Our Top 10's of 2002 -- Time To Throw Down / The HTF 2002 Film Awards (See Post #1) (1 Viewer)

[Vickie_M]

I hate making absolute lists, but I suppose I need to in order to get in on a voting process.

1. Punch-Drunk Love
2. Adaptation
3. Rabbit-Proof Fence
4. The Pianist
5. Frailty
6. Real Women Have Curves
7. Sunshine State
8. Chicago
9. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
10. Far From Heaven

Next 10 (in no particular order)

The Hours
Catch Me If You Can
25th Hour
Bowling For Columbine
Frida
Gangs of New York
The Good Girl
The Man From Elysian Fields
Minority Report
Solaris

I saw 77 different movies in the theater last year, not counting 2001 movies I saw at the beginning of the year (Iris, Ali, Black Hawk Down, etc.) and not counting movies I saw more than once.

 

[Winston Smith]

46 films seen.

My top ten list for 2002

1. Bowling for Columbine
2. Far From Heaven
3. Thirteen Conversations About One Thing
4. Changing Lanes
5. Punch Drunk Love
6. Gangs of New York
7. The Rules of Attraction
8. 25th Hour
9. About Schmidt
10. 8 Mile

 

[MichaelPe]

I see MBFGW as this year's Chocolat in that regard.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you on that one.
I loved "Chocolat" (it was #8 in my Top 10 of 2000), and thought it was a much stronger film overall. As you said, it received 5 Oscar noms, and I thought it was deserving of all of them. And, let's not forget that it had some amazing performances from its stellar cast (Juliette Binoche, Judi Dench, Alfred Molina, Carrie-Anne Moss, Johnny Depp).
I'm honestly stunned at the success of MBFGW, and even more shocked that it was nominated for an Oscar. Sure, I thought it was a very funny film, with average performances, and it had its cute moments... but that's as far as it gets. Does anyone here really think that it deserved a nom for "Best Original Screenplay"? I don't think so, and I can probably name 100 films from 2002 with better screenplays (don't worry, I won't name them).

 

[Vickie_M]

Does anyone here really think that it deserved a nom for "Best Original Screenplay"?

I don't. However, while mourning all the screenplays that didn't get in, I must say that I'm glad that it got some recognition, and I'm glad that the recognition had Nia's name on it. As someone who would give her soul to be a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, I'm thrilled, THRILLED I tell you, for Nia Vardalos. She went from guest spots on TV shows to an AMPAS member in one year, and it couldn't have happened to a nicer person. She never again has to worry about money, everyone knows her name, she's on the "A list" and everything that entails, she has a sure-fire hit TV show on the way, she gets freebies galore and, most importantly, in my eyes, she GETS TO VOTE on the Academy Awards. Talk about a Cinderella story! I wish people would just be happy for her as a person. Backlash is nasty.

 

[John Thomas]

I thought it was deserving of all of them

Well, obviously.
The point of the message was that it's praise from critics/Academy didn't translate into praise here on the HTF. The freshest incident of this in my mind was Chocolat, as I recall it not being one of the faves around here but praised by critics/Academy/Miramax.

 

[Matt Stone]

IIRC, Chocolot wasn't heavily praised by critics.

 

[Matt Stone]

Just checked at Rotten Tomatoes and Chocolat came it at a meager 61% with 104 reviews counted. Definitely not high critical praise.

Also as for MBFGW, I remember there being quite a bit of support for it on the forum. Edwin, Seth, and Tino were constantly urging me to go see it...

Also...I know that RT isn't a perfect indicator of anything, but it's the best critical compilation available, with quite a few reviews.

edited for spelling and the RT disclaimer

 

[Seth Paxton]

Yes, Chocolat was different from MBFGW in that it had a smaller but stronger contingency of fans. MBFGW seems to have done so well by striking the fancy of a wide range of groups, though none of them would consider it the best film of the year (AFAIK).

Watching Wedding again the other day I was considering all these dynamics and I'd have to say that Wedding succeeds for 2 specific reasons - entertaining supporting cast and some pretty fun writing. So seeing the script in the Oscar mix is okay with me. In fact, being able to sell what is basically formula as fun and/or fresh tells me that the script did have something to it.

But its tough to tell, it could just be that the performers are all so solid.


