I was just kidding with the DTC one. Of course that is an extreme case and very unlikely to happen.St. Gloede wrote: ↑December 4th, 2022, 12:49 pmIs choosing to promote women and black directors political correctness? What then is choosing to promote classic Hollywood, Silents, Welles, Hitchcock, Tarkovsky, etc.?zhangalan wrote: ↑December 4th, 2022, 11:23 am I can accept that the tastes of the new gen critics are different from the older ones, but the problem with the new S&S list is that you can easily see how (heavily!) political correctness influence the outcome. Then you suspect one select the films not based on quality, but based on political correctness.
Also, what if someone bears the mindset of "I have to include one female-directed film. I should also include one film by black director." Then they are not selecting top 10 anymore, because there are only 8 slots . Sorry for my poor English, I hope you understand my meaning.
To use your logic, if someone is of the mindset that they must promote 1 film by Welles and then 1 film by Hitchcock they are not selecting a top 10 anymore, because there are only 8 slots
If the voters are selecting films by women or black directors they don't love or count amongst their favourite films, that is deeply disappointing and frustrating, but then these kinds of people have always affected the results. For instance, many people have expressed a near moral obligation to vote for Birth of a Nation despite hating portions of it, just because of how important and influential it is.
I'll quote myself from earlier:
I think we all need filters when we only have 10 slots to try to represent and highlight our favourite films. Especially in an era where women and minority directors are on the agenda and activiley spoken and written about, with many hoping to highlight cinematic achievements that in their minds were undervalued, such filters make even more sense before, but I'm sure it has been a filter that has often been in consideration, just not to the same extent as wishing to highlight each Hollywood great, the French New Wave, etc.I'll certainly grant that it certainly seems a set of the voters have purposefully chosen to highlight films directed by women, but is using that as one of the filters when narrowing down your list of favourite films of all-time to 10 really that different from the old days/present when many try to ensure to get one film by Ford, one by Hawks, one by Welles, etc. in to be representative. (Or more modern equivilants of trying to fit 1 film from each of your top directors).
A large part of the voters have always openly tried to be representative, be it of film movements, innovations, decades, countries, key names from x country/niche, etc.
I'm not sure if voters also considering the gender of the directors and trying to, for instance, place at least one woman director in their list is any different from trying to place at least one silent, at least one film from the last 10 years, etc.
You frequently hear voters talk about representing cinema history, their tastes, even their cinematic journey, and when we had our thread on how we would vote most forum users also had to find limitations to manage to get their list down to 10.
And we're list obsessed maniacs.
Speaking for myself I'm only really comfortable with the top 5 or so spots and everything else that I may place in a top 10 is part of a 30-40 tie and this is after a lifetime of rankings and lists. I assume most people here are in a similar situation.
In circles less inclined to obsessive list making the practice may even be worse. S&S keeps qoating the feedback they got in 1952 which even then held that limiting cinema down to 10 films was impossible, cruel and a long list of adjectives expressing utter pain.
I don't think such filters are suddenly dirty or something to complain about just because some of the considerations change and I would not at all call it "political correctness" as that speaks to a kind of policing or norms of what people can or cannot say. I doubt people felt forced to vote for women. Most of the ballots I have seen so far had no films by women filmmakers on them. Even Scorsese who is quoted as saying "Varda is art", did not vote for a Varda film, but that again just comes down to how few slates are available.
At the end of the day, what 10 films (or in some elite cases 15) the voters wish to highlight comes down to their personal considerations, be that what they think is "objectively great", deep personal favourites, hidden gems, a patchwork of their tastes, etc. etc. etc. and to repeat myself I don't think voting for films by women directors in part because they are women is any different from voting for films in part because they are French, Japanese, Indian, Classic Hollywood, etc. and I have yet to see anyone explain why this is any more problematic.
I do see some people hear thinking that the identity of the filmmakers suddenly matters more than the quality of the films or that people have something against men or white male directors - which is absurd. Ok, I'm sure there is someone like that out there, but accusing our resident overtly old white man, so overt that he calls himself OldAle, rather than say OldSake, of hating old white men feels like a bizarre stretch. I'll have to add that essentially everyone voting for Jeanne Dielman that have had their votes revealed so far also voted for films by old white men. It feels like a kind of weird political language is coming in here that seems out of place.
I will grant Torgo's point that the majority of filmmakers working, even now, are men, and that it is perfectly reasonable that the supermajority of films on top lists are by men as a result. I think everyone here will agree with that, OldAle agreed with that too. In the case of S&S I believe we are now talking about 11/100 being made by women. I would not have minded if the number had been much smaller, even if it was arbitrarily 0 that would have been fine, though at that point it would have been very odd given the number of respected films by women and I am quite happy with the added exposure this time around.
Does that mean Touch of Evil will be eligible for DtC? Probably no time soon. Can't see that one dropping out of TSPDT any time the next century, provided the list continues to exist.
And no, a few select highly regarded films by women getting votes should not be seen as an attack on men. No one thinks or feels that way (except perhaps a weird, irrelevant minority). I can only speak of the 115 ballots I've seen so far, but EVERYONE mainly voted for the films of old white men, including those with women on the ballot.
I have Le bonheur as my 2nd favourite film, would hate to be suspected of bias or of hating my own gender just because the film was directed by a woman.
Regarding the issue with political correctness, I think the problem lies with the voting system. There are only 10 slots, and now people must include one female-directed film or something else in their list. Ok, let's see what happen. There are many male-directed films one can vote and there are many famous male directors (at least with most people's knowledge). But what happens with female-directed films? Yeah, Jeanne Dielman is critically acclaimed, so let's pick it. This is how it becomes the new no.1. And this is how we get The Piano, Meshes of the Afternoon, News from Home, Get Out, Moonlight etc in the top 100. I don't think this is fair to other types of films, and I don't see it as respect to female and black directors either, because this is strategic voting rather than true respect.
I think when you truly respect their works, you will consider them as equal with other films. But now I feel that the voters are forcibly including films made by women and black directors etc. But of course, this is what happens when you want diversity but with only 10 slots.
And then there is also the problem of the knowledge of the voters. Why Get Out? Why Moonlight? Are they better than Xala or Sambizanga? There are actually much more films to choose, but I don't think the voters have seen enough before they include one black-director's work in their ballot. If this is the case, why should they forcibly include one if they only have limited choices to pick?