Sight & Sound

[Robin Davies]

Michelangelo Frammartino sure likes Rossellini.

[Lemmy Caution]

The two lists that have made the most sense to me (so far):

Whit Stillman
with Sturges, Lubitsch, McCarey and Truffaut, etc. His Hitchcock pick is rather unexpected.
&
Atom Egoyan
with choices focusing on the mystery of selfhood/uncertainty of identity
Vertigo, Kane, 8.5, Persona, Vagabond.
I like that he has Paradjanov's Colour of Pomegranates in his mix.

Pomegranates, Battle of Algiers and I am Cuba are my three favorite inclusions on lists so far.

[Maltic]

The two lists that have made the most sense to me (so far):

Whit Stillman
with Sturges, Lubitsch, McCarey and Truffaut, etc. His Hitchcock pick is rather unexpected.

No Rohmer though:


The Awful Truth 1937 Leo McCarey
I SOLITI IGNOTI 1958 Mario Monicelli
The Gay Divorcee 1934 Mark Sandrich
Howards End 1992 James Ivory
The Palm Beach Story 1942 Preston Sturges
The Shop around the Corner 1940 Ernst Lubitsch
BAISERS VOLÉS 1968 François Truffaut
Stranger than Paradise 1984 Jim Jarmusch
Young and Innocent 1937 Alfred Hitchcock
Wagon Master 1950 John Ford

[rrenault]

I was curious to know whether Kent Jones' and Dan Sallitt's ballots should count towards the directors' or critics' poll or both (?), considering they've both directed full-length features. One of Sallitt's full-length films even streamed on the Criterion Channel for a while.

[tolbs1010]

Did David Hare work it as both critic and director or are there two David Hares?

No Tarantino and no John Waters this time around is disappointing. Waters was the only hope for me to see a Losey film on any list, most likely. Maybe there is a vote or two for The Servant somewhere in there. Someone else mentioned missing the filtering by film or director option that was there previously. Agreed!

[MichaelB]

The director David Hare (Wetherby, Paris By Night, Strapless) is much better known as a playwright and occasional screenwriter.

[therewillbeblus]

I was curious to know whether Kent Jones' and Dan Sallitt's ballots should count towards the directors' or critics' poll or both (?), considering they've both directed full-length features. One of Sallitt's full-length films even streamed on the Criterion Channel for a while.

Dan Sallitt has written some worthy criticism, but the inexplicably-lauded Fourteen might take the cake as the most offensive, masturbatory film tackling addiction I've ever seen, so I try to pretend he just writes

[Toland's Mitchell]

https://www.worldofreel.com/blog/2022/1 ... jaiorwfbbc

Here's what one of the 'voting consultants' selected.

[yoloswegmaster]

Why are we posting shitty articles from Jordan Ruimy/WOR? What a nothingburger of an article.

[dekadetia]

I'm attempting to scrape the ballots into an spreadsheet as I imagine the bird's-eye view and filtering capabilities will be useful. Will share here when it's ready.

[mystic_matahari]

I'm attempting to scrape the ballots into an spreadsheet as I imagine the bird's-eye view and filtering capabilities will be useful. Will share here when it's ready.

I'm actually in the process of doing the same! I can't wait to see what you come up with. So far, I've only done a comparison between the number of voters from each country.

[swo17]

That sounds like so much thankless work--Jeanne Dielman would be proud!

[ryannichols7]

I got a peek over her shoulder while she was working on it - the most harrowing piece of information I saw: Costa Gavras' Z received exactly one vote, while You Were Never Really Here got a handful. I'm curious to see what else she pulls from it

[Robin Davies]

https://www.worldofreel.com/blog/2022/1 ... jaiorwfbbc

Here's what one of the 'voting consultants' selected.

Does anyone know what a "voting consultant" actually does?

[barbarella satyricon]

...

[Lemmy Caution]

In the running for worst list, Whelan Barzey's is limited to 1994-2013 (Shawshank to Wolf of Wall St). Undoubtedly a young'un.

[dekadetia]

I'm attempting to scrape the ballots into an spreadsheet as I imagine the bird's-eye view and filtering capabilities will be useful. Will share here when it's ready.

I'm actually in the process of doing the same! I can't wait to see what you come up with. So far, I've only done a comparison between the number of voters from each country.

I haven't done any visualizations or anything, but here's the raw data for download if anyone would like to play around with it.

[mystic_matahari]

That sounds like so much thankless work--Jeanne Dielman would be proud!

Speaking of our good friend Jeanne...there was a 17 pt. difference between Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles and Vertigo.

---
While cleaning the data as much as I can, here are some fascinating (creative) answers I've found:

• All of Lars von Trier's Movies

• Stan Brakhage's Short Films from '72-'75

• Twin Peaks (TV Series)

• Dekalog

• Vikings (TV Series)

• The Name of the Game (Season 2): The Perfect Image

• The Bill Douglas Trilogy

[Toland's Mitchell]

Why are we posting shitty articles from Jordan Ruimy/WOR? What a nothingburger of an article.

I only posted the article for the critic's embedded tweet, which corresponds to his ballot.

Does anyone know what a "voting consultant" actually does?

I was wondering that myself until the individual lists were released. I'm not sure if there were 'consultants.' Girish Shambu was supposedly a hired consultant, but wasn't he simply a participant like the others? Perhaps 'consultant' simply meant critic or director who participated, who also rejected the canonized classics?

