Critics' Top 10s 2007

[Damien]

Roger Ebert's list:

Exhibit number 1 as to why only a fool would take Ebert seriously.

[anonymous1980]

Roger Ebert's list:

1 Juno
2 No Country for Old Men
3 Before the Devil Knows You're Dead
4 Atonement
5 The Kite Runner
6 Away From Her
7 Across the Universe
8 La Vie en Rose
9 The Great Debaters
10 Into the Wild

[Eric]

Would've made second place in either case.

[rain Bard]

So it looks like these critics picked Affleck as Supporting:

Melissa Anderson
Peter Brunette
Jeannette Catsoulis
Godfrey Cheshire
Bilge Ebiri
Jim Emerson
Steve Erickson
David Fear
Graham Fuller
Stephen Garrett
Dennis Harvey
Brian Miller
Wesley Morris
Noel Murray
Rob Nelson
Mark Olsen
Ray Pride
Tasha Robinson
R. Emmet Sweeney
Alison Willmore

These ones picked Affleck as Lead, but their votes were subsumed into the larger group's picks:

Sam Adams
Tom Charity
Andrew Grant
David Hudson
Mark Jenkins
Ben Kenigsberg
Shelly Kraicer
Nathan Lee
Phillip Lopate
Andrea Picard
Ray Pride
David Sterritt
Elbert Ventura
Chuck Wilson

So those top twenty names are the ones to blame for the misplacement.

[Penelope]

Their entire list is invalidated by the fact that they consider Casey Affleck a supporting performance.

Okay, it isn't, but I would like an explanation on it nonetheless.

It certainly makes it seem suspect to me. I mean, I'm sure these folks are very perceptive, but obviously not entirely perceptive.

[Okri]

Their entire list is invalidated by the fact that they consider Casey Affleck a supporting performance.

Okay, it isn't, but I would like an explanation on it nonetheless.

[Eric]

I didn't take offense. I thought your comment was on an irrelevant tangent.

[OscarGuy]

But there you go, Eric, you value their opinions more. That shows why you took offense to something I said when I did not mean it as a dig or an attack of any kind. I can't say that I object to the list in the least and I don't think I said as much.

[Eric]

I am considering the source, which is why I think more highly of these results than I do any other similar poll or organization. (I haven't even seen their #1 yet, so I obviously can't be rejoicing in it for what it awards.) As far as I'm concerned, the list of people invited to the IndieWire poll (which is essentially the Village Voice poll relocated) constitutes a collection of the most vital voices in film criticism today.

[OscarGuy]

Not at all, Eric. I'm just saying they may be more eclectically-skewed because of the publication. It's like polls conducted by oil company's that display the effects of gas prices on college educations...One of the things they tought me in my high school history classes was to be cautious about the source of any polling data and the results of those polls.

I'm not saying these aren't genuine lists or that it's been tampered, but you have to consider the source.

[Eric]

this might be the first year that a Brian De Palma film gets taken down in Armond's "this widely-hated movie is great, this much-buzzed-about film is horrible" dialectic. I haven't followed this year's spate of Iraq docs to know which pro-war candidate will get his praise against Redacted, though.

The answer: Lions for Lambs ... I guess?

[Eric]

I guess I fail to see your point. Are you suggesting these results are invalid in some capacity?

[OscarGuy]

The problem is, we are given to calling the non-majors indies now (Miramax, Paramount Vantage, etc.). It's not because they are producing actual independent pictures, but that they tend to pick up subjects that the majors wouldn't greenlight in a million years. These distribs have certainly become more mainstream over the years, but I would challenge them not being still more Indie-minded in that respect. Then again, I don't know what you'd really call them.

There Will Be Blood - Paramount Vantage/Miramax
No Country for Old Men - Miramax
Zodiac's the only one with a Majors attachment, but David Fincher is hardly a neophyte with the Indie crowd.

And there's also the origins of directors that make these films seem more indie-like. Paul Thomas Anderson and Joel & Ethan Coen are fringe directors that have broad cross-over appeal, but still fail to live in the "studio" environment.

[Eric]

Very enlightening, Eric, but it doesn't mention who the critics are and since it's run by IndieWire, I'm sure we can expect a certain amount of IndiElitism from the group they selected

http://www.indiewire.com/critics2007/critics.html

I wouldn't call There Will Be Blood, Zodiac or No Country for Old Men indies, either.

[OscarGuy]

Very enlightening, Eric, but it doesn't mention who the critics are and since it's run by IndieWire, I'm sure we can expect a certain amount of IndiElitism from the group they selected...but overall, I'm astounded to see how There Will Be Blood seems to be doing against No Country for Old Men. I mean Paul Thomas Anderson had no contest to put him into the lead it seemed.