Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Mar 1, 2006 20:05:24 GMT
While I agree completely with your arguments so far (though remain in an ultimately exhausted, deflated mood with all the pedantic chimes it's kicked off), I can't really argue with the copyright given at the end of the credits. To me, a film isn't finished being produced until it's fully edited. Since there's no real equivalent to a painter's signature on the piece, the closest we can get to defining a film's production date is surely its own credits?
I mean, on the Eternal Sunshine credits, does it have a separate date for production, and then another one for copyright?
Anyway, I don't particularly hold any interest in these awards now. Like I said, I agree with your theories on the audience-author relationship and whatnot, but this is verging on making filmwatching a chore for me.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 1, 2006 20:19:49 GMT
I thought films were copyrighted immediately upon completion, but they're not. Often they sit in studio vaults for months, even years, before they're finally tended to, copyrighted only as they're prepped for release. It takes some research to find out when the film was actually finished, but it's not usually too difficult. Filming dates, of both the film itself and the director's subsequent project, are indicators. Submission deadlines for debuts at various festivals are definites. Then web searches for the title with year dates attached turn up all sorts of information. There will always be grey areas, but there will be with copyrights, too - unless it's the legal information itself you're after. It's obviously easier to defer to IMDb, but, well... call it pedantry or devotion. It's probably both.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Mar 1, 2006 20:25:53 GMT
Devotion's one thing, and while I like to be accurate, I've never really cared for knowing at will the exact dates of texts, be it my favourite film, book, album or whatever. Unless it has some kind of political aside, or whether I'm empathising with a film which is by today's standards dated, I never take it into consideration anyway, outside of these (otherwise) annual awards.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 1, 2006 20:30:13 GMT
Well, I wouldn't be expending massive amounts of time trying to figure out if Gondry did any editing in the first week of January. It was enough for me to scroll down here and make the assumption that it didn't take nine months to wrap post.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 1, 2006 21:31:24 GMT
Anyway, look, I don't want to feel as though I've sabotaged these awards. We can't all take our votes from different lists. Capo, yours is based on copyright dates, but Omar's and Vercetti's are, I assume, taken straight from IMDb's release information. If I then take mine from an even shorter list of production dates, this becomes completely arbitrary and uneven. That's all I was saying, and I'm sorry to have caused a fuss.
As I said, I'll go along with whatever. So is it copyright dates?
Maybe, despite my objection, it should be IMDb. Just for ease's sake.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 3, 2006 2:58:25 GMT
I don't know if there's been a walkout or if this is still happening, but these are my votes, dates taken from IMDb.
BEST FILM Good Night, and Good Luck. King Kong Last Days Where the Truth Lies Wolf Creek
BEST DIRECTOR David Cronenberg, for A History of Violence George Clooney, for Good Night, and Good Luck. Terrence Malick, for The New World Atom Egoyan, for Where the Truth Lies Greg McLean, for Wolf Creek
BEST MALE PERFORMANCE Heath Ledger, for Brokeback Mountain Bill Murray, for Broken Flowers David Strathairn, for Good Night, and Good Luck. Michael Pitt, for Last Days Colin Firth, for Where the Truth Lies
BEST FEMALE PERFORMANCE Maria Bello, for A History of Violence Michelle Williams, for Brokeback Mountain Rachel Weisz, for The Constant Gardener Naomi Watts, for King Kong Alison Lohman, for Where the Truth Lies
BEST FEATURE DEBUT Me and You and Everyone We Know Wolf Creek
