About a potential next tournament

[Mattrick]

You're assuming those who were doing other things wouldn't nominate art films. ... I don't see how them not living in the thread means they have worst taste in films, that's totally arbitrary. Your point is kind of moot in that regard.

I'm not assuming that, I'm just suggesting it. It's not true in the case of Heather, (who brought it up) I'll grant you, based on my observation of her participation in this forum generally and in these tournaments. But the basis of my suggestion (still open for discussion) that the people living in the thread have better taste in general is your list showing the names of those people and my informal observation of their participation in this forum generally and in these tournaments as compared to the people who did not live in that thread who I observe are giving lots of votes to poorer films as we speak.

Exactly why we should have a gap of time between nominations and the tournament and lengthen the nomination process. If people who haven't seen the art films and classics have time to watch some of them, we may have people voting differently. It seems people are more interested in nominating films that are less serious than more serious movies that are hilarious. I'm pretty sure you seconded Almost Famous after I nominated it, where as pablo and others didn't think it was much of a comedy. Dramedies stood no chance in this tournament most because of why people are voting for certain films. I think, in general, a lot of people don't watch comedies for anything arty and aren't considering that aspect much. Me and someone else had that discussion in the nominations thread, in that some people are voting because they laughed, and others are voting because of why they laughed. Most of the smart comedies haven't fared well because of this, I think.

And a lot of those art films didn't even make it past the first round because they hadn't been seen. A lot of good getting them in did anyways.

Agreed. Proving what? Ok, maybe proving that nominating them was pointless. Or maybe proving that the tournament itself is pointless. Just a matter of how you look at things, I suppose.

Like I said above, if people had more time and it wasn't a week long whirlwind of nominations and the start of the tournament, people would have a chance to watch them. Loaded up a tournament with a bunch of films the majority hasn't seen is almost guaranteeing those films won't get votes. The problem isn't that films a lot of people haven't seen get into the tournament, the problem is that so many did.

I've always seen these tournaments not just as fun or as a vehicle to discuss a wide variety of films, but as a means to introduce a variety of new films for people to watch. When 100 films are eliminated two weeks after the nominations begin, it defeats people's drive to watch those 100 films since they're already gone. Some of those films I'll still try to watch, but any motivation to watch them soon is kind of gone. When it comes to classics and obscure movies, short of downloading (and even then, classics are much harder to find), they're limited to the Netflixes of the world who might not have them anyways, or knowing someone who has them. Even going into a store specifically to buy them isn't as easy as finding copies of popular, more contemporary movies. Half the reason I haven't seen as many classic films is lack of access, not just to the film, but knowing about them in the first place.

[fernandito]

I'm just trying to think of a way for more people to be able to participate. I don't think its fair to all the members if 5 people nominate half the films.

Playing devil's advocate just for the hell of it (har,har), you could make a case that it's also not fair for those of us who will actually ignite debate and discussion of the films to have our total number of noms stymied in favor of others who will only nominate something and never join the discussions.

Again, not a counter argument, just like to make sure we cover as much ground as possible here.

[Mattrick]

Putting a nomination cap ensures you vote for those you truly feel are worthy.

This was my point, though I don't think I said as much. People would be far more thoughtful with their nominations. Instead of nominating the first films that come to mind, which must happen often since it happens to me during these processes. I'll suddenly think of a film, or another nomination will make me think of a film, and I nominate it on impulse, which there's nothing wrong with, there just isn't as much individual deliberation, and I think individual deliberation in this case is a beneficial thing to everyone.

[pathoftheturtle]

The point of the tournament is to have fun. That should be the end game, regardless of how many classics or w/e get 'snubbed'.

Education is fun to me. I like education.

If I'm limited to 5 films, I'm saying "screw it" to the lesser known ones b/c I'm just wasting my allotted slots. I don't nominate those. The tournament loses a little something I think.

Key word in your post, wasting; In essence you're conceding that those films aren't really worth checking out anyway. When I nominate films, I don't nominate on how popular they are, but rather on their perceived quality. That should be the aim I think.

Putting a nomination cap ensures you vote for those you truly feel are worthy.

It's just a distraction, the idea of what has a chance to win, but I'll concede that distraction can affect me as well if I'm not conscious about it. Worth thinking about, IMO, that's all.

Maybe it would be fun for a change to do months of nominating involving the whole community and a lot of discussion, then compress the voting to four days so that just a handful of hardcore enthusiasts pick the best ones.

[fernandito]

OMG

I got it!

How about this; we open grounds for discussion of the films before the nomination starts. Hear me out -

Each member participating can make a list of 5- 10 films they're positive they will nominate in the tournament (not a requirement of course, optional).

