|
Remember to vote 5 so we can get that vid to the goldmine. This is definitely the first goon project ive ever finished so im very proud of all of you. Ugh the worst snipe
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2020 21:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
drat you for being such a thoughtful and truly good remake, Evil Dead '13.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
Voted 5 and quoting the video for the page
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
Not really happy with the results but it was fun to see how it all turned out. Now we get to vote for director!
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 02:09
|
|
|
Ok so Carpenter is probably the overall #1 seed, but let's not forget this competition would likely feature: - Dario Argento - David Cronenberg - David Lynch - Takashi Miike - Guerillmo del Toro - Tod Browning - George Romero - William Castle - Wes Craven Also, I'm pro-64 seed tournaments. The first rounds are fun and give the opportunity to bring in competitors who deserve a chance. I remember a Twitter tournament once for Best film of 1997 where Romy and Michele's High School Reunion won a playoff for the 64th seed and wound up upsetting the #1 of Titanic and continuing for multiple rounds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 02:26
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Not really happy with the results but it was fun to see how it all turned out. Now we get to vote for director! Oh that's going to be a fight
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 02:27
|
|
|
The correct choice is Hélène Cattet/Bruno Forzani
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 02:40
|
|
|
I feel like consistency is going to keep coming up with directors. I'd love to have a vote that's worst movie vs worst movie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 03:53
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Oh that's going to be a fight Carpenter's easily the #1 Seed. Timeless Appeal posted:I feel like consistency is going to keep coming up with directors. I'd love to have a vote that's worst movie vs worst movie. If you go with consistency then that's a real tough one because Cronenberg has yet to ever make a bad film. Like at all. All of his entries into horror are excellent. Its a tough category to vote for Rankings for I guess top 4 John Carpenter Lucio Fulci James Whale George Romero Hollismason fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 03:54
|
|
|
And people thought Evil Dead would get knocked out early.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 06:35
|
|
|
I really thought Alien was going to make it but in retrospect it makes sense why it didn't. It did knock out Re-Animator, which is a shame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 13:51
|
|
|
I'm burning my Evil Dead tapes/dvd's/blurays. What a travesty! I hope y'all sit and think about what you have done. Romero was robbed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 14:24
|
|
|
Whoops misread that the first result listed was best overall! In that case hail to the king, etc. Flying Zamboni fucked around with this message at 16:08 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 14:59
|
|
|
When I saw Romero take a 2-0 lead I was like "it won, I'm ok with that) and then ED won the next 2 pts and I got all excited and was like "OMG! EITHER CAN WIN! THIS IS SO EXCITING!" I was deeply engrossed in that results read and excited for either way it went.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 15:01
|
|
|
This was a lot of fun to see develop; thanks for setting it up! I think one approach to a director showdown is not have it be single-elimination. Instead, do a points-based system with a random movie picked each time, so those with a stronger overall career might have a chance, and the discussion can keep going. Or do it World Cup style to mix it up and keep it interesting as the tournament drags on (groups of 4 match up against each other in the early rounds, the top two from each group advance, and it's single-elim from then on. Draws would then be viable for the early competitions, say if the higher side is less than 60% or something).
