Alternative Methods of Scoring in Yearly Film Polls

Which of the methods below would you prefer?

Option A
3
60%
Option B
0
No votes
Option C
2
40%
 
Total votes: 5

User avatar
BleuPanda
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 2475
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 1:20 am
Location: Urbana, IL

Alternative Methods of Scoring in Yearly Film Polls

Postby BleuPanda » Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:33 pm

Petri and I have been discussing alternative methods in private chat and we have decided to ask everyone here. I feel like everyone is good with having 150 movies in the final, but I know I at least don't like having a fixed 15 per year; it benefits weak years and harms strong ones. I have provided various options below.

Option A: What we have now; 15 movies exactly from each year. Benefit is it is the most direct. Negatives is that it gives weak years a lot of entrants and can block great films from strong years. However, if you view the final list as a top 100 with 50 honorable mentions, this makes more sense; it's hard to think of a year where all 15 movies will place in the top 100.

Option B: We take the top 13 of each year, then run a final poll where we place another top 20 by voting among those films that ranked #14-20 in their respective years. The benefit here is it can give strength back to stronger years; the negative is that a lot of the films in these ranks are rather obscure, so there's a possibility it would lend itself strongly to the most seen films (which may not be that bad since they were already popular enough to place).

Option C: We take the top 50 (or some number) films from the last time we ran this and have them automatically qualify for the final. We then take the top 10 from each year. So, years with a stronger top section would get more entrants, but we would be fully aware of what those numbers are (1980 had 6 movies in the top 50 so it would end up with 16, 1981 had 3 so 13, etc.). The main benefit here is that it transforms the yearly poll from a rather predictable top 5 or so to instead focus on the works that would place in the lower ranks. For example, in the current full results, Stardust Memories has 111 points, while Kagemusha and Airplane both have 110. If we exclude points for the 6 films that would automatically qualify, Kagemusha and Airplane would shoot up to 200 and 199 points respectively, while Stardust Memories falls out of step with only 147. Essentially, this system benefits the people who prefer the films that the forum in general prefer; this also inherently negates the urge to 'fix' your rankings (i.e., to give more points to your favorite films that might struggle to make it in compared to guaranteed entrants such as Raging Bull, even if you think Raging Bull is the better film). Another key change is it shifts the lower end upwards; #15 right now has only 53 points while #10 in this method has 80. This prevents a movie from making the final from being high on a single person's list and picking up a couple small points from others. The negatives of this is that it removes the most obvious choices from individual lists (but if you have mainly seen those automatic qualifiers, you're probably fine with them getting a free placement) and that a few odd choices get a free pass (Caddyshack is an oddball for 1980).



My vote would easily be for Option C; I feel it is the option that shakes things up in the most beneficial way. We already know Raging Bull, The Shining, etc. dominate the top spots, and we can still have everyone submit their full list to see what the results would be with them included, but I feel the year polls would be much more effective if we focused on the lower entrants. I think the free pass is really a minor complaint; I'd rather have Caddyshack get a free pass and fall into the bottom 50 than give a couple films easy entrance through a low point floor at spot 15; it can simply be a benefit of doing well in the past. Note that the entrants are also largely the same in both lists; the main difference is their ranks among each other, with I believe one film squeezing into the top 10 from the point shift.

I believe Option C might need a change in point distribution to shift back down to 10 films moving on, but that can be discussed if that's what we decide on.
If I could begin to be, half of what you think of me,
I could do about anything, I could even learn how to love.

User avatar
bootsy
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 958
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:38 pm

Re: Alternative Methods of Scoring in Yearly Film Polls

Postby bootsy » Fri Mar 17, 2017 6:09 am

I like Option C as well. The top 50 aren't going to change that much if at all so it's not going to be a big deal and the other spots can be covered for each year and that gives those all those years a more even and fair chance to be in the final.

User avatar
bonnielaurel
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 766
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:48 pm

Re: Alternative Methods of Scoring in Yearly Film Polls

Postby bonnielaurel » Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:46 pm

Which years would benefit from system C?