You list your 5-10 films, and state your case on why you feel this film is worth the other users' time.

So:

1. Movie A
Nominating this because it's well made and bla bla bla bla

2. Movie B
It's socially relevant and well choreographed and bla bla bla

3. Movie C
Omg it's like so mind blowing and that twist at the end etc.,

So on and so forth


We'll leave this thread open for a month before the nominations start. Participating members will help raise awareness of the films they'll be submitting, discussions will ensue, members will seek out these films, and it will help us make more informed 2nd'ngs (?) during the nomination process; films that wouldn't have been 2nd before can/will be now because we saw it before it was even nominated, presumably.

What do you guys think?

[Mattrick]

It's a good idea in theory Fernando. I'm just worried that would exhaust all of our discussion before anything even begins. It's some outside the box thinking though.

[pathoftheturtle]

It's a good idea in theory Fernando. I'm just worried that would exhaust all of our discussion before anything even begins. It's some outside the box thinking though.

Most people right now don't comment anyway. At most, someone might say "More people please vote for Caddyshack!" The few of us who talk all the time probably always will. But if it's a worry that the rest might run out of meaningful criticism to give while they are voting, it still wouldn't really make that part much different from what we have already.

[mae]

As for other future tournaments, I would love to do the animation one (even though, again, animation itself is not a genre). Maybe we should try and schedule these in some way. We can definitely do several more genres and all the decades:

1. Best Action
2. Best Animated Film
3. Best Drama
4. Best Thriller
5. Best Mystery

These five along with our three other genres (Horror, Sci-Fi, Comedy) will give us eight and we can have an 8-title round-robin playoff for the best genre at the end of it all. Not to restart the whole thriller vs. mystery debate, these are just an idea. What other genres can we do?

1. Best Film of the 2000s
2. Best Film of the 1990s
3. Best Film of the 1980s
4. Best Film of the 1970s
5. Best Film of the 1960s
6. Best Film of the 1950s
7. Best Film of the 1940s
8. Best Film of the 1930s
9. Best Film of the 1920s

The 1920s could also be expanded to include films from the 1910s and prior. I doubt we could nominate 200 good films just from the '20s alone.

[Mattrick]

Is my memory awful or didn't we break the Best Film of All Time into decades?

[pathoftheturtle]

As for other future tournaments, I would love to do the animation one (even though, again, animation itself is not a genre). Maybe we should try and schedule these in some way. We can definitely do several more genres and all the decades:

1. Best Action
2. Best Animated Film
3. Best Drama
4. Best Thriller
5. Best Mystery

These five along with our three other genres (Horror, Sci-Fi, Comedy) will give us eight and we can have an 8-title round-robin playoff for the best genre at the end of it all. Not to restart the whole thriller vs. mystery debate, these are just an idea. What other genres can we do?

1. Best Film of the 2000s
2. Best Film of the 1990s
3. Best Film of the 1980s
4. Best Film of the 1970s
5. Best Film of the 1960s
6. Best Film of the 1950s
7. Best Film of the 1940s
8. Best Film of the 1930s
9. Best Film of the 1920s

The 1920s could also be expanded to include films from the 1910s and prior. I doubt we could nominate 200 good films just from the '20s alone.

Why do you phrase your ongoing presentation of your plan as if you want feedback when you never listen to anyone? Every one of your posts are "all the rest of your comments aside" and back to the same thing. I vote, primarily, that our next category be something other than another genre. There are plenty of possibilities that could be fun, and variety is fun in itself. Just not being stuck in a compulsive schedule would be nice. All in favor?

[fernandito]

I'd be inclined to agree with you Michael if you cited examples lol.

[pathoftheturtle]

Well, to begin with, one suggestion that I've floated before would be a Best Detective tourney. That would take us back toward the Best Character angle, (it would be kind of nice to again shift to looking at film crosswise rather than title-by-title) and allow us to embrace the action/thriller/suspense areas at once with no need to split hairs.

[Heather19]

I'd be for a best animated film tournament next. Or a best worst film, although I know there's probably really only 3 or 4 us that would be into that. Anything aside from action or western

Matt, we never split the best film of all-time tournament into decades, but we did semi-recently have threads for each decade where people could list their favorite films.

[Iwritecode]

Did we do a best TV show by decade? Maybe that's what he's thinking of.

[T-Dogz_AK47]

I'd be for a best animated film tournament next. Or a best worst film, although I know there's probably really only 3 or 4 us that would be into that. Anything aside from action or western

I thought we had already agreed ages ago, that the next tournament would be Best Worst Movie?