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
Really intrigued by these results. I think we'll make the next Bracket Battle for Horror Directors it's own thread, making it a clear and clean demarcation from this one. I think the easiest way of doing it is nominating directors with a minimum of 3 horror movies under their belt. Masters of Horror episodes count as a film, in this case. There are a lot of options out there, so we may need to do a write-in ballot for nominations, and directors that get the most nominations get to play. I want to give a huge thanks to Shrecknet and the amount of work they put into this. This was basically their baby, so make sure you show their appreciation. I assume they might want a brief break before they start work on the next Bracket Battle, so when they're ready, y'all will be able to send your nominations for horror directors to me or them. (I'm foolishly positing this here before discussing it with them, so if they correct me, apologies to Shrecknet and any goon reading this.) Tool shed! Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 16:12
|
|
|
I've been dancing around the franchises NIT idea for weeks but it feels like the crew is really more interested in the director thing. We could always go back and do a B franchise think some other tie but I feel like if I ran it now it would just get lost as people wanted or focused on the director thing. I'm happy to volunteer to help with that if Shrek wants to take a break and no one else wants to do it. But they did a great job with this so Shrek's more than earned dibs. I subscribe to the ballots idea as I did with the franchises. Round robin or roulette stuff feels complicated. And a movie roulette seems like it gives the edge to directors with smaller libraries and punishes a director for being more eclectic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 16:20
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:If you go with consistency then that's a real tough one because Cronenberg has yet to ever make a bad film. Like at all. All of his entries into horror are excellent. I hope Steve Miner gets folded in because while it's not a great career, it is a loving fun career... I mean his horror stuff, his non-horror stuff.. yeesh.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:11
|
|
|
I really really like the idea of feature roulette for horror directors. It also keeps out the non horror riff raff and rewards directors with a catalog (Craven  ) from dabblers like Spielberg.It also makes the rounds after the knockout round fairly easy to actually watch and changes the discussion point on each one. Question is, are there 64 directors whove done 4+ horror movies who arent Charles Band tier?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:18
|
|
|
I think we can absolutely come up with 64 directors who have 3/4+ horror movies of note. Some will be like Mike Flanagan and James Wan but you need 1st round knock outs. I reiterate that I think "movie roulette" will have the opposite impact and punish directors with larger filmographies because they're less likely to draw one of their best films than the guys with small pools. And while it might direct people to films they might otherwise skip it also theoretically limits what they check out. But as always I defer to the crew.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:23
|
|
|
There are 7 rounds (theoretically) youd need movies for. 7 is a tall ask for any director; we could cap it at 5 and let directors use their top 5 films (by letterbox score? @imdb?) twice, ensuring they use all 5 before recycling so Carpenter doesnt end up getting the thing twice in a row for autowins. We could also have a 'draft' by committed posters to assume responsibility for up to 4 directors (1 from each bracket) who would need to select from their assigned directors catalog, so there's additional strategy of when to deploy Scream and when you can get by your opponent using Last House on the Left. This would be monumentally more coordinating but definitely also more engaging. A draft would also automatically create perfect seeding as a side effect. Wed need ideally 16 posters, or only 8 if we started at top 32 - but we could also have any undrafted directors in the contest just be forced to use roulette. I feel like this idea (drafted directors, select movies weekly) would work MUCH better with 4 genres competing - so a horror, action, comedy, drama bracket. Nicholas sparks vs john mctiernan! Judd apatow vs Scorsese! It would let us dig deeper into hollywoods director catalog and also induce all of CD to join rather than just us weirdos Shrecknet fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:40
|
|
|