My biggest problem with Chocolat was that it was just Pleasantville all over again.

 

[MichaelPe]

True, but I guess we should also admit that 2002 was a much stronger year than 2000. Oscar noms are about selecting the year's five "best" in any given category, so I guess it's all relative. Perhaps if "Chocolat" had been released in 2002, it would've been ignored by the Academy.

 

[John Thomas]

To boil it down for those of you..
Link to 2000 thread re: Chocolat
"It also makes the Chocolat nomination seem that much stranger, I think."
Thanks.

 

[Brook K]

No changes to top 10's. I've up to 47 watched and 20 of the top 30.

 

[Arman]

.

 

[Dana Fillhart]

Just thought I'd get an update out there...
Not much has changed, just some film totals, mostly.
The Top 30 of Our Top 10 of 2002
Contributing, Qualifying Members: [COLOR= gold]77[/COLOR]
[SIZE= 8pt]Includes all member updates through [COLOR= gold]18 Feb 2003 2 PM[/COLOR]#TitleTotal ScoreFractional Weighted TotalTop 10 List Appearances :
2002 Film List AppearancesWeighted AverageUnweighted Average01The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers36941.6051 : 607.244.7902Minority Report27833.6044 : 586.323.6103Punch-Drunk Love26532.1639 : 506.793.4404Gangs of New York199.524.6034 : 515.872.5905Adaptation.19925.2830 : 396.632.5806Sen to Chihiro no kamikakushi (Spirited Away)17321.3625 : 326.922.2507Bowling for Columbine16520.1424 : 376.882.1408Chicago16019.8526 : 366.152.0809Road to Perdition12516.6823 : 455.431.6210The Pianist12015.5819 : 246.321.5611Signs11615.7122 : 485.271.5112Y Tu Mamá También (And Your Mother Too)9813.6118 : 385.441.2713About Schmidt91.512.2318 : 365.081.1914Catch Me If You Can8513.0617 : 405.001.1015Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones839.5414 : 475.931.0816Solaris8011.4414 : 315.711.041725th Hour7712.0616 : 284.811.0018Far from Heaven748.7713 : 305.690.9619Insomnia668.9013 : 445.080.8620Frailty669.4314 : 414.710.8621The Hours639.4412 : 235.250.8222Metropolis579.1010 : 265.700.7423Hable con Ella (Talk to Her)477.4008 : 135.880.6124Changing Lanes425.6507 : 356.000.5525Thirteen Conversations About One Thing427.4009 : 304.670.5526About a Boy386.8310 : 323.800.4927Spider-Man387.2812 : 463.170.4928The Ring374.7108 : 354.630.4829Panic Room364.7408 : 434.500.4730Igby Goes Down344.4806 : 225.670.44Columns:

1. Position
2. Film Title
3. Total Score: A summation of each film's position in each contributor's top 10, with points given as follows: 1st place = 10, 10th place = 1. 10th place ties get .5 points per tie, limit to 2. All ties above 10th place get full points in each position, so long as the total points for the contributor does not exceed 55 (10+9+...+1); if that happens, remainder of tie will be divided like they were 10th place.
4. Fractional Weighted Total: The total combined fractional weighted scores of each contributor's film. Fractional weighted scores are computed for each contributor by the position of the film against the total number of films seen -- i.e., if a contributor saw 50 films, 1st place is 50/50 (1.00), 10th place is 41/50 (0.82). This gives more weight to lists with higher film totals.
5. Top 10 List Appearances : 2002 Film List Appearances: Ratio of a film's appearance in this thread to how many appearances it makes in contributors' lists in the 2002 Film List thread. This gives better value to the Weighted Average (and Total Score) numbers.
6. Weighted Average: Total Score divided by Top 10 List Appearances. This is considered weighted because it only takes into account those contributors who have the film in the top 10.
7. Unweighted Average: Total Score divided by total number of Top 10 contributors (currently 77).

