CaB's Favourite Films of the 21st Century - Voting

[greenman]

Personally I'm happy to make an exception and include TP: TR if everyone is ok with that. We don't need to make it some grand judgement on the worth of different forms or on the nature of this forum and I don't think this list on a small forum needs to be overly pedantic. If its going to end up in a running battle though with demands of more and more serial works should be included I don't see how it can really work.

Can't we just put Under The Skin 30 times in a row and be fucking done with it?

I'm guessing most of the early votes will be more us self important would be cinephile types end as were more likely to have wasted time compiling such lists beforehand, I'm guessing things will shift a bit with latter votes.

Hopefully one benefit of the voting system will be people can include whatever they want rather than any kind of tactical voting, if you have a favourite that isn't unlikely to get mentioned then putting it in your top 10 still probably gives it a good chance of inclusion unless the update for voting is much larger than I expect it will be.

[Bad Ambassador]

That's like telling a colourblind person to describe the differences between maroon and pink.  It's your remit, not his.

He, and you, are posting on a board with separate film and TV forums. This is not some cruel trap I've dreamt up to torment the artistic. It's something agreed by general consent. The Twin Peaks thread is in the TV forum.

As a highly successful producer of filmic, televisual, musical, literary and late-night public access vaporwave entertainment myself, all this categorisation malarkey exists more in the minds of critics and the audience than the people making it.  You just get a germ of an idea and follow it through, and then all these people muscle in on it, apply all these ethereal concepts to this thing you thought up.  Iunno, maybe there are brains which can't truck there not being a scaffold around things, and other (way sexier) brains that dig the chaos.

This is the single worst thing I've ever read. I bet even your pets think you're a wanker.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

This is not some cruel trap I've dreamt up to torment the artistic.

I would like to note again that the issue seems to be that I am entirely untormented by this, whereas you regard these distinctions very passionately.

[Sin Agog]

He, and you, are posting on a board with separate film and TV forums. This is not some cruel trap I've dreamt up to torment the artistic. It's something agreed by general consent. The Twin Peaks thread is in the TV forum.

This is the single worst thing I've ever read. I bet even your pets think you're a wanker.

What if your dick is actually wanking the rest of your body?!

[sevendaughters]

I'm not trying to pull rank or anything here, just adding my own experience, but I lecture in film and television and increasingly we're finding ourselves in the department having to reconfigure whether these distinctions mean anything. In the 1960s you can see that they're clearly operating in different realms but since HBO and the quality television revolution (not that it didn't exist before) you're seeing the same stars, cinematographers, directors, budgets, etc. in both film and television. And if you're going to gatekeep television, then where does internet fit in? It's an increasingly porous region. I consider Alan Clarke one of my favourite directors in the broadest sense of the word; he chiefly did television.

My suggestion is include whatever you see fit to include and keep disagreements to a thread about the non-overlapping magisteria of film, television, and the internet.

[EOLAN]

In addition to Twin Peaks: The Return I also threw in OJ Made in America as another TV series/film hybrid. Did get an Oscar mind you - so I feel more comfortable with that.

[sevendaughters]

In addition to Twin Peaks: The Return I also threw in OJ Made in America as another TV series/film hybrid. Did get an Oscar mind you - so I feel more comfortable with that.

similarly I nearly included Heimat 3, P'tit Quinquin, Finding Frances, and the Trial of Tim Heidecker.

[Bad Ambassador]

I might as well throw in the BBC version of War and Peace from a few years ago, as apparently it's a film if its total running time is long enough.

I don't see the point in having a poll of films and then allowing basically anything that's been on a screen.

[sevendaughters]

I might as well throw in the BBC version of War and Peace from a few years ago, as apparently it's a film if its total running time is long enough.

I don't see the point in having a poll of films and then allowing basically anything that's been on a screen.

You've established that thought a number of times and no one is shoving your arm up your back and making you pick something you don't consider a film. The distinctions are crumbling and you can grouse about it all you want. Your list remains a bastion of purity and generations of people who will self-identify with flaps of celluloid hanging from their shoulders will hail you for it.

