The voting is frozen for now, Lucas. DiB’s on much-earned holiday.
All this talk about voting against films one has not seen sounds fairly stupid to me. If I want to participate on a film poll on a film board, I should watch the films. If I’m not interested, I can decide not to participate. Otherwise I could ask my little sister to choose 3 films randomly each round and put a plus and two minuses next to them. Because: POLARIS FORGOT TO MENTION THAT I SHOULDN’T LET SOMEONE ELSE USE MY ACCOUNT: Boy, oh boy, this Polaris – sure forgot a lot of things to mention….
Seriously: What’s the problem of one twoor even ten films remaining in the list for a long time that no one has seen. In the end (and that’s what counts – not like some seem to think at what time in the game a film is dropped), when there are only 50 or 60 films remaining, each of us has the possibility to decide to watch some of the films, he or she hasn’t seen. If there would be serious availability issues, I would understand. But as it stands all of the films currently in the list can be easily bought or downloaded. I don’t have the money, time, or I have scrouples to download aren’t actual arguments, as in one or another form GETTING ACCES TO a film is always a necessitiy for anybody so one can actually watch a film.
Personally I also have to say, that if I continue this game and continue to find people who vote against films without having seen them I will actually start to vote for films I haven’t seen. Because I won’t need to think much, as I will be simply always voting against the films those individuals try to promote.with their plus vote, subsequently automatically trying to give as many films that aren’t supported by those individuals the benefit of the doubt. Just my two cents. ;-)
BTW: John Derek’s “Tarzan” is a masterpiece. And I don’t mean that ironically or hinting at some of its trash-qualities, but regarding the film as a serious offer. As you can see from this alone, opinions do differ a lot even between cinefiles, and just because I think one film does absolutely not belong in any top 20 whatsoever, it doesn’t mean that is actually a fact that has any consensual meaning. Think about that, when talking about “obscure films that only one person has seen possibly ending up in the final 20”. Jeez, …
For the record I have yet to vote against anything I haven’t seen, and I would like to personally avoid voting for things I haven’t seen for as long as possible (and am indeed watching some of the stuff on the list). So yeah, that’s the context for my reply..
“Boy, oh boy, this Polaris – sure forgot a lot of things to mention….”
When we started talking about this very issue earlier in the game Polaris explicitly advocated voting against films one hasn’t seen. He’s even done it himself, a lot.
" Think about that, when talking about “obscure films that only one person has seen possibly ending up in the final 20”."
Except this is the “Mubi Forum Users’ Top 20”. Not just the “Top 20”. It’s meant to be the top 20 films that best represent the taste of those users who use the Mubi forums. If only one person on the forum has seen a film the it cannot possibly represent the taste of the hundred or so individuals who are voting in this event. Yes it may still be one of the best films ever made, but it is not one of the best films to represent the forum’s taste.
So Polaris is railing in later stages against voting down films one hasn’t seen for what reason?
It seems I’m missing something…
If The creator of this competition actually created it with the idea of voting against films one hasn’t seen in some later stage of the game, I’m taking my leave from such a negative (in my opinion) view on a competitive event. Sounds to me a lot like shooting the marathon runners one doesn’t want to arrive at the finish line. Lol.
As I said – looking at the list right now, a film ending in the final 20 only one person has the possibility to see is impossible. So this discussion is useless, because as it stands of course the list can and should represent MUBI Forum tastes. Thus my dismissal of people who still claim that they “don’t want a film no one has seen ending up in the top 20” as their “explenation” doesn’t serve any purpose than to wrongfully claim such an occurance is (still) possible.