[Heather19]

I don't think many people are into it

[pathoftheturtle]

Matt, we never split the best film of all-time tournament into decades, but we did semi-recently have threads for each decade where people could list their favorite films.

Right, that was interesting, though not a formal polling tournament like internet people have a craze for. And yes, Iwc, also instructive was the method pablo introduced and managed in our Best TV Series of All Time contest.

Or a best worst film, although I know there's probably really only 3 or 4 us that would be into that.

Actually, I think there's plenty of interest. It gets suggested by someone else on a regular basis. And the timing would be kind of nice following this comedy thing. But I really think, unfortunately, that it should be put off until more kinks are worked out of how we operate. As was pointed out, it is a contentious concept; really one of the most difficult potential categories to pull off as it assumes the judging body is in a solid position of understanding on the art and industry.

Anything aside from action or western

We can argue and object, but I guess there won't ever be a "Best Romance" tourney done in such a male-heavy community as this one.

I'd be for a best animated film tournament next.

Sure, that's a cool idea. Or maybe we could consider other possible divisions based on format rather than content, such as best musical.

[Heather19]

Anything aside from action or western

We can argue and object, but I guess there won't ever be a "Best Romance" tourney done in such a male-heavy community as this one.

You know I've been thinking about that lately. There's very few women that post down here

[Girlystevedave]

Anything aside from action or western

We can argue and object, but I guess there won't ever be a "Best Romance" tourney done in such a male-heavy community as this one.

You know I've been thinking about that lately. There's very few women that post down here

I never really thought about it until now. There really aren't many female posters.



And I'll throw in a vote for doing best animated film at some point in the future.

[pathoftheturtle]

Anything aside from action or western

We can argue and object, but I guess there won't ever be a "Best Romance" tourney done in such a male-heavy community as this one.

You know I've been thinking about that lately. There's very few women that post down here

Less than in the past. IDK, maybe there will be more changes in the membership at some point. For now it seems we have to expect a lot of the masculine energy, though.

[Mattrick]

I think best animated film would be perfect. It can be a smaller tournament and everyone has watched plenty of them in their lives, I am sure. Plus it would give me an excuse to finally watch all those Miyazaki films I haven't seen (only watched Princess Mononoke).

For the next big tournament I'd love to do drama since we'd get a bunch of new films. We've had quite a bit of a cross over between genres so far and I think it would be very fresh. I'm not really too picky though.

[Heather19]

Start with Spirited Away

[mae]

As for other future tournaments, I would love to do the animation one (even though, again, animation itself is not a genre). Maybe we should try and schedule these in some way. We can definitely do several more genres and all the decades:

1. Best Action
2. Best Animated Film
3. Best Drama
4. Best Thriller
5. Best Mystery

These five along with our three other genres (Horror, Sci-Fi, Comedy) will give us eight and we can have an 8-title round-robin playoff for the best genre at the end of it all. Not to restart the whole thriller vs. mystery debate, these are just an idea. What other genres can we do?

1. Best Film of the 2000s
2. Best Film of the 1990s
3. Best Film of the 1980s
4. Best Film of the 1970s
5. Best Film of the 1960s
6. Best Film of the 1950s
7. Best Film of the 1940s
8. Best Film of the 1930s
9. Best Film of the 1920s

The 1920s could also be expanded to include films from the 1910s and prior. I doubt we could nominate 200 good films just from the '20s alone.

Why do you phrase your ongoing presentation of your plan as if you want feedback when you never listen to anyone? Every one of your posts are "all the rest of your comments aside" and back to the same thing. I vote, primarily, that our next category be something other than another genre. There are plenty of possibilities that could be fun, and variety is fun in itself. Just not being stuck in a compulsive schedule would be nice. All in favor?

I don't see why you would take it like that, because the above was meant as stimulating further discussion on possible topics for tournaments and when to do them. What's wrong with that exactly? If you and other people have more suggestions, I'm only all for it.

One different thing we could do is whole actor or director filmographies.

[pathoftheturtle]

I exaggerated, I apologize. Not "every" post you make is dismissive. I just logged on hoping to hear your opinion of all the ideas about upgrades to nominating and instead it was repetitive outline of that one agenda. I'mnot sure I understand about filmographies. We've done Best Actor and Director.

[mae]

I've already posted some thoughts on nominating upgrades and said that thirding is stood idea. If need be, we can also increase the waiting period between moms from five to eight, for instance. We can also have a limit as waiting for a certain period before seconding and thirding and not being able to second or third in the same post multiple titles.

As for filmographies, I meant doing every film an actor or director or anyone made.