If you want to vote for Waltz, go ahead...like I said in the first post, I'm open to debate about this. (I'm certainly not married to certain hard and fast rules like some.) I wouldn't want the fact that you can't vote for one movie to cause you to view this thread as pointless. I think you'll find that you and maybe a few others will be the only ones to even see Waltz. If we were still doing the mid-year, then that's why we would limit this poll to films released in the US in 08. Yet, even without the mid-year correction this last year, I still think it makes more sense for 4 months to be eligible the following year. It will no doubt finish higher in this poll then it would have last year, though certainly films like this are going to always get screwed in this forum because we aren't film critics who get to see the majority of films released in a given year. It just so happens that I didn't think 4 months was as great as I thought it would be...it would be a shame if Waltz gets two or three votes and finishes, say 35th on our list...then a majority of us get the chance to see it later and love it but it's not eligible because Mitch saw it in England last year.
If it makes any difference in how you view this, I'll be sure to update the first thread in this post reminding people of what films just missed the deadline last year and are eligible, such as 4 months. Anyone that can think of others, help me out. I'm sure there were some docs and foreign films.
I certainly didn't mean anyone to think the thread was pointless, I meant that last year we had the debate about 4 months
and Iím wondering whether waiting until this year is actually going to make any difference to itís position to be honest. The year before we had this with Das Leben Der Anderen
and we ended up including it in the mid years and it didnít do that well, last year we didnít have a mid-year countdown.
Iím not particularly bothered on eligibility, even whereís thereís a grey area Iím happy to go with whatever is called and vote (or not) accordingly. What I donít understand is how the vote should both be dependent on whether SOMBies could see the film. Thatís such an arbitrary term when we are discussing when a film was on in 2, 4, 25 or 1800 cinemas in the US and then when a DVD screener leaked. Aren't they are at odds with each other?
If itís to be US release only Iím fine with that, if itís (2008) on IMDB Iím fine with that but last year The Orphanage
was limited release until Jan 11 in the US but it was #59. This Is England
only got a limited US release in 2007, made #39. Because no questions of inclusion were raised on these, people voted for them anyway and they made it in. The first hadn't been released on DVD at the time of the poll and the second hadn't.
Speaking of Shane Meadows: Somerís Town
this year, no US release and unlikely to be one so can I never vote for that? Or do I have to wait until it's on NetFlix?
The year in films is skewed away from Jan-Dec anyway due to limited releases in late December, more so if you don't live in a major US city, more so if you don't live in the US. Coupled with not having the time or means to watch newer DVD releases on an adequate screen, or go to the cinema that much at the moment (not that anyone should care about this, and quite rightly) people who aren't running the poll striking out films I've actually seen at the cinema in 2008 aren't making me that enthusiastic about voting until the mid-year.
Nice bowl of Crunchy Nut you got here, pretty expensive as I recall.