I came up with a list of 85 potential directors: Wes Craven, George A. Romero, Dario Argento, Guillermo del Toro, Sam Raimi, John Carpenter, David Cronenberg, David Lynch, Alfred Hitchcock, Tobe Hooper, Karyn Kusama, Jennifer Kent, Tim Burton, Eli Roth, Jen and Sylvia Soska, Mario Bava, Joe Dante, Clive Barker, Jordan Peele, Rob Zombie, Lucio Fulci, Tod Browning, Roger Corman, Stuart Gordon, James Whale, Mike Flanagan, Kiyoshi Kurosawa, Robert Eggers, Ari Aster, Ti West, Takashi Miike, Brian De Palma, Terence Fisher, William Castle, Herschel Gordon Lewis, Adam Wingard, Charles Band, Don Coscarelli, Luigi Cozzi, James DeMonaco, Uwe Boll, Abel Ferrara, Jesus Franco, Frank Henenlotter, Ruggero Deodato, Bob Clark, Mary Lambert, William Lustig, Bruno Mattei, James Wan, E. Elias Merge, Ken Russell, F.W. Murnau, Steve Miner, Roman Polanski, Herbert L. Strock, Sion Sono, Park Chan-wook, Jacques Tourneur, Edgar G. Ulmer, Tom Six, Tom Savini, Ridley Scott, Dan O’Bannon, Ed Wood, Ken Wiederhorn, Brian Yuzna, William Malone, Larry Cohen, Mary Harron, William Friedkin, Steven Spielberg, Neil Marshall, Hélène Cattet & Bruno Forzani, John Landis, Freddie Francis, Peter Jackson, Robert Rodriguez, Takashi Shimizu, Ishiro Honda, Jack Arnold, Jean Rollin, Sergio Martino, Michele Soavi, and Alexandre Aja I feel like dabblers should be allowed to compete so long as they get enough support in early play-in rounds/ranked choice. I'd also say we should take care to reflect a diversity of styles, nationalities, genders, races and generations (let's not forget people like Jacques Tourneur, F.W. Murnau and Edgar Ulmer, or even Ed Wood for that matter). A few of those directors may only have two features to date (Ari Aster, Jordan Peele) but they feel so relevant right now I think they should at least be considered before being completely ruled out. I can also see us having considered conversations about directors like John Landis -- mostly a comedy director who nevertheless does meet the three-film minimum for horror, has one all-time great film in the genre under his belt and then some forgotten poo poo (plus one that he's infamous for).
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:41
|
|
|
How does Jordan Peele work? Hes only got two directing credits and a writing credit on comedy Keanu? Are we counting Twilight Zone eps?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:45
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:There are 7 rounds (theoretically) youd need movies for. 7 is a tall ask for any director; we could cap it at 5 and let directors use their top 5 films (by letterbox score? @imdb?) twice, ensuring they use all 5 before recycling so Carpenter doesnt end up getting the thing twice in a row for autowins. I assumed when we said "roulette" that it was just a new shuffle every round that chose a movie. So you could get the same movie every round by chance, but directors with smaller catalogues would be inherently more likely to while it was possible Wes Craven went 4 rounds with My Soul To Take, Cursed, A Deadly Friend, and Vampire in Brooklyn. A strategic draft thing is different but I also think is a less of a tournament at that stage and more of a card game. Which like, is cool if that's what we wanna do. I'm not a table top game guy so I think its less appealing to me but I'd be here watching movies and making long, passionate arguments.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:
Haha I love this idea, but I feel like that's an entirely different type of thread altogether. One thing to keep in mind, this is just for fun, so who cares if the finale is Karyn Kusama vs. Tom Savini instead of Sam Raimi vs John Carpenter. I don't think we need to worry too much about fairness or who "deserves" to win, let chaos reign.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:I feel like dabblers should be allowed to compete so long as they get enough support in early play-in rounds/ranked choice. I'd also say we should take care to reflect a diversity of styles, nationalities, genders, races and generations (let's not forget people like Jacques Tourneur, F.W. Murnau and Edgar Ulmer, or even Ed Wood for that matter). A few of those directors may only have two features to date (Ari Aster, Jordan Peele) but they feel so relevant right now I think they should at least be considered before being completely ruled out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:How does Jordan Peele work? Hes only got two directing credits and a writing credit on comedy Keanu? Are we counting Twilight Zone eps? Well, he's redefining the horror genre before our eyes and is easily one of the most relevant auteurs working in mainstream Hollywood at the moment, making blockbusters out of politically charged genre films. And there's so few Black horror auteurs as is, and he's stated his intent to continue working in the genre. I also don't feel we should overthink this by adding points systems or film-by-film matchups. I think like a real tournament you throw the guys with the deep catalogues at the dabblers. Like, Steven Spielberg could probably crush Charles Band just on the grounds that Jaws is that good, though he would likely fall to a Tobe Hooper. If anything, directors who have more diverse filmographies become more interesting imo. Even if we're only allowed to count their horror entries (which if we're strict would even affect heavyweights like Carpenter by ruling out Big Trouble in Little China and Escape from New York), I think that could in certain ways give the dabblers more of an advantage. How far can American Werewolf in London carry John Landis before he runs up against a Dario Argento? Can one great film overrule a career of cheap trash? What happens if we matchup Sam Raimi and George A. Romero again except this time you have Evil Dead and Drag Me to Hell up against Romero's entire, more horror-oriented career, Spider-Man can't help him here. I also think there's some very tough competition that keeps John Carpenter from being a foregone conclusion, even if he would likely be the overall #1 seed. I think when you really look at the list there's the potential for some surprising upsets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:54
|
|
|
That makes sense for Jordan Peele, but William Friedkin has three horror movies: Bug, The Exorcist and The Guardian.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:57
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:How does Jordan Peele work? Hes only got two directing credits and a writing credit on comedy Keanu? Are we counting Twilight Zone eps? Part of this is I think that if you just throw Peele or Jennifer Kent into a full bracket you get the issue that Wes Craven never made a movie as good as Get Out or The Babadook, but it's hard to compare the sheer volume of his films and scope of his influence. I think the winner of the junior bracket is just a lamb going to the slaughter, but you at least give them the opportunity to be discussed on their own terms. Like Peele vs Aster is a really loving good conversation. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
Friedkin also has the documentary The Devil and Father Amorth which deals with an exorcism, and I think we could probably count Cruising in since it's a very dark serial killer thriller even if it's a technicality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:If anything, directors who have more diverse filmographies become more interesting imo. Even if we're only allowed to count their horror entries (which if we're strict would even affect heavyweights like Carpenter by ruling out Big Trouble in Little China and Escape from New York), I think that could in certain ways give the dabblers more of an advantage. How far can American Werewolf in London carry John Landis before he runs up against a Dario Argento? Can one great film overrule a career of cheap trash? What happens if we matchup Sam Raimi and George A. Romero again except this time you have Evil Dead and Drag Me to Hell up against Romero's entire, more horror-oriented career, Spider-Man can't help him here. I think that's gonna be essential for this to work. We'd only consider their career in horror and thrillers. Otherwise Spielberg gets to win for Raiders of the Lost Ark and Schindler's List or something, Carpenter gets to win for Starman, etc. Timeless Appeal posted:I feel like you could have a sub-bracket of junior directors (Jordan Peele, Robert Eggers, Robert Mitchell, Ari Aster, Jennifer Kent) and then seed the winner into the broader bracket. Oh I like this idea too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
I kind of like the Junior Directors bracket too. Maybe the Top 2 from that bracket get in, depending on how many total competitors there are. Seems a shame to only allow in one, when something like The Babadook is on its own better than the entire careers of some of these guys. One more thought, Alfred Hitchcock is also only a dabbler. Most of his films are firmly suspense and I think drawing distinctions about which count as Horror is a real question. Psycho and The Birds, no doubt. But where do films like The Lodger, Rear Window and Frenzy fall?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 18:06
|
|
|
Maybe someone should make a google docs file where people can add their director picks for easier access? Trix' list is great and mostly exhaustive but if we're going to be adding director piecemeal it might be tricky. Lamberto Bava, Park Chan Wook, maybe Neil Jordan for example could be on there. Also, I anticipate this to bring up the question of what is horror again. Thrillers, Gialli?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 18:09
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:I kind of like the Junior Directors bracket too. Maybe the Top 2 from that bracket get in, depending on how many total competitors there are. Seems a shame to only allow in one, when something like The Babadook is on its own better than the entire careers of some of these guys. Hitchcock's Frenzy is for-sure a horror film, but I agree that Rear Window, while a solid thriller, has zero interest in being "scary", and is more like an investigative mystery. There will have to be an agreement for stuff like that. David Lynch should be in it, but we should probably only consider Eraserhead, Lost Highway, INLAND EMPIRE, Fire Walk With Me, unless Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive has enough thriller DNA to be considered horror and not neo-noir. (The fallacies of the construct of genres!)