[Bad Ambassador]

But I don't see the point in having a poll of films when things that are demonstrably not films are eligible. I'm not gatekeeping anything, and I know that my list is maybe less adventurous than others, but I still have no understanding why TP:TR should be considered a film. The separate circles representing film and television have started to overlap in this Venn diagram, meaning things like Heimat 3 or OJ: Made in America fall in the very small grey area in the middle, but no one has explained why TP:TR gets a pass.

People complaining about forcing things into boxes seem unaware of the irony that this whole thread is ultimately the process of putting a list of things in order. Structure is the process itself. I don't understand how you can have a poll of films and then suggest a TV series, which apparently gets a pass. It makes nonsense of the whole process.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

things that are demonstrably not films

this means nothing! How is Heimat 3 in the grey area and Twin Peaks: The Return not there? Where are we getting this from?

[sevendaughters]

People complaining about forcing things into boxes seem unaware of the irony that this whole thread is ultimately the process of putting a list of things in order. Structure is the process itself. I don't understand how you can have a poll of films and then suggest a TV series, which apparently gets a pass. It makes nonsense of the whole process.

No it isn't. It's the agglomeration of interpretation and the provocation of conversation. The process is the outcome. You're being artless and pedantic unnecessarily now, and inventing people decrying forcing things into boxes to suit your oblique goal of saying a person can't have an opinion that they manifestly can.

[Sin Agog]

You could equally say even though it got a re-editing job last year,  t'Other Side of the Wind is older than most of us.

[Bad Ambassador]

this means nothing! How is Heimat 3 in the grey area and Twin Peaks: The Return not there? Where are we getting this from?

Heimat 3 was released in cinemas and broadcast on television in its home country only a few months apart.

TP:TR has been made available to the general public in no format other than an episodic series on a broadcast network, its associated catch-up service and home video.

[Bad Ambassador]

No it isn't. It's the agglomeration of interpretation and the provocation of conversation. The process is the outcome. You're being artless and pedantic unnecessarily now, and inventing people decrying forcing things into boxes to suit your oblique goal of saying a person can't have an opinion that they manifestly can.

It's not a matter of opinion whether or not TP:TR is a television series.

You could equally say even though it got a re-editing job last year,  t'Other Side of the Wind is older than most of us.

It wasn't released until last year though. It wasn't even finished.

[chveik]

the irony is that the return is irredeemable crap

[Monsieur Verdoux]

Heimat 3 was released in cinemas and broadcast on television in its home country only a few months apart.

TP:TR has been made available to the general public in no format other than an episodic series on a broadcast network, its associated catch-up service and home video.

So it's just about distribution method? It's got nothing to do with the episodic form? Does that leave all Netflix films in the grey area as well? What about Alan Clarke's Made in Britain? Consigned to the grey area forvever? What purpose does any of this categorising serve?

[sevendaughters]

It's not a matter of opinion whether or not TP:TR is a television series.

It is a TV series that also appeared at #1 on the best film lists of Sight and Sound and Cahiers du Cinema.

[Sin Agog]

the irony is that the return is irredeemable crap

The Return isn't exactly my favourite Russian film, but irredeemable crap seems a bit harsh.

[BlodwynPig]

Bergerac
Heimat: The Women

[Cuellar]

Is Under the Skin good then? Started watching it on Netflix (don't know if it's still there) and got frustrated.

[Bad Ambassador]

So it's just about distribution method? It's got nothing to do with the episodic form? Does that leave all Netflix films in the grey area as well? What about Alan Clarke's Made in Britain? Consigned to the grey area forvever? What purpose does any of this categorising serve?

As I already said, it's distribution and format. Heimat 3 was intended as both a television series and a cinema release. TP:TR wasn't.

I would put films released on streaming services in the same category as DTV. It's still a movie, just on a different platform. It's different from broadcast television. I put The Other Side of the Wind in my top 10.

Made in Britain is a television film. Nothing wrong with that.

If you're going to have a film poll, and eligibility is not clear, you have to actually define it.

It is a TV series that also appeared at #1 on the best film lists of Sight and Sound and Cahiers du Cinema.

I disagree with their decision, as do many others.

[Sin Agog]

Is Under the Skin good then? Started watching it on Netflix (don't know if it's still there) and got frustrated.

It's good, but there were funnier sketches on Limmy's Show.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

These distinctions just seems to have nothing to do with the film 'text' itself. Twin Peaks: The Return shares the same production qualities and aesthetic coherence as Heimat, but it wasn't released in a theatre (even though it has been, by the way), so therefore the category bangs down regardless. Made in Britain could easily have been released in the cinema, but it wasn't, so therefore it gets defined in a certain way forever after. This stuff serves absolutely no purpose in terms of assessing aesthetic merit. It's absolutely meaningless.

[Small Man Big Horse]

1 - 10

Love Exposure
November
Mr Nobody
Holy Motors
Paddington 2
Shortbus
In The Mood For Love
White God
Synecdoche, New York
Amelie

11 - 20
Tangerine
Paprika
Four Lions
Crank 2: High Voltage
The Lego Movie
Punch-Drunk Love
A Town Called Panic
Being Frank
The Tale of The Princess Kaguya
Citizen Dog

21 - 30
Y Tu Mamá También
Mary and Max
The Wind Rises
Shaolin Soccer
The Royal Tenenbaums
The Hunt For The Wilderpeople
Kaboom
The Last Circus
The Nine Lives Of Tomas Katz
Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind

Caveats: This was a fucking hard list to make, the final ten especially saw some films I adore cut from it incredibly reluctantly. Also, if we were to include tv series which might be films then Twin Peaks The Return, Finding Frances, and Doctor Who - Day Of The Doctor would all have made the top 20, with the first two in the top 10. And I've probably forgotten something I love too, but I guess it's too late to change now.

[Cuellar]

My favourite film was when a man jumped out of his BMW parked on our road and had a slash against a wall in broad daylight. I said "Really?" at him, and he said "Yup, sorry".

[greenman]

But I don't see the point in having a poll of films when things that are demonstrably not films are eligible. I'm not gatekeeping anything, and I know that my list is maybe less adventurous than others, but I still have no understanding why TP:TR should be considered a film. The separate circles representing film and television have started to overlap in this Venn diagram, meaning things like Heimat 3 or OJ: Made in America fall in the very small grey area in the middle, but no one has explained why TP:TR gets a pass.

People complaining about forcing things into boxes seem unaware of the irony that this whole thread is ultimately the process of putting a list of things in order. Structure is the process itself. I don't understand how you can have a poll of films and then suggest a TV series, which apparently gets a pass. It makes nonsense of the whole process.

Your position does I think have the benefit that there is some concrete boundary to it even if it might be viewed as pedantic by some, I mean even on the net there is still pretty clearly a boundary between works sold in the manner of films and those sold in serial form. I don't think this divide is an unreasonable one to make for a poll given that this forum itself is divided and that as highlighted here we don't even have any kind of agreement on artistic boundary even at an academic level so whatever we go with is unlikely to please everyone.

I mean if were considering what might actually work beyond that and not derail the whole thing then the only alternative to me would seem to be acceptance of a difference but also of a small number of "grey areas". I think the poll could survive inclusion of a small number of these but if it becomes a running battle with people claiming the lack of inclusion of something like the Wire or the Sopranos as a deep insult I don't see how it can work.

At the end of the day of course this whole forum is divided along Film/TV lines still so is some form of division in poll really that great an anachronism? nothing to stop people doing a serial form poll in that sub forum. Plus indeed I'd hope the end result here would be more than just a ranking but a series of write-ups about each film maybe kept as a sticky?

[Bad Ambassador]

Made in Britain could easily have been released in the cinema, but it wasn't, so therefore it gets defined in a certain way forever after.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Besides, MiB was produced by a television company so it was never likely to get a cinema release in the UK. Some arthouse release in the US, maybe, but that wouldn't change that it was a film produced and intended for television.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

No I don't. This is the mistake you keep making. I don't have the TV=bad Film=art thing that you've clearly internalised. I simply think that the production and distribution context are extremely trivial in cases where merit is being assessed.

[Bad Ambassador]

No I don't. This is the mistake you keep making. I don't have the TV=bad Film=art thing that you've clearly internalised

You may not mean it or feel it, but your posts definitely read that way. In part because I don't understand why TP:TR can't be regarded as a television series. I don't know why it has to be recategorised because of some "artistic value" that doesn't apply to Edge of Darkness or The Singing Detective.