criterionforum.org

Huh? It's listed in there, where it's been since early last year...

That's odd. Tapatalk is picking up an old version of the page it seems:

Hmm, well that does explain why we were on different pages (literally?) here! Can you tell me what the Genre Lists portion looks like? It'd help me to be able to pinpoint when Taptalk last read that post

Must be pretty old, because I updated that forever ago.

So TV has always been a bit of a gray area within the decades list projects, and it's getting grayer with the lax distinction in recent years between mini-series (which are eligible) and traditional series (which are not). Two specific examples come to mind that impact our next project:

1. Season 1 of True Detective, which is arguably a mini-series directed by Cary Fukunaga. Subsequent seasons have a different cast and creative team behind them.

2. The Knick, which is a little more complicated. All 20 episodes of the first two seasons have been directed by Steven Soderbergh. Reportedly he's done directing the show, but it will go on without him.

Thoughts? I wouldn't personally vote for either of these if they were eligible, but I just want to make the most people possible happy/I enjoy being difficult. Maybe we say that if it's a single season with the same director for each episode, it counts as a mini-series (ruling #1 in and #2 out)?

Re: miniseries: True Detective yes, the Knick no

I think there should also be some clear component of being self-contained. If the subsequent series of True Detective were following the same characters or storyline, I'd argue that even the continued presence of a sole director wouldn't make it a mini-series.

(Though personally I'd err on the side of exclusion, since I think there's more than enough actual cinema to have to deal with, and I can still recall The Great Nothing Dummy-Spitting of '09 - or whenever it was.)

I agree basically, but wouldn't the excluding of The Knick (in its first two seasons) functionally also exclude von Trier's hospital show?

I think it is best to exclude both. I do agree that True Detective and its sequel are self-contained mini-series, but once the show is being commissioned indefinitely and has multiple seasons, you're opening a can of worms.

I'd personally love to vote for Forbrydelsen I and III, as they are again both self-contained mini-series with only the lead character and her superior carrying over. There were in fact listed as three separate mini-series on IMDb until about 18 months or 2 years ago.

I think it is much easier to classify mini-series and their sequels with something like Prime Suspect where each mini-series is essentially a two-part TV film of 90 + 90 minutes.

Thanks for your input, guys. After giving this much thought (like five whole minutes), I'm leaning toward this definition of a miniseries:

1. All episodes directed by the same person/team
2. The series begins and ends with them, including in name

This keeps Riget eligible, but rules out True Detective, The Knick, The Killing, etc. Also, something like Winterbottom's TV version of The Trip would be eligible. And yes, I don't think the Prime Suspects are in question, as each installment is basically either a one- or two-part TV movie. They're even named like movies (i.e. Prime Suspect 2, Prime Suspect 3).

Would that ban something like Band of Brothers which is directed by a variety of people with producer Hanks being more the guiding body or is that why you phrased it 'team'?

knives wrote:Would that ban something like Band of Brothers which is directed by a variety of people with producer Hanks being more the guiding body or is that why you phrased it 'team'?

Sort of? Band of Brothers is unambiguously a mini-series though. I guess I meant my rule to apply only to things residing in that gray area between series and mini-series.

Fair enough. Sorry for having you run hoops around this seemingly plain sighted issue.

What's the point distribution going to be for the 2010-2014 list? 25-1 I guess? 50-48-46... 4-2 would be pretty nice though for making the top places in a ballot worth significantly more than just actually making a ballot and would be consistent with the other lists.

So, I can still vote for the first season of Deadwood in the Pre-1920s Vol. 04 List, since Deadwood takes place before the 1920s, right?

TMDaines wrote:What's the point distribution going to be for the 2010-2014 list? 25-1 I guess? 50-48-46... 4-2 would be pretty nice though for making the top places in a ballot worth significantly more than just actually making a ballot and would be consistent with the other lists.

Scaling the points like that would have absolutely no bearing on the rankings. (All points would simply be doubled.) There would be an impact on the rankings if points were assigned 50, 49, 48...27, 26 (namely, films appearing lower on more lists would have an advantage over those appearing higher on less lists) though I see no point in doing that.

I think I'll pass on the 2000s list - unless you only need to post a Top 30

For the 2000s you would need to submit a top 50. I would be happy to tell you what 20 films to watch over the next three weeks to fill out a list.

swo17 wrote:For the 2000s you would need to submit a top 50. I would be happy to tell you what 20 films to watch over the next three weeks to fill out a list.

That's ok, thanks: I'll check out the various suggestions posted to see whether I can come up with a 50 that I'd be happy to stand over

swo17 wrote:

TMDaines wrote:What's the point distribution going to be for the 2010-2014 list? 25-1 I guess? 50-48-46... 4-2 would be pretty nice though for making the top places in a ballot worth significantly more than just actually making a ballot and would be consistent with the other lists.

Scaling the points like that would have absolutely no bearing on the rankings. (All points would simply be doubled.) There would be an impact on the rankings if points were assigned 50, 49, 48...27, 26 (namely, films appearing lower on more lists would have an advantage over those appearing higher on less lists) though I see no point in doing that.

Fair enough. 25 to 1 works best.

domino harvey wrote:So, I can still vote for the first season of Deadwood in the Pre-1920s Vol. 04 List, since Deadwood takes place before the 1920s, right?

You can only vote for certain episodes. Nothing will tell you which ones are eligible.

I hear Soi Cowboy is eligible in each decade because it's a masterpiece that resides outside of time.

domino harvey wrote:So, I can still vote for the first season of Deadwood in the Pre-1920s Vol. 04 List, since Deadwood takes place before the 1920s, right?

We really should have a forum inside joke FAQ; I'd recommend starting here, here and here. (Bonus points if you can guess all three links before clicking on them)

Snubbing Barmy from your recommendations is an injustice on the level of Do the Right Thing not getting an Oscar nod. (And I don't think I joined till after he was gone!)

mizoguchi5354 wrote:Snubbing Barmy from your recommendations is an injustice on the level of Do the Right Thing not getting an Oscar nod. (And I don't think I joined till after he was gone!)

Oh, Barmy! (cue laughtrack) The guy was totally insane, but we agreed on films more often than not (which was indeed disturbing).

(And remember that time Dave Sim turned up under an alias to defend the mental health of Dave Sim?)