices.

it would be more work but it wouldn't mean using polls.  think of what the list is supposed to represent - does it represent the top 20 of a few people, or the top films of filmspotters in general?  i do think the 11-30 scale addresses this problem a bit. 

i'll take my ballot as example.  of my top 20 films, i think 2 made it into the top 100, so my film tastes are arguable taken into little account for the filmspotter top 100.  however, had we gone through a second round, i, and other outliers, would have taken into account our favorite of the top 150 or so and adjusted our "top 20" accordingly so that our relative tastes would be represented.  i think most of the films would be the same, perhaps shuffle 20ish in and out, as well as some re-ordering, but having the second round better represents an overall sense of the film tastes on the boards. 

if a second round appeals, but the workload doesn't, i'd be happy to help out in any capacity you see fit :)

Hmmm... why would you want to adjust what your actuall top 20 are?  That doesn't reflect actual tastes but a forced decision among a limited and pre-selected # of choices?

jbissell

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10885
  • What's up, hot dog?
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #23 on: November 13, 2008, 12:05:12 PM »
Araki!

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #24 on: November 13, 2008, 02:03:10 PM »
I think Keith has it right. Part of the idea is yha each person comes up with a semi-definitive list. No sense having people change their lists.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

ˇKeith!

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 26756
  • Bitch, I been around since LimeWire.
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #25 on: November 13, 2008, 02:15:24 PM »
I think Keith has it right. Part of the idea is yha each person comes up with a semi-definitive list. No sense having people change their lists.

and thats why we're BFFs

edgar00

  • 00 Agent
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *
  • Posts: 12131
  • corndogs are better than Die Another Day
    • Between The Seats
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #26 on: November 13, 2008, 02:22:50 PM »
The points based system is the most fair way of handling this list. If a second round of emailing lists is required, I would agree that filmspotters create a second top 20 list from 100 or 150 directors that are remaining. That is, of course, if a second round is required.
-Le Chiffre: You changed your shirt, Mr Bond. I hope our little game isn't causing you to perspire.

-James Bond: A little. But I won't consider myself to be in trouble until I start weeping blood.

https://twitter.com/Betweentheseats
http://crabkeyheadquarters.wordpress.com/

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #27 on: November 13, 2008, 02:28:06 PM »
Okay. I'm going to stick to my method because if I've thought it through correctly it will indeed be the most fair method. If as I compile the top 100 I see that it's not working as expected then I will try and see if changing the rate of graduation helps or if I should just do a 1-20 point scheme and then do a second gathering of top 20s.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

skjerva

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 9448
  • I'm your audience.
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #28 on: November 13, 2008, 02:31:18 PM »
I think Keith has it right. Part of the idea is yha each person comes up with a semi-definitive list. No sense having people change their lists.

i wrote a reply a while a go but it got lost in the tubes, this isn't about people changing their lists, or as _Keith_ suggests, going against an "actual list" and "actual tastes".

again, take my Top 20 ballot that had Top 100 representation in only 2 films.  does this mean that i only like 2 of those Top 100 films?  of course not.  does the Top 100 do a good job of reflecting how these films resonate with the filmspotting community?  again, i'd say no.

of those Top 100 films (or extend that to the Top 150 or 200), i think there were a handful that i would say i really like/love, but my interest in those films is not represented in the list, or in my initial Top 20 list.  by having a second round, i would then change my ballot to reflect both my initial choices as well as the suggestions of others.  i did not include Chungking Express in my Top 20, but that does not mean i don't love the film; it might even be a sometimes Top 20 film.  by casting a second ballot and placing CE or 2001 on my list, i am refining the representation of how filmspotters generally rank films.  further, take something like Yi Yi that just missed the cut-off, this might inspire folks to include it in their lists or prop it up to a higher position.
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams. 
                        - Iris Barry from "The Public's Pleasure" (1926)

skjerva

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 9448
  • I'm your audience.
Re: Filmspotters' Top 100 Directors
« Reply #29 on: November 13, 2008, 02:32:59 PM »
Okay. I'm going to stick to my method because if I've thought it through correctly it will indeed be the most fair method. If as I compile the top 100 I see that it's not working as expected then I will try and see if changing the rate of graduation helps or if I should just do a 1-20 point scheme and then do a second gathering of top 20s.

ego much?  is "if not working correctly" means not getting the results you want, then i'm not sure what value the exercize has anyway.  why don't you just give us your top 20 and be done with it and spare us all from the fiction of input?
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams. 
                        - Iris Barry from "The Public's Pleasure" (1926)