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 18:15
|
|
|
I think Rear Window is horror because the protagonist is stuck looking out his window, he's powerless to do anything about what he sees. That's the horror, that's what makes it different from a regular investigative mystery.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 18:16
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:I kind of like the Junior Directors bracket too. Maybe the Top 2 from that bracket get in, depending on how many total competitors there are. Seems a shame to only allow in one, when something like The Babadook is on its own better than the entire careers of some of these guys. I think the qualifications for a Junior Bracket would be: --Three horror feature films or under --Their additional shorts or television horror work can still count in consideration --The majority of their work has to have been produced in the last eight years So, folks like West and Flanagan would just get thrown into the main bracket.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 18:48
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:Hitchcock's Frenzy is for-sure a horror film, but I agree that Rear Window, while a solid thriller, has zero interest in being "scary", and is more like an investigative mystery. There will have to be an agreement for stuff like that. David Lynch should be in it, but we should probably only consider Eraserhead, Lost Highway, INLAND EMPIRE, Fire Walk With Me, unless Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive has enough thriller DNA to be considered horror and not neo-noir. (The fallacies of the construct of genres!) Mulholland Drive is a weird one cause it often ends up on scariest movie moments ever lists and there's a good degree of pure horror in that film (Winkies, the reveal of the corpse, the entire finale) but also is very much a surrealist neo-noir. I mean, it speaks to the sprawling nature of the genre and these are perhaps debates to be had. Like it's kind of hard to talk about Lynch and say "well, we have to exclude Blue Velvet and Mulholland Dr." and yet not think about the visceral terror of Dennis Hopper's performance in BV or the tiny old people flashing by the screen in the finale of MD when making our votes. Twin Peaks: The Return is also such a mishmash of genres, perhaps simultaneously the funniest and scariest work of the decade. Rear Window also poses a curious question. There's absolutely horror elements to it, especially the climax. Yet it's historically never been defined as horror and was made in an era where horror was more strictly defined to exclude this type of thriller from that categorization. And you can obviously point to the litany of killers and shocks in Hitchock's filmography that border on horror. And no doubt, even pretending Psycho never existed, modern horror would not be what it is if not for those mid-career Hitchcock classics like Rear Window. Suspense and thriller vs. horror really is a very tricky question. edit: Also thanks for remembering Lamberto Bava. Would be a shame to leave Demons out of the conversation. TrixRabbi fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 19:08
|
|
|
I think the only way to do it is to cast a wide net. If you don't let people consider thrillers and that sort of thing in their voting then it's just gonna be a non-stop classification argument.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I think the only way to do it is to cast a wide net. If you don't let people consider thrillers and that sort of thing in their voting then it's just gonna be a non-stop classification argument. Yeah, and people are gonna get annoyed that they can't count, say, Killer Joe, for Friedkin even though that movie has some of the most upsetting imagery and memorable acts of violence of the past 10 years. I feel like it's fair to say that, assuming Spielberg makes the list, you don't get to count Raiders of the Lost Ark, but you should be able to consider War of the Worlds. edit: Just realized, Francis Ford Coppola meets the requirements with Dementia 13, Bram Stoker's Dracula and Twixt. Lars Von Trier has Antichrist, Epidemic and The House That Jack Built. Joe Begos might have enough to qualify on his own, or could go in the Newcomers Bracket. TrixRabbi fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 19:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Wes Craven never made a movie as good as Get Out or The Babadook  Also if David Robert Mitchell is not in the Junior Bracket I don't even know. edit: gently caress if we cast a wide net we definitely have to include Bong Joon Ho and Park Chan Wook, rip all other directors. married but discreet fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 19:37
|
|