BEST CINEMATIC EXPERIMENT Grizzly Man King Kong Last Days Sin City The Wild Blue Yonder
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY Jim Jarmusch, for Broken Flowers Lars von Trier, for Dear Wendy George Clooney, Grant Heslov & Fred W. Friendly, for Good Night, and Good Luck. Werner Herzog, for The Wild Blue Yonder Greg McLean, for Wolf Creek
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY Frank Cottrell Boyce & Michael Winterbottom, for A Cock and Bull Story (from the novel by Laurence Sterne) Josh Olson, for A History of Violence (from the graphic novel by John Wagner & Vince Locke) Larry McMurtry & Diana Ossana, for Brokeback Mountain (from the short story by Annie Proulx) Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens & Peter Jackson, for King Kong (from the original screenplay by James Creelman & Ruth Rose) Atom Egoyan, for Where the Truth Lies (from the novel by Rupert Holmes)
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY Robert Elswit, for Good Night, and Good Luck. Roger Deakins, for Jarhead Harris Savides, for Last Days Emmanuel Lubezki, for The New World Will Gibson & Brandon Trost, for Wolf Creek
BEST EDITING Peter Christelis, for A Cock and Bull Story Geraldine Peroni & Dylan Tichenor, for Brokeback Mountain Jay Rabinowitz, for Broken Flowers Richard Chew, Hank Corwin, Saar Klein & Mark Yoshikawa, for The New World Susan Shipton, for Where the Truth Lies
BEST ORIGINAL SCORE Howard Shore, for A History of Violence Gustavo Santaolalla & Marcelo Zarvos, for Brokeback Mountain Richard Thompson, for Grizzly Man James Horner, for The New World Mychael Danna, for Where the Truth Lies
RETROSPECTIVE AWARD: BEST OF 2004 2046 Before Sunset Bin-jip 3-Iron Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind Vital
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Mar 3, 2006 3:23:30 GMT
My nominations:
BEST FILM The Constant Gardener A History of Violence Match Point The New World Syriana
BEST DIRECTOR Woody Allen for Match Point David Cronenberg for A History of Violence Stephen Gaghan for Syriana Terrence Malick for The New World Fernando Meirelles for The Constant Gardener
BEST MALE PERFORMANCE George Clooney for Syriana Ralph Fiennes for The Constant Gardener Philip Seymour Hoffman for Capote Viggo Mortensen for A History of Violence Mickey Rourke for Sin City
BEST FEMALE PERFORMANCE Scarlett Johannson for Match Point Laura Linney for The Squid and the Whale Naomi Watts for King Kong Rachel Weisz for The Constant Gardener Reese Witherspoon for Walk the Line
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY Woody Allen for Match Point Noah Baumbach for The Squid and the Whale Dan Futterman for Capote Stephen Gaghan for Syriana Jim Jarmusch for Broken Flowers
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY Robert Benton and Richard Russo for The Ice Harvest William Broyles Jr. for Jarhead Jeffrey Caine for The Constant Gardener Steve Martin for Shopgirl Josh Olson for A History of Violence
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY Cesar Charlone for The Constant Gardener Roger Deakins for Jarhead Robert Elswit for Syriana Emmanuel Lubezki for The New World Robert Rodriguez for Sin City
BEST FILM EDITING Richard Chew, Hank Corwin, Sarr Klein, Mark Yoshikawa for The New World Ronald Sanders for A History of Violence Claire Simpson for The Constant Gardener Tim Squyes for Syriana David Tedeschi for No Direction Home: Bob Dylan
BEST ORIGINAL SCORE Alexandre Desplat for Syriana James Horner for The New World Alberto Iglesias for The Constant Gardener Jina Sumedi for Paradise Now John Williams for Munich
BEST DIRECTORIAL DEBUT Shane Black for Kiss Kiss Bang Bang Stephen Gaghan for Syriana Miranda July for Me and You and Everyone We Know Bennett Miller for Capote
BEST EXPERIMENT Robert Rodriguez for Sin City Gus Van Sant for Last Days
RETROSPECTIVE AWARD: BEST OF 2004 Before Sunset Closer Crash Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind Winter Solstice
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 4, 2006 0:38:28 GMT
Don't you have Retrospective 2004 nominations?
