New Game: The Best By The Best

[Reza]

So it WAS rather simple after all. Hooray, I'm not a complete moron!

Count me in.

I also feel that a film should be included in the year it was originally released in its country of origin. I find it absurd that Limelight and Tokyo Story fit into 1972 just because the films were released in America (or L.A.) that year. Both films should belong to the years they first came out.

[Big Magilla]

Yes.

[Reza]

So the nominees we get to add in each category could be from the actual list of nominees OR a film or performance from that year which was NOT nominated?



Edited By Reza on 1211998584

[OscarGuy]

It's actually really simple, Reza:

We present a year. In turn order, you add a nominee to each of the list categories. That's it. The rest of our discussion probably doesn't impact your decisions other than how we determine release dates.

[Reza]

I would like to play but as with the other game just trying to understand what it is all about makes me want to run in the opposite direction.

Sorry but reading all your posts has made me confused. Don't understand the game at all.

I guess I'm out on this one. Penelope's game is simple so I'll just stick to that (in between bouts of computer problems).

[Big Magilla]

I'll play.

[FilmFan720]

Two games is enough for me...I'll pass here. Have fun, though.

[rudeboy]

I'll play.

[OscarGuy]

All right. Who wants to play?

And, I agree that if we don't have enough players to make 10 selections in each category, we should take turns until we have 10 in each.



Edited By OscarGuy on 1211984198

[Big Magilla]

Then it's probably not worth the bother.

[OscarGuy]

I would say it would take up a pick to nominate a second film for an actor.

[Big Magilla]

Instead of nominating actors separately for different roles couldn't we just list more than one film for an actor either in the first place, or by the next person?

In the example given, which is 1967, not 1968, I nominate Sidney Poitier for In the Heat of the Night, Penelope adds To Sir, with Love to my nomination and adds another actor of his choosing, or I could nominate Sidney for Heat, Sir and Guess Who's Coming to dinner in the first place.

However, I would suggest that multiple nods be used sparingly. For example, in the days when it was common for actors to appear in five films a year, only one or two of them may be award worthy so we should nominate someone only for perforamcnes that we feel have particular merit and not for everything they appeared in during that year.

An example of the latter: in 1956, Deborah Kerr had high profile roles in The King and I, Tea and Sympathy and The Proud and Profane. While she was luminous in the first two, she was merely good in the third, so I would want to nomiante her only for the first two.

[OscarGuy]

Well, I don't see a problem with that. After all, we aren't using Oscar's rules. And I always thought it silly that Composers, Cinematographers, Art Directors, etc, could get double nominations, even directors, but actors couldn't.

[Penelope]

True, we don't want fights and hurt feelings.

Would performances be able to be nominated for different performances in the same year? Say Magilla selects Sidney Poitier in In the Heat of the Night for Best Actor 1968, would I still be able to select Poitier for To Sir With Love?

[OscarGuy]

I think we should just make it a list. In essence, you would be allowign people to say their choices suck more than others when we are trying to be all-inclusive with this specific game. Of course, that won't stop any of us from critiquing someone else's choices, but at least it would make everyone's choices Equal in Stature.