And here we part ways. If it gets to the point where I haven’t seen a film that appeals to me, even if I haven’t seen it, than I’m going to vote against it. I haven’t had to resort to this yet (I just started voting 2 rounds ago.). Cecil brings up a great point: If this is supposed to represent our collective taste than how can we allow a film that we haven’t even seen be a part of the Mubi “best of”. I’m sure there are films (not necessarily those on this list) that only one of us participants have seen and if that person votes the film +2 every round than there is no stopping it from being #1 on our list. That’s not good. This game is only fun if we all are responsible for the final outcome. I, too, am going to watch a few films while Polaris is away but if it comes down to me either voting against a film I love or voting against a film I haven’t seen I’m obviously going to vote the latter or not vote at all. Seriously, what’s the fun in participating in a game if you can’t see it out to the end?
…this discussion is useless…
Yes. Please stop. We have gone through this discussion multiple times and there is no consensus. The only thing we can agree on is that Polaris set the game up to allow for voting against films that you haven’t seen. It is up to you to decide how you will vote, though. If you feel it is a matter of personal integrity to have seen the films you are voting for and against – great! More power to you. But the game itself does not demand this of us and therefore it is time to let the issue die.
You seem to misunderstand me. When I wrote “this discusision is useless”, I was referring to the one pointed out by my sentence before that, meaning that it is useless to discuss a possibility of a film entering the final 20 no one can see, when there is clearly no indication of such a film on the list (meaning that part of Patapons “explanations” of this under my post are “useless”). I have nothing against discussing something per se. ;-)
I guess it is rather difficult to understand what I’m saying at times, but I feel all those people who are constantly pointing out that they don’t want a film only one person can see to end up in the final 20 AS PARTIAL EXPLANATION for voting against films they haven’t senn, like somebody saying he doesn’t want Martians invading his home, thus he is always putting milk in the refrigerator. It doesn’t make sense – since there is no connection between the (hypothetical) possibility of such a film creeping up, against the visible fact, that this isn’t the case.
BTW: I’m not complaining that the mod allowed voting against films one hasn’t seen, but that it seems he has somehow endorsed this. If it is so I wouldn’t want to participate. Allowing for something, means also allowing to disagree with that. I wasn’t personally attacking anybody, just saying that I find voting against films one hasn’t seen as stupid, and that under those circumstances (and keeping with the rules), I will purposefully vote against films those people who vote against films they haven’t seen are promoting. As Arbitrary as this may appear, I wasn’t trying to start a (new) discussion, but just expressing my standpoint, so there would actually be no hard feelings when I start acting this way (something I expect to happen). What I was discussing was solely the above pointed out “argument” that “we can’t let a film in the top 20 nobody can see”, which is in one way in itself a logical statement, but which unfortunately (regarding the current top 250) doesn’t make any sense. And as I feel it is used solely to further “explain” why one is voting against films one hasn’t seen, I get offended by its stupidity.
Whoa I wasn’t referring to any particular film on this list its the concept of voting down a film that doesn’t represent you that I’m discussing. That “one film” I mentioned was a metaphorical one. Of course we don’t all have the opportunity to see these films but obviously all of them have been seen by at least one person and probably more. And is anyone actually voting down a film because they are upset that they don’t have access to it? That’s what I’ve gathered from what you’ve said but I don’t think that’s happening. Tell me if I’m wrong but in every case thus far voting against an unseen film has been because they don’t want it to represent them, personally. Of course not having access might have something to do with the fact that they haven’t seen it but doesn’t that speak for itself?
Btw did you mean to say “…that only one person has seen” or did you mean exactly what you said that “…only one person can see…” because, like I’ve said, no one is voting with spite towards non-distribution…And I hope you’re Martian analogy makes sense to someone else because you’ve just confused me.
Since a few people are considering watching some of the films in or near the top 20 while Polaris is away, if anyone wishes to watch Donkey in a Brahmin Village, let me know. I can provide a youtube link.
i do i do!!
Let’s try simplicity:
-I’m supposed to represent myself in this game.
-I haven’t seen some of the films on this list.
-I’m not going to vote up a film I haven’t seen because it doesn’t represent me.
-I’m going to vote down a film I haven’t seen because it doesn’t represent me.