Contributing members (if your name is not on here, and you are sure your list is complete, email me. Grey numbers beside names denotes less than 35 -- if you have only those listed here in the Top 10 list, then you didn't post a list in the 2002 Film List):
(30/30 : 232[/SIZE]) Jason Whyte
(27/30 : 172) Stephen R
(29/30 : 295) Bill Harris
(15/30 : 058) Matthew Chmiel
(28/30 : 130) Kevin Leonard
(30/30 : 117) Edwin Pereyra
(17/30 : 048) Matt Stone
(23/30 : 079) John Thomas
(06/30 : 010) Justin_S
(14/30 : 037) Travis_S
(08/30 : 011) Adam_S
(08/30 : 010) Doug R
(18/30 : 077) Derik Miner
(25/30 : 075) Jehan
(23/30 : 045) Rob Willey
(13/30 : 133) JohnS
(04/30 : 010) Doug D
(30/30 : 277) Michael Perez
(25/30 : 242) Scott Weinberg
(07/30 : 010) Dean DeMass
(26/30 : 086) Craig S
(20/30 : 069) John Spencer
(28/30 : 104) Kristian
(26/30 : 111) Chris_Richard
(16/30 : 064) ChuckDeLa
(18/30 : 137) Ruth_F
(06/30 : 010) Joel Turpin
(04/30 : 010) L. Anton Dencklau
(08/30 : 010) Dustin Woods
(07/30 : 010) AaronJB
(21/30 : 087) Nick Sievers
(07/30 : 010) Steve Lockwood
(27/30 : 196) Jason Seaver
(00/30 : 010) Brian Lawrence
(24/30 : 069) NickNC
(09/30 : 010) Larry Sutliff
(15/30 : 043) Bill J
(04/30 : 010) Rob P S
(30/30 : 133) Kirk Tsai
(07/30 : 010) Dome Vongvises
(08/30 : 010) Kami
(21/30 : 054) Lowell_B
(05/30 : 010) Damin J Toell
(09/30 : 010) Paul Case
(15/30 : 054) Scott_MacD
(16/30 : 063) Joshua_Y
(25/30 : 064) Dana Fillhart
(04/30 : 010) Malcom R
(08/30 : 010) JonZ
(08/30 : 010) PatrickL
(27/30 : 216) Mark Pfeiffer
(13/30 : 057) Andrew Schwarz
(09/30 : 010) JonBoriss
(08/30 : 010) MikeRS
(09/30 : 010) Steven Lay
(09/30 : 010) Pat Ford
(09/30 : 010) Fred Bang
(13/30 : 034) Chuck Mayer
(04/30 : 010) Martin Fontaine
(10/30 : 010) Paul-Gunther
(10/30 : 010) Kevin Clemons
(06/30 : 010) Elizabeth S
(27/30 : 059) Arman
(03/30 : 010) JonathanG
(07/30 : 010) Marc_Savoie
(10/30 : 010) Barry Woodward
(09/30 : 010) LawrenceK
(08/30 : 010) Chris Harvey
(19/30 : 139) Mark Palermo
(08/30 : 010) Michael Costa
(05/30 : 010) steve jaros
(27/30 : 092) Seth Paxton
(26/30 : 098) Eric Howell
(06/30 : 011) Quentin
(20/30 : 047) Brook K
(07/30 : 010) Vickie_M
(08/30 : 010) Winston Smith
Non-qualifying members:

• Declan, LennyP - List can only contain 2002 FILMS (there were a few other people with one or two platform-pushover titles, which I've let go for the time being)
• Angelo.M - Must have 10 titles in the list, and at least 35 seen from 2002
• Luc D - You'll need an order to your list)

 

[MichaelPe]

Dana,
I guess it's just a typo, but shouldn't Bill Harris have 302 movies next to his name (and 30/30 films seen)? After all, he is the "2002 List Leader".

 

[Dana Fillhart]