If anyone's interested, a patron over at LB expanded the director's list by compiling every ballot. The notes section includes how many votes each film received and which directors voted for them:
https://letterboxd.com/alexanderson/lis ... tors-list/

[tolbs1010]

I'm attempting to scrape the ballots into an spreadsheet as I imagine the bird's-eye view and filtering capabilities will be useful. Will share here when it's ready.

I'm actually in the process of doing the same! I can't wait to see what you come up with. So far, I've only done a comparison between the number of voters from each country.

I haven't done any visualizations or anything, but here's the raw data for download if anyone would like to play around with it.

BIG thanks for doing this. Some thoughts after filtering and scrolling:

It's reassuring to see that someone like, say, Altman, really did receive a lot of votes but over a wide range of films. Props to Carolyn Funk for choosing California Split, question marks for Richard Combs choosing A Prairie Home Companion.

Great to see a handful of votes for Losey. More than I expected. Criterion's release of Mr. Klein must've had an impact on a few voters as I don't recall it getting votes in past polls.

Only three votes for Jan Troell despite Criterion highlighting his wonderful work. Really thought The Emigrants/The New Land would have more votes. Still hoping Criterion releases Hamsun at some point.

I really need to dive into Hou Hsiao-Hsien's work. Have only seen one of his films and it's not one of the ones that got votes.

Not much love for Danny Boyle. Somewhat surprising given that the UK dominates the list of respondents.

Appreciation for Costa-Gavras has really diminished over the years.

George Cukor gets a large handful of votes but not a single one for Gaslight. Kind of surprising.

Several votes for Gerwig's Lady Bird? Average age of respondents must be much younger than previous polls.

Friedkin's Cruising continues to enjoy a slight critical renaissance.

Loved seeing a couple votes for Ghost World. Please make another film, Terry Z. I'm sure you've been trying.

Single worst film chosen: Eastwood's Cry Macho by Luke Aspell. Trolling?

[diamonds]

Does anyone know what a "voting consultant" actually does?

I was wondering that myself until the individual lists were released. I'm not sure if there were 'consultants.' Girish Shambu was supposedly a hired consultant, but wasn't he simply a participant like the others? Perhaps 'consultant' simply meant critic or director who participated, who also rejected the canonized classics?

Taken from a transcript of an October panel in which this was discussed:

>> Devika Girish: Girish, correct me if I'm wrong, you were a diversity advisor for this year's Sight & Sound poll. I wonder if you can tell us what that entailed. How exactly do you address diversity in a list that is sourced from hundreds of people? Is it just a matter of expanding the pool of voters or is there something more to it?

>> Girish Shambu: Yes, so I was asked to be an advisor and my only task was to suggest people to add to the voter pool, to expand the voter pool. that was my only task, so I sent them dozens of suggestions of people, mostly women, mostly people of color, mostly queer people, disabled critics, trans critics and scholars and people's work that I kind of knew and knew it would result in a diverse set of lists. I was not partied to any discussions about this. I sent them lists.

[mystic_matahari]

I haven't done any visualizations or anything, but here's the raw data for download if anyone would like to play around with it.

Mmmmm...more data!

Several votes for Gerwig's Lady Bird? Average age of respondents must be much younger than previous polls.

Yes! I've been trying to think of how to use AI magic to get demographics data and compare the findings.

---
Meanwhile, 1971 had the most films voted for with a total of 89!

Link to Graph: https://imgur.com/a/xsKJGIz

*I feel like I should clarify that the graphs and analysis are only as good as the data. I tried my best to clean up what I could and chose certain assumptions. So, 100% have errors (more likely than not)!

[MichaelB]

Does anyone know what a "voting consultant" actually does?

I was wondering that myself until the individual lists were released. I'm not sure if there were 'consultants.' Girish Shambu was supposedly a hired consultant, but wasn't he simply a participant like the others? Perhaps 'consultant' simply meant critic or director who participated, who also rejected the canonized classics?

Taken from a transcript of an October panel in which this was discussed:

>> Devika Girish: Girish, correct me if I'm wrong, you were a diversity advisor for this year's Sight & Sound poll. I wonder if you can tell us what that entailed. How exactly do you address diversity in a list that is sourced from hundreds of people? Is it just a matter of expanding the pool of voters or is there something more to it?

>> Girish Shambu: Yes, so I was asked to be an advisor and my only task was to suggest people to add to the voter pool, to expand the voter pool. that was my only task, so I sent them dozens of suggestions of people, mostly women, mostly people of color, mostly queer people, disabled critics, trans critics and scholars and people's work that I kind of knew and knew it would result in a diverse set of lists. I was not partied to any discussions about this. I sent them lists.

I was asked to recommend people with good contacts in various Eastern European countries, and there’s every reason to believe that they also fell under the “consultant” umbrella. But the aim certainly wasn’t to slant the poll in a particular direction, it was to invite qualified contributors who might otherwise have passed under the radar.

[bad future]

I haven't done any visualizations or anything, but here's the raw data for download if anyone would like to play around with it.

Thank you; this is invaluable! I've already lost a good hour perusing it. (Am I correct in seeing that it only includes contributors A through C so far? Not complaining, just making sure I'm not doing something wrong in accessing the data)

[spectre]

I thought I saw that too (might have just been on my phone though!). The complete list is here, in any case: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8eb5x6go ... Sound.xlsx