-I’m going to vote for films I have seen because they represent me.
-I’m going to keep voting because this game does have merit.
-If you want to vote against my promoted films than go right ahead.
-I’m not going to announce when I vote down a film I haven’t seen so you won’t be able to act on your promise.
Anyone want to add to this?
Nope, sounds good to me. As your idea.
Mine goes something like this:
- I’m supposed to take part in a game
- it’s voting on films
- you have positive and negative votes
- If I don’t use a negative vote, doesn’t matter, films get voted down anyway
- I cannot absolutely say anything about a film I haven’t seen
- so why in the world should I vote it down ?
- This list is supposed to represent Mubis tastes
- so obviosly it can’t consist only of films I like
- so who cares if there are films in the final 20 I don’t know and have no intention (time, etc.) of seeing
- obviously someone (numerous ones, if it’s high up) must like it
- so I vote for films I like, and against films I don’t like and everything is cool
- other people have their own rules/ ideas / perceptions
- so maybe I can also change mine as I go along
- if i suppose somebody votes down a film he/she hasn’t seen, I am allowed to vote down the film they are promoting
- as I don’t like the concept of voting against films one hasn’t seen I’m not happy with the way things are evolving
- thus I will set up new rules/ideas/principles for myself, that make the game more fun
- so maybe I will start voting randomly and let my sister use the account
QUOTE: “And is anyone actually voting down a film because they are upset that they don’t have access to it? That’s what I’ve gathered from what you’ve said but I don’t think that’s happening. Tell me if I’m wrong but in every case thus far voting against an unseen film has been because they don’t want it to represent them, personally. Of course not having access might have something to do with the fact that they haven’t seen it but doesn’t that speak for itself?”
Yes, that’s the only thing that’s really bothering me. I have the suspicion that people are using their unwillingness to watch a film as an argument for excluding/trying to vote down a film. I’m not speaking of you, but I have the impression that with some people (may be only half a dozen or less, but it IS bothering me), it’s like they act a bit paranoid (very simplified):
-I haven’t seen a lot of the films on the list
- I have no intention seeing a lot of the films on the list
- surealy some of the titles must be totally obscure and unavailable
- it seems someone is sabotaging the “community” effort, and bringing in films only THEY like
- that’s not good, so I’ll try to vote down all that stuff i don’t know and haven’t seen, so the films I like stay in
The paradox is that if 20 of your films stay in, how are they going to represent the “community” and on the other hand, how can I suppose that some titles is totally obscure and no one can watch them, when they have many votes and are obviously liked by many (otherwise they would have been excluded long ago), as some actually try to watch more films while participating in this game.
Simply put: I see a negative approch that I absolutely don’t like because it seems based on assumptions that don’t make sense (what represents MUBI and what doesn’t)
I prefer people going into the game like this:
- I wonder how the outcome will be
- Hopefully one or two films I like will be there
- I will try to vote for them
- I wouldn’t like to have films I don’t like/I find unworthy, etc. on such a list
- so I will try to vote against those I don’t like
- If I haven’t seen a film I can’t say anything about it, so what’s the point voting against it (if films get excluded anyway?)
- If there are only films left I don’t know it doesn’t make much sense to continue participating
- so I will either watch some of the ones I don’t know to find something to promote or demote, or leave it to the others to vote (who have obviously proven that all those films that are on the list are more liked than those that are not on the list, simply because they have remained, and thus represent the community more faithfully)
But as I said in the above posts. I am just stating my opinion regarding the whole thing, I’m not trying to get anyone to agree with me. Obviously there are different opinions/tactics around, so as I have written at the beginning of this post, I will adapt my tactics in a way so that I still find fun participating in the game. And that just also means intuitivly trying to find people voting down films they haven’t seen, o vote down the films they are promoting.
You nailed it, WBA.