User avatar
BleuPanda
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 2475
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 1:20 am
Location: Urbana, IL

Re: Alternative Methods of Scoring in Yearly Film Polls

Postby BleuPanda » Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:56 pm

Here are the movies that would receive free passes, divided by year:

1980:
Caddyshack
Berlin Alexanderplatz
The Empire Strikes Back
Raging Bull
The Shining
The Elephant Man

1981:
Diva
Das Boot
Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark

1982:
Fitzcarraldo
The Thing
Fanny and Alexander
Blade Runner

1983:
Videodrome
Sans soleil
The Right Stuff
Nostalghia
Zelig

1984:
Repo Man
The Terminator
Stop Making Sense
Blood Simple
Amadeus
This Is Spinal Tap
Once Upon a Time in America
Paris, Texas

1985:
Brazil
The Purple Rose of Cairo
Shoah
Back to the Future
Ran
Come and See

1986:
Shadows in Paradise
The Sacrifice
Platoon
Hannah and Her Sisters
Down by Law
Blue Velvet

1987:
The Untouchables
Damnation
Wings of Desire

1988:
Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown
The Last Temptation of Christ
Cinema Paradiso
A Short Film About Killing
My Neighbor Totoro
Grave of the Fireflies

1989:
Sex, Lies and Videotape
Do the Right Thing
Crimes and Misdemeanors



So, a few years only get 3, 1984 strongly benefits with 8, and 6 year remain in the 4-6 range.
If I could begin to be, half of what you think of me,
I could do about anything, I could even learn how to love.

User avatar
bonnielaurel
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 766
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:48 pm

Re: Alternative Methods of Scoring in Yearly Film Polls

Postby bonnielaurel » Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:59 pm

I voted to stick with option A. To me 1989 is a much better year than 1984, so I don't really see how this would be better. I think Petri should decide if he wants to change it or not.

User avatar
Petri
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 790
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:13 pm
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Alternative Methods of Scoring in Yearly Film Polls

Postby Petri » Fri Mar 17, 2017 6:39 pm

I didn’t vote for any option yet.
Although I like the idea that we would update these polls I found some problems in option C.

Those so called ”problematic movies” (everybody knows they’re going to qualify) are often different movies than those that ended up to top 50 in final (top 20 is whole dirrerent story). For example last time Monty Python's Meaning of Life was #2 of its but #90 (out of 100) in the final. Now it would possibly win its year. Same with Indiana Jones Last Crusade (#3 of its year and #86 in the final) and other #3 of their years outside the final top 50. If we exclude those film classsics everyone has seen and almost every gives a great amount of points to them (The Raging Bull, The Shining, Elephant Man, Empire Strikes Back), the winner of the year is probably going to be not so great movies every one has seen (Airplane last time #95 in the final, Blues Brothers #97 in the final). I would more likely see at the top spot of the year movies people really love than movies everyone has seen and thinks they are good.

But which movies are in final top 50 (outside top 20). Last time there were three #10 of their years for example. Then there were even Caddyshack (John’s and beefsupreme’s #1 of its year and John’s #1 and beefsupreme’s #6 of the decade. Practically everybody else who had seen it (except one) were among the haters. Why we should give a free pass for a movie that has gained only few points so far and was in top 50 (#50 preciously) last time only because two voters who haven’t posted hare for in years loved it. (If you still read these threads you are more than welcome to still vote.)

Voters have changed during these years. Greg, Gillingham, Petri, antonius, RockyRaccoon and Michel were the only ones who voted now in the 1990s final and voted last time in the final of 1980s poll. There were movies like Black Cat White Cat (#33 ) and Wrong Trousers in the top 50 of the final of 1990s. This round they didn’t end up to top 150 because people who vote have changed.

There are really many good points that BleuPanda pointed out.
But the biggest problem for me would be that this new system could mean much more calculating (alternative lists, excluding the ineligible movies etc) and hosting work (noting that people are voting for movies that are already in the final, people voting too few movies because they haven’t seen enough etc.). I’m really busy right now (and shouldn’t spend so much time in the forum I do right now.) So this is the biggest reason I'm not for the option C.

If we want to move to option C I think the top 20 (not top 50) would go automatically to the final (those movies are often the biggest classics that will end up high on both yearly lists and in the final no matter who are voting). After that 10 or 13 movies for every year would go to the final and we would have 120 or 150 movies in the final. I think the good points BleuPanda pointed out would come true the best that way.

Option B have good points too but main problem is that only few people have seen enough movies that will end up #13-#20 on the year lists.


Return to “Films, movies, motion pictures...”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests