- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
The Oscars 2080: Calculating the Cultural Consciousness
Posted on 2/25/13 at 11:25 am
Posted on 2/25/13 at 11:25 am
So people are upset over Argo. Let's figure out a new way to it (even though I agree with the choice). What might this look like?
Use a closed group of people schooled on film to create a rating system built on some key factors. I might use:
1. Film History Context
2. Perceived Future Importance
3. Quality
- Writing
-Editing
-Director
-Acting
- Etc.
Publish the formula and let it be a "Season" like the BCS (which worked people, it worked). As movies are released, ratings changed because our cultural perception changes with films released. Then maybe have a vote off for the larger Academy with the final 8 or so choices.
This would be epic, crazy fun.
I'm copyrighting that idea.
Get these guys involved: LINK or use Metacritic for aggregates in the formula.
Basically: Is it possible to mathematically track and understand cultural consciousness? I'm going to say yes, but others may disagree. Discuss.
Sub Question: But also, once we found a formula that worked, would it be mathematically possible to decipher the code and create the perfect film?
Use a closed group of people schooled on film to create a rating system built on some key factors. I might use:
1. Film History Context
2. Perceived Future Importance
3. Quality
- Writing
-Editing
-Director
-Acting
- Etc.
Publish the formula and let it be a "Season" like the BCS (which worked people, it worked). As movies are released, ratings changed because our cultural perception changes with films released. Then maybe have a vote off for the larger Academy with the final 8 or so choices.
This would be epic, crazy fun.
I'm copyrighting that idea.
Get these guys involved: LINK or use Metacritic for aggregates in the formula.
Basically: Is it possible to mathematically track and understand cultural consciousness? I'm going to say yes, but others may disagree. Discuss.
Sub Question: But also, once we found a formula that worked, would it be mathematically possible to decipher the code and create the perfect film?
This post was edited on 2/25/13 at 11:31 am
6
Posted on 2/25/13 at 11:29 am to Freauxzen
quote:
This would be epic, crazy fun
Posted on 2/25/13 at 11:30 am to Freauxzen
Need a playoff.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 11:31 am to CocomoLSU
Funny because it's true or not true?
If 1 billion people watched the Oscars, just think about adding a BCS formula to this.
Wait a second, I might have started World War III.
If 1 billion people watched the Oscars, just think about adding a BCS formula to this.
Wait a second, I might have started World War III.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 11:37 am to Freauxzen
Here are things I'm thinking about for variables:
We should look historically at really odd figures:
Credited Producers/Oscars Won
Writers/Oscars Won
I think there is something to this. I think, that there CAN be a way to measure a film's composition through certain outlets. Particularly Producers and Writers. Too many chefs in the kitchen? I wonder if there is a historical correlation to this.
Top Billed Actors Salary/Crew List Count (and/or Salary)
Time to Production/Time Before Release
Number of Scenes Cut/Number of Scenes
There has to be some interesting data there compared to Oscar wins.
We should look historically at really odd figures:
Credited Producers/Oscars Won
Writers/Oscars Won
I think there is something to this. I think, that there CAN be a way to measure a film's composition through certain outlets. Particularly Producers and Writers. Too many chefs in the kitchen? I wonder if there is a historical correlation to this.
Top Billed Actors Salary/Crew List Count (and/or Salary)
Time to Production/Time Before Release
Number of Scenes Cut/Number of Scenes
There has to be some interesting data there compared to Oscar wins.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 12:05 pm to Freauxzen
I guess I am the only wannabe numbers nerd.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 12:20 pm to Freauxzen
ESPN hates the Oscars.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 12:43 pm to Freauxzen
This reminds me of the scene in Dead Poet's Society where the students opened up their books and started reading about how to represent the greatness of a literary work on a graph. Robin Williams rightly told them to rip it out of their books.
I can't imagine this could ever be really put into practice. And if it were, just like teachers teach tests, studios would use whatever formula as a guidebook. And studios already tell the Academy what to nominate by the film's release date. Now they would tell them what should win?
It isn't a bad theory for speculation though. Now that I think about it, maybe you don't mean this literally. Maybe you are using the Serbian Jew Double Bluff to get us talking about what makes films great.
Hmmmm.
I can't imagine this could ever be really put into practice. And if it were, just like teachers teach tests, studios would use whatever formula as a guidebook. And studios already tell the Academy what to nominate by the film's release date. Now they would tell them what should win?
It isn't a bad theory for speculation though. Now that I think about it, maybe you don't mean this literally. Maybe you are using the Serbian Jew Double Bluff to get us talking about what makes films great.
Hmmmm.
This post was edited on 2/25/13 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 2/25/13 at 12:58 pm to Freauxzen
I think if it was based on numerous factors, most of which must not require the participation of the subjects, you could gauge it, though I don't think you could ever be absolutely precise.
If the mechanism required participation (e.g. The People's Choice Awards), you'd get another popularity contest between the self-chosen or simply, the kind of people who would take time out of their day to help determine the cultural significance of films. Maybe those are "educated" groups, but they don't ever represent the whole.
One thing's for sure. Film critics should be removed from the equation entirely. They're really nothing more than propaganda and academic masturbation.
If the mechanism required participation (e.g. The People's Choice Awards), you'd get another popularity contest between the self-chosen or simply, the kind of people who would take time out of their day to help determine the cultural significance of films. Maybe those are "educated" groups, but they don't ever represent the whole.
One thing's for sure. Film critics should be removed from the equation entirely. They're really nothing more than propaganda and academic masturbation.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 1:18 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Perceived Future Importance
This one would give people looking for an excuse an out to disqualify comedies, action movies, fantasy etc in favor of dramas.
And people are generally absolutely terrible at judging the future impact/relevance of a film. In short, this criteria (although well-intentioned) would not just be ineffective, it would be counter-productive.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 1:20 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Funny because it's true or not true?
Funny because I doubt many people would consider it "epic, crazy fun."
But I love your enthusiasm.
This post was edited on 2/25/13 at 1:20 pm
Posted on 2/25/13 at 1:39 pm to alajones
quote:
This reminds me of the scene in Dead Poet's Society where the students opened up their books and started reading about how to represent the greatness of a literary work on a graph
My first thought as well
Posted on 2/25/13 at 1:59 pm to alajones
quote:
This reminds me of the scene in Dead Poet's Society where the students opened up their books and started reading about how to represent the greatness of a literary work on a graph. Robin Williams rightly told them to rip it out of their books.
Well good point. But that depends on the purpose. I am strictly basing this argument on measuring cultural reflections, not necessarily the meaning of the work.
And second, we are already doing this arbitrarily by awarding "Best Picture," anyways. So he either agrees with Ethan Hawke, and this whole exercise is ridiculous, so he doesn't need to be in on the conversation, or he's right and we shouldn't be doing this at all.
Side Note: I have an MA in English, so either I have crapped on the graves of my literary heroes, or I'm just trying to bring order to complicated systems of ratings. Real artists aren't concerned with awards anyways, I'm not one, nor do I pretend to be.
quote:
I can't imagine this could ever be really put into practice. And if it were, just like teachers teach tests, studios would use whatever formula as a guidebook. And studios already tell the Academy what to nominate by the film's release date. Now they would tell them what should win?
Maybe run by an impartial third party.
quote:
It isn't a bad theory for speculation though. Now that I think about it, maybe you don't mean this literally. Maybe you are using the Serbian Jew Double Bluff to get us talking about what makes films great.
Red Handed.
I've picked up this conversation from time to time. I think there is an objective way to determine the quality of a piece of work, and I think the entire practice of art itself is partially based on figuring this out.
This post was edited on 2/25/13 at 2:00 pm
Posted on 2/25/13 at 2:01 pm to blueboy
quote:
I think if it was based on numerous factors, most of which must not require the participation of the subjects, you could gauge it, though I don't think you could ever be absolutely precise.
Agreed.
quote:
If the mechanism required participation (e.g. The People's Choice Awards), you'd get another popularity contest between the self-chosen or simply, the kind of people who would take time out of their day to help determine the cultural significance of films. Maybe those are "educated" groups, but they don't ever represent the whole.
But if the goal is partially to measure cultural consciousness, then they would be appropriate.
quote:
One thing's for sure. Film critics should be removed from the equation entirely. They're really nothing more than propaganda and academic masturbation.
Their impact, like that of BCS computers, should be minor. They do have a job to rate films, and I think Metacritic as an aggregated work, is a very good judge of popular tastes.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 2:03 pm to Freauxzen
quote:That's a tough one. Nude Descending a Staircase and much of Picasso look like hammered shite. But one time I saw an incredible sidewalk chalk that looked 3-D and incredibly real. I can't even remember that kid's name.
I think there is an objective way to determine the quality of a piece of work, and I think the entire practice of art itself is partially based on figuring this out.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 2:03 pm to CocomoLSU
quote:
Funny because I doubt many people would consider it "epic, crazy fun."
Ok fair enough, I'm a film nerd, admitted.
quote:
But I love your enthusiasm.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 2:14 pm to alajones
quote:
That's a tough one.
Absolutely. But I think it's a fun question to determine.
quote:
Nude Descending a Staircase and much of Picasso look like hammered shite. But one time I saw an incredible sidewalk chalk that looked 3-D and incredibly real. I can't even remember that kid's name.
I do think that while paintings are art, just like film, they are a different realm. Much like poetry, I think they are completely subjective.
I think the formula to determine the quality of a painting is far beyond that of a film even though a film has more pieces involved.
Think about the numbers involved in films:
Time: Length, Length of Original Cut, Time/crew member, time/word of script
Subgroups for people: Directors, Writers, Producers, Crew, Cast, etc.
Money: Cost, Gross Profits, Revenue, Costs/unit of production, etc.
Box Office Numbers, Box Office/Subgroup
I think there would be some fascinating comparisons and data points, but I am not skilled enough with numbers to figure that out.
I like words!
Posted on 2/25/13 at 3:48 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Publish the formula and let it be a "Season" like the BCS
I came close to replying to you in the other thread with this same analogy. Honestly I don't see how it couldn't be a better, much more objective evaluation system that the current subjective Oscar awards method currently in place.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 3:50 pm to davesdawgs
Right. I really don't believe this should determine the winners, honestly.
But having a third party run this to just parallel the Oscars and maybe give some awards based on it, isn't a bad idea.
Granted, this will never happen.
But having a third party run this to just parallel the Oscars and maybe give some awards based on it, isn't a bad idea.
Granted, this will never happen.
Posted on 2/25/13 at 4:29 pm to Freauxzen
quote:Sure, they'd be an addition to the whole equation, but no more or less than anyone else. Yes, the "intelligentsia" are often integral in raising awareness of certain films, but they are also very often just an echo chamber. Just because a film is artistically well crafted doesn't make it a good movie, much less "culturally significant." The latter has very little to do with film experts, regardless of how well-respected.
But if the goal is partially to measure cultural consciousness, then they would be appropriate.
quote:The critics so often get it wrong, I think they'd do more harm than good. The RT fan and critic meters are often at severe odds with each other, and the fans seem to get it right more often than the critics. The Hobbit, for example.
They do have a job to rate films, and I think Metacritic as an aggregated work, is a very good judge of popular tastes.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News