The Gray Area: Your Committee

Wait, didn't my watch list have that you didnt vote on any films for a winner, you were not forced to watch anything you didnt enjoy and that it was open for discussion only with people who had just watched the film or had watched it beforehand, whether you nominated a film or not?

And only a handful watch the first 6 films...with about 25 people nominating films?

its over and done.. Its dead... and I wont ever suggest anything like that anymore or participate in any HOF..

I even sent you a message about the Comedy HoF....

which was...

Comedies?? Comedies???

That makes sense. Still, I think there needs to be a way to keep people from inappropriately limiting what is allowed in the hall of fames.

Like JJ said, the drama has all happened because of people trying to limit what goes on in the hall of fames. A Musical Hall of Fame should include all musicals. A Comedy Hall of Fame should include all comedies. It's that simple.

JJ said something about a task force.

WHY THE HELL DOES MOVIE FORUMS NOW HAVE A TASK FORCE???

As an almost 14 year long member here at this site, I cannot believe how STUPID it's getting around here, and largely thanks to stuff like these Hall of Fames. It was never this insane in the past. You people of the younger generation are SUPER CRAZY.

There's good reason to limit certain things in these things, Swan. You are sounding like an idiot to me to believe that everything should just be LIMITLESS.

This is not a Madonna concert. We are not trying to break all the rules.

Thanks, buddy.

I don't need to be called an idiot when I'm just trying to see the Hall of Fames thrive. I'm done here.

It's conflicting to say the host of an HOF makes the rules... but then to turn around and say there should be no limits. That's just imposing your rules on another person.

Huh? He's talking about the HoF voters. He's saying it's there to complete a task.

Anyway, I agree that a) whoever runs a HoF gets to decide the rules, b) anyone who ends up having to watch films they could not have reasonably guessed they might watch should get to drop out without any resulting drama, and c) the committee is an area of last resort when there are intractable differences. You guys can and should work things out on your own whenever possible.

Elaborating on b): whether or not a comedy HoF should include horror, it's clearly understandable why someone might sign up for comedy and then not want to watch gory movies.

Just my two cents.

Way to make accusations without a shred of proof and to try to make this about you and your Watchlist when it has absolutely nothing to do with you.

People nominated horror comedies because they like horror comedies and because ALL types of comedies were eligible for the Comedy Hall of Fame. Nobody decided on their choices with any intent to offend anyone. I very nearly nominated a horror comedy as well. Why? Because I think the movie is hilarious. Ultimately I didn't because there was another comedy that I like more.

__________________

If you're referring to me, I never said I think the host of an HoF should make all the rules. I don't think that should be the case.

I am not a huge fan of A , but I think this is what should probably just be done. If only for a compromise and a resolution to a situation that has gotten pretty wacky.

Quoted for future reference.

Can we all agree to leave it like this?

I think we all agree that this part is understandable.

We don't all agree though that it's understandable to drop out of one HOF because you don't want to watch gory movies and then try to get the rules changed to prohibit them or to bend the well established rules for future HOFs. This is where the true issue lies.

Agreed.

If someone calls his particular Hall of Fame a "Comedy Hall of Fame" it should include all kinds of comedies (in my opinion).
On the other hand, someone also has the right to make (for instance) a "Classic Live Action Musical Hall of Fame" with the rule that only live action musicals made before 1960 can be included.

To be legitimate a Hall of Fame would then need 8, 10 or 12 participants (depending on what we agree is a good limit).

Do you think this is a fair system, Swan? What about you, JJ and Citizen?

I absolutely do. Titles are important. I was fine with Citizen running a Live Action Musical Hall of Fame. What I wasn't okay with was him running a Musical Hall of Fame and then not allowing animated musicals.

I almost nominated a Slasher/Horror Comedy as well.

If you guys need me I am off to find where Godoggo is hanging out.

__________________
Letterboxd

I cant wait for the next musical HOF

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/entertainm...315015601.html

Just don't take this crap so seriously. Having a committee is extreme and nutty. This whole thread has become the most Bonkers Thread of 2015. If any of that is my fault, that's cool, as I am probably (maybe?) one of the most bonkers people here.

Yes -- let the HOF host make the rules.

Don't take this stuff so seriously. The winner of a HOF is not gonna get covered on the nightly news and be written up in an encyclopedia, if encyclopedias even still exist. They will not win an ESPY Hero of the Year award like Caitlyn Jenner. Nobody will care about the HOF a week after it ends.

I hope.

They probably will care....

They probably will... even decades from now. Especially since its gonna take a millennium for all of those HOFs on the planned list to even be completed.