Michael,
I've mentioned it a few times, but it never hurts to repeat it
Lots of members have TWO lists in their 2002 Film List (myself included) -- one alphabetically, one by rating, and sometimes one by date seen. Often there are discrepancies between the two lists.
In Bill Harris' case, I literally copied and pasted his *RATING* list, because that list required less editing on my part -- if I had grabbed his alphabetical list, I'd have to manually go through every title and get rid of his extraneous information. True to the Programmer's Credo, I took the lazier route
Once I have a member's full list of titles, I go through them and ensure each title matches the "standard" title (i.e., "Hable con Ella (Talk to Her)" instead of just "Talk to Her"). I toyed with the idea of having a master list of films, and just having a 1 or a 0 in each row, going across the columns for each member. You'd think that'd be programmatically easier, but it turns out to be a nightmare for updates -- when members update their lists, there is no consistency in how they do it, so I have to manually go through the lists for each "Last edited by" that fits the dates I'm looking for, and pick out each new title, and add it to the spreadsheet. Doing it by name is surprisingly (or maybe not so surprisingly) FAR faster than if there was one master list of titles and "checking off" if the person has seen it.
For the 2003 titles, I eventually plan on having a website that members can come to and check off which ones they've seen, and get an HTML output of their choosing to insert in the 2002 Film List thread. Due to interfering influences (read: my day job ), that's been put on a back burner temporarily, but I hope to get it started this weekend.
Now...back to Bill Harris: He has 302 films in his alphabetical list, but only 295 titles in his rating list. I could go through and try to find the 7 missing ones (one of which I'm sure is in our top 30 ) but there are a number of members who have this problem, and I'd rather they do the honors of synching their lists. However, since he's our official leader in the cause, I'll give him a break The next update should reflect his total of 302.
Hope that clears up any confusion!

 

[Dana Fillhart]

P.S.,

Bill's missing titles in his rating list are:

Who is Cletus Tout?
Welcome to Collinwood
The Wild Thornberrys Movie
Sweet Home Alabama
Gangs of New York
Formula 51 (The 51st State)
8 Femmes (8 Women)

 

[MichaelPe]

No problem Dana... with all the tedious work you've been doing here, I didn't even realize that you had time for a job.

For the 2003 titles, I eventually plan on having a website that members can come to and check off which ones they've seen, and get an HTML output of their choosing to insert in the 2002 Film List thread. Due to interfering influences (read: my day job ), that's been put on a back burner temporarily, but I hope to get it started this weekend.

Well, maybe I can help with this part. Right now, I currently use an MS Access database that I created for managing my film list. It makes it so much easier to make updates, because I simply enter the name of the film in a form (and rating/IMDB#... the date is inserted automatically), and the HTML source for my alphabetically-sorted table is generated instantly. It didn't take me very long to program, but it saved me lots of time in the long run. If there's an easy way of porting my code into a web-based interface, then I can maybe work on that when I have some free time.

 

[Dana Fillhart]

Michael,
That's a pretty cool thing to have, but I'll be needing to do a little more with it. I intend to use it to manage both the 2003 Film List (and the Top 10 that'll come at the end of the year) and the 2003 Box Office totals. I usually get my titles from RottenTomatoes.com I know it's not complete, so I'll also provide a form for members to fill out to recommend new titles.
Too bad IMDB (or Box Office Mojo or RT for that matter) doesn't have a web service to download info in XML form, that'd make life a LOT easier. No matter what, the input of 2003 titles will be a manual process, but at least it only has to be done once for each new title.
Also, each member tends to have his or her own wants and needs for output style. I like to have a table by date seen and then a table by rating. Some like to do their ratings by 4 or 5 stars, by 1-10 scale, or percentile. Some include director information, some include theatres seen. My intention is to provide a list of stylesheets (XSLT) that will allow a member to choose how they want the data transformed -- there'll be a "standard" output ("Just list the films with my ratings"), some fancier ones ("Give me my list of films, sorted by date seen, in table format"), and then I'll provide customized stylesheets for each member that wants one. I'm sure you, Seth, and a few others (including myself) will sign up for that
The ultimate goal is to have a standardized list of films and a central place to manage/track them by member, so that we can provide any kind of stats we want on which films are the most popular with which groups of members.
I know, it sounds bold (or maybe a pipe dream ) but I hope to at least try it and see if it works. After all, I'm a developer at heart -- I love tinkering with code -- and I also love stats!

 

[Brook K]

No list changes, but Changing Lanes makes 48 seen and 21 of the top 30.

 

[MichaelPe]

The ultimate goal is to have a standardized list of films and a central place to manage/track them by member, so that we can provide any kind of stats we want on which films are the most popular with which groups of members.
I know, it sounds bold (or maybe a pipe dream ) but I hope to at least try it and see if it works. After all, I'm a developer at heart -- I love tinkering with code -- and I also love stats!

Wow!! That would be insanely cool!