It’s not, for me, so much a question of representing my tastes, but as has been said, MUBI’s at large. Hypothetically, there could be a movie voted up by only one individual, but practically speaking any movie that keeps getting voted up is getting voted up because there are people – plural – who love it. How can I vote it down sight unseen, simply because I want the list to more closely resemble mine? How is that accurately representing MUBI’s tastes? It’s not my intention to represent myself, if the general tide of public opinion doesn’t accord with it. For that I have my own top 20.
POLARIS forgot to mention that we can drink Dr. Pepper while posting on this thread, but not Coca-Cola Classic or Pepsi
Such a majestic strategy. Too little time to retort.
I’ll be voting primarily for The Human Condition and In The Mood For Love (even though I’m predicting a short life span) and a few others, maybe Pastoral, depending on the round so when the time comes do what you have to do.
But if you vote mine down for kicks (which is basically saying “to hell with my opinion”) and vote up (or leave alone) a film that doesn’t represent you (i.e. a film that you haven’t seen) than why even play this game? That question was rhetorical; unless the rules of figures of speech don’t apply to you either in which case you may respond.
Or maybe bribery is in order: Entertain us and add an N between the W and B of your name and I’ll succumb to your whims. Kidding, of course.
“How is that accurately representing MUBI’s tastes?”
Because you’re only one person among many, so any representation of something that’s purely “your taste” is going to get proportionately diluted by the presence of others voting there own taste.
^ I might give Matt a slobbery kiss if he keeps this up.
i agree with Matt, but i won’t give him a slobbery kiss. maybe a film-noiresque nod of appreciation.
But in this case it’s not my taste I’m voting. I’m expressly voting against the taste of others – because I haven’t seen the film, so my own taste doesn’t enter the equation. To use your word, I’m diluting the general representation to a skewed proportion.
If everybody did the same, I suppose, we’d all cancel one another out as you say, but that’s not the way many people seem to want to play the game and it would be a pretty barbaric way of going about this activity, completely blocking out the aspect of sharing and discovery that should at the very least be at the back of our minds as we go about it – shouldn’t it?
If we all voted down films we haven’t see it would be much more accurate of our collective taste. Your own taste does enter into the equation. If the top 20 consists of films you don’t like or haven’t seen than whether you like it or not your tastes are being represented because you are a member of Mubi. If you would have contributed to at least one of those films’ removal from the top 20 than your tastes would be more accurately depicted. Of course its not as black and white as I make it seem with the vast number of members voting and how, individually, with only +2s and -1s, we hardly make an impact. But why keep me and others from voting this way if it makes sense and is not harming anyone (and feelings don’t count, we’re big boys and girls). As long as the voting isn’t skewed because of some childish need for revenge.
The ONLY issue I see with this is how do we know which films to vote down? If there are 30 films left and we’ve only see 10 but we like all of them then which of the remaining 20 do we give a -1? This is where research and makeshift process of elimination comes in to play. Or you just don’t vote at all. You could vote down Marketa Lazarova because you’ve seen another Vlacil that you don’t care for. You could vote down Tie Xi Qu because you don’t like long, “boring” cinema. You could even vote up Sansho the Baliff because Ugetsu is one of your favorite films and Mizoguchi is closer to you than the other directors. Whatever you do, do it in the name of self-representation.
Whatever you do, do it in the name of self-representation.
But even in the name of self-representation, you aren’t doing yourself or any other cinephile favors by voting down a film you haven’t seen. The only way this method of voting down films you haven’t seen serves self-representation is if you believe that you should stick to your favorite films as some immutable holy relics and never allow for an evolution of your aesthetic tastes.
What’s the point of this game? Promoting one’s favorite films is certainly a huge part of it and can be fun. But I’d like to think that it should serve as a stepping stone to exploring some films that haven’t gotten a lot of exposure. If one or two people are hell-bent on promoting a certain film, it might actually be because the film happens to be worthy of that kind of support. People seem to have the time to argue endlessly about the rules—or lack thereof—that allow for the voting down of films they haven’t seen, but God forbid they actually take the time out to watch something they haven’t been exposed to. I know it’s a novel concept. You can actually expand your cinematic horizons while simultaneously upholding the integrity and the point of the game. And then if the said film turns out to suck ass, you can vote it down with confidence.