IMDb lists Keane as 2004, by the way.
|
|
Pherdy
Ghost writer
Posts: 596
|
Post by Pherdy on Mar 4, 2006 19:12:38 GMT
considering film as a form of art that purely is a tad naive maybe, since cinema is a commodity, an entertainment form at first (that's how "cinema" made it's bones anyway). it's awful how nowadays some films are considered a product to the extreme, but that doesn't rule out more artistic films as not-commercial. ALL movies are made for a public. so release dates do matter. it's kinda pointless I admit to refer to release dates, for the mere fact every country has other dates. good point. one can compare this to famous paintings who are now assigned to the year of completion, regardless of when they were first exhibited, auctioned or even seen. however, when awarding films at the end of the year in competition to each other choosing the best of that year, I don't think you can omit the more audience-based approach of when a film is completed (and in that sense even, a film isn't completed when the shooting or editing is done, but when the marketing is, despite your disagreement) in comparison to an artist-approach. seeing film as an artform that's finished when the artist is done with it, and then judging on it in competition to other films over a period (the calendar year) seems like a paradox. and even if wetdog's arguments are logical, which they are from his point of view, no doubt, it would be silly for folks like us to follow that approach of judging a film in it's year of production, for the whole reason it's usually released later. that way, about half the films we see can't compete in the annual awards, but only in the retrospective awards. so it would be more pragmatic anyway to use one source, be it copyright dates or Imdb or whatever PS nice to see more lists
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 4, 2006 19:48:14 GMT
considering film as a form of art that purely is a tad naive maybe I am, of course, aware that cinema is an industry. But, to me, it's art. So, for me, the most important communication is between me and the artist, and the most important time period I could attach to the art is the time when it first came into existence, when the artist completed it. The fact that producers, manufacturers, distributors, advertisers, exhibitors and the like have to interject in the middle of that conversation is unpleasant, but, well, hopefully the art is eventually worth it. Maybe all art is ultimately defined by its consumption. But the general, or even limited, release of a film doesn't herald its first arrival before an audience. It's been watched dozens of times before it's ever released. So the marketing is just a technicality. When it happens isn't important, it has no impact on what the art eventually becomes or what it was intended to be. You could make a film, and never bother releasing it, maybe show it to a few friends, or just watch it yourself. It'd still be complete, as long as it had been watched. Don't you think? Ah, a very good point. I agree.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Mar 5, 2006 0:57:15 GMT
Don't you have Retrospective 2004 nominations? IMDb lists Keane as 2004, by the way. Sorry about that. I'll correct it and add the Retrospective nominations.
|
|
|
Post by Vercetti on Mar 5, 2006 0:59:41 GMT
Wet Dog, I wouldn't go by IMDB or Yahoo's dates. Memento I believe is listed as 2001 when it's actually 2000.
I click the "Release Dates" tab to find this information out rather then the normal dates.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 5, 2006 1:29:00 GMT
Thanks, Omar.
Vercetti, IMDb lists Memento as 2000. As far as I know, the year they suffix the title with is the earliest year that appears when you click the Release Dates tab. I think that's their format. Though there could well be some oversights, I've never come across any.
|
|
|
Post by Vercetti on Mar 5, 2006 1:33:44 GMT
Ah, well I remember it as 2001, it must've changed
|
|
|
Post by Vercetti on Mar 5, 2006 5:51:42 GMT
I updated with Best Actor/Actress, unless it's too late now.
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Mar 5, 2006 23:11:06 GMT
When is the voting going to begin? or is it going on in some other thread?
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 5, 2006 23:18:21 GMT
Soon.
We're counting.
|
|
Pherdy
Ghost writer
Posts: 596
|
Post by Pherdy on Mar 8, 2006 10:36:06 GMT
can't wait, all this discussion didn't really speed up the process I'm afraid and the Oscars inspired me to make surprise votes!!
|
|
Pherdy
Ghost writer
Posts: 596
|
Post by Pherdy on Mar 12, 2006 13:22:31 GMT
quite exciting: this year's FCM Awards seem non-Oscarry unlike recent years (I still regret Lost In Translation's win ), but I'm surprised at the high number of mainstream films nominated, though I totally agree with that because those films were above par last year while the more artistic films of 2005 dissapointed (the Oscar-films were mediocre at best). King Kong and Batman Begins were snubbed at the Academy Awards!! films I couldn't see before voting: Last Days, New World and Syriana.
|
|