One of the worst things one can do as an appreciator of the arts is to discredit a work you haven’t acquainted yourself with. That common sense caveat alone should override any other concerns.
I’ve never seen Avatar and certainly never plan on it, does mean I shouldn’t vote it down on principle alone?
final plea: watch some of the films from the top you haven’t seen, there’s plenty of time before the game ends. or do you not like watching movies other people think highly of?
my issue with Patapon’s suggestion about going based on directors is that directors you like aren’t infallible, directors you haven’t liked like so far don’t/didn’t necessarily only make films you won’t like. Examples: I couldn’t stand Wendy and Lucy but Meek’s Cutoff was my favorite film of 2010. I love Antonioni but hated The Passenger. I can’t decide the fate of something I haven’t experienced/analyzed.
Thank you Blue K.
ULI- fortunately you don’t have to worry about examples like Avatar outstripping good films on this site, so that doesn’t work as a point for or against anything I don’t think.
hey girlfriends, a wild suggestion:
- those who think that one shouldn’t vote down films they haven’t seen, DO NOT VOTE DOWN FILMS YOU HAVEN’T SEEN
- those who do not necessarily think that one shouldn’t vote down films they haven’t seen, VOTE DOWN FILMS YOU HAVEN’T SEEN IF YOU FEEL SO INCLINED
Obviously, Curtis, it’s not enough for people to be able to do what they want to do with our own votes, we want to tell others what to do with their votes. We’re all for expanding your cinematic horizons, but only if it means expanding them into mine.
Matt I’m not sure if that was directed at me but lets make it clear that I’m not expanding anyone else’s horizons into my own. In fact, if anything I’m looking for justification to be my own horizon.
I hate being dramatic over such a tedious issue which is why I rarely post anymore unless what I’m posting about is captivating enough (I swear this will be my last post on this argument).
Blue, of course you come along and start making sense. But…The favor I’m doing is expressing truth. The truth is that I haven’t seen many of the films listed and if we want this to be a true representation of our cinephilia than how is it benefiting anyone if I allow a film I have no connection with whatsoever to be voted above those films I cherish. Of course I’m speaking as a generic participant not myself in particular. So, while I’m not doing any favors to anyone else I am honestly depicting my current interests based on the films that I have been exposed to. In a sense, we are not voting at all. We are gradually and carefully arranging this list to our liking. Potential aesthetic evolution has no relevance when assessing our presently existing cinephilia.
Now, again, I have NOT yet voted against a film I haven’t seen (only voted in 2 rounds so far…I’m a late bloomer) and I don’t plan on it for a while. So don’t you dare accuse me of discrediting a film I haven’t seen or I’ll rip out your….whoa, who ho hoa there Pata, breath and relax. Sorry got carried away there. But Blue, your Utopian scheme of watching the films instead of arguing is nice and chivalrous and all but we all know that’s not gonna happen. Me personally, I’ll try and watch a few of the films why Polaris is away and some during my winter break from college but I can’t watch them all. So if the time comes when I have but one or two or no favorites left should I vote +2 to a film I haven’t seen or should I vote -1 or should I not vote at all? I say -1 for the sake of self-representation but I still don’t know where you stand. Hypothetically, would you say, “Sorry I can’t vote because I haven’t seen any of them” or “I’ll vote -1 to (insert unseen film) because I haven’t seen it and it doesn’t represent me”?
How about giving people the power to take a half point off any film they haven’t seen? But then we should be able to give half points to films we haven’t seen. Maybe three-quarters up or down to films we only saw part of. Or a proportion of a point equivalent to the length of the film we saw… (1/28 up or down for someone who only saw half an hour of Berlin Alexanderplatz for instance.)