Nikon
Badass
Posts: 2,084 
Likes: 1,103
|
Post by Nikon on Mar 24, 2022 11:50:02 GMT
How often does it happen with you? What are some prime examples of yours? was the year too dire - or the quality you saw too undeniable?     |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Mar 24, 2022 12:22:41 GMT
Well, it's easy for me because my top lists aren't gospel anyway. If something is on TV and it "feels like a movie" or it's undeniable to me - it's on my list particularly for performances. Film and TV are synonymous now - or close to it - which is why I say the "triple crown of acting" will be the barometer rather than the Oscar alone anyway. Especially when more men do it because the patriarchy and stuff.  The Decalogue is one of the greatest things ever done on film like The Godfather / Jean De Florette level - so to me it's a movie - there's nothing episodic about it. Angels in America is like that for American productions..... Nobody will ever convince me that Michelle Williams (Fosse / Verdon), Winslet (Mare of Easttown), Pacino (Angels in America) wouldn't have totally swept everything in a different release format. There are some others that are very arguable - but I mean if you look at the field of nominees these ones are quite obvious. Heck, Pacino's entire "GOAT argument" is in some way based on his 2 Emmy winning TV roles - and them being "cinematic" - since they are pretty much agreed to be in his top 10 - side by side with "movies". In the IMDB days I argued that True Detective season 1 to me was a movie - and people freaked out about that iirc and even back then that wasn't close to the most eyebrow raising thing I said regularly......   |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2022 13:19:32 GMT
No, I don't - I only include narrative films that were Oscar-eligible in that year.
|
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Mar 24, 2022 13:26:38 GMT
No, I don't - I only include narrative films that were Oscar-eligible in that year. This |
|
ibbi
Based
"Batman's a scientist"
Posts: 4,960
Likes: 4,463
|
Post by ibbi on Mar 24, 2022 14:11:28 GMT
I wouldn't put a miniseries in my top 10, but if I did there would probably be a whole bunch of them that made it.
As far as TV movies go... I mean Netflix and the like are sort of redefining what that means anyway, right? There's a bunch of movies from the past frew years that are in and around my top 10 where I'm not sure if they got theatrical runs to go with their Netflix release (1922, Rolling Thunder Revue, Okja).
Prior to this era it's definitely a rarer occurrence. I know Life and Death of Peter Sellers was a TV movie in the US, but we got blessed with it on the big screen, so it wouldn't even count. Ditto The Last Seduction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2022 14:23:36 GMT
Prior to this era it's definitely a rarer occurrence. I know Life and Death of Peter Sellers was a TV movie in the US, but we got blessed with it on the big screen, so it wouldn't even count. Ditto The Last Seduction. , too - Matt Damon was BAFTA-nominated for it. |
|
Nikon
Badass
Posts: 2,084
Likes: 1,103
|
Post by Nikon on Mar 24, 2022 17:14:57 GMT
Angels in America comfortably sits in my top 5 of 2003 if I'd include it... And I prefer John Adams to half of what I used to dig from 2008 these days.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Mar 24, 2022 17:38:05 GMT
I haven't really had any TV shows I would want to include in my recent year-end lists (save for O.J.: Made in America and La Flor, both of which were released theatrically and thus technically movies), so I've never really considered this. But yeah, sure. My current #1 of 2021 (which will probably keep that spot) is the first season of a TV show, with a very strong narrative that puts almost all modern movies to shame. So yeah, I don't see why not. If it is an audiovisual format, go for it. It's like separating Dickens from current writers because his books were serialized in magazines when first published. Who cares, the end product is what matters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Mar 24, 2022 17:56:47 GMT
miniseries - never. they're episodically structured and each episode has a beginning and end and is self-contained, which is not at all the same as having self-contained acts or "chapters" (which a lot of movies seem to be doing this way) in a film that is still meant to be a seamless experience that you watch all the way through in one sitting.
TV films - yes but I haven't seen many before the age of Netflix. I can probably count on two hands the amount of true TV films I've seen, and not just films that premiered only on TV way back in the day. They tend to be much more obscure I find so unless it dropped sometime in the last decade (Behind the Candelabra for example), I probably haven't heard of it. None make my top 10 lists that I can think of but Candelabra is in my 2013 costume lineup and Bad Education for 2020 ensemble.
"TV film" as a category has become utterly pointless in the age of streaming. Bad Education only being eligible for Emmys while Netflix releases are up for Oscars is totally arbitrary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Mar 24, 2022 18:23:28 GMT
miniseries - never. they're episodically structured and each episode has a beginning and end and is self-contained, which is not at all the same as having self-contained acts or "chapters" (which a lot of movies seem to be doing this way) in a film that is still meant to be a seamless experience that you watch all the way through in one sitting. What of longer, theatrically released "movies" designed to be watched in multiple sittings? Such as my two examples: O.J.: Made in America (five sittings IIRC) and La Flor (three sittings). What of movies that were single productions but split into multiple parts, such as Jean de Florette or Lord of the Rings? What of franchise films that were made with cliffhangers and are clearly meant to be seen as part of a larger series (John Wick 2 & 3, for example)? What of very short "series" that are movie length, like Empire Falls (3 hours) or Over the Garden Wall (I think, like, 90 minutes)? It's very arbitrary and gets into semantics the further into the hole you go, so I suppose that having a clear-cut line is a good thing if you're doing lists. |
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Mar 24, 2022 19:25:51 GMT
miniseries - never. they're episodically structured and each episode has a beginning and end and is self-contained, which is not at all the same as having self-contained acts or "chapters" (which a lot of movies seem to be doing these days) in a film that is still meant to be a seamless experience that you watch all the way through in one sitting. What of longer, theatrically released "movies" designed to be watched in multiple sittings? Such as my two examples: O.J.: Made in America (five sittings IIRC) and La Flor (three sittings). What of movies that were single productions but split into multiple parts, such as Jean de Florette or Lord of the Rings? What of franchise films that were made with cliffhangers and are clearly meant to be seen as part of a larger series (John Wick 2 & 3, for example)? What of very short "series" that are movie length, like Empire Falls (3 hours) or Over the Garden Wall (I think, like, 90 minutes)? It's very arbitrary and gets into semantics the further into the hole you go, so I suppose that having a clear-cut line is a good thing if you're doing lists. wellll I have thoughts on this and since you asked...  - O.J. I consider a docuseries - Jean de Florette is two separate films released in the same year (the Swedish Girl with a Dragon Tattoo is another example of that) - Lord of the Rings is three separate films - I haven't seen Empire Falls but if it's got separate episodes, I'm calling it a miniseries. - John Wick is clearly separate films in a series that's ongoing. Yes they end on cliffhangers but the difference is that they're released as individual films over multiple years, not in multiple episodes back-to-back. And that to me is key because even when someday after the series has ended and you binge the whole thing in one sitting, it will always be true that those films were released separately over a period of several years. one of the longest movies I've ever seen was Giant a couple weeks ago (over 4 hours) but it's still undeniably a film with a clear first and second half and not portions within it that you can easily chop up and separate into smaller "episodes". Likewise City Hall is the longest documentary I've ever seen at over 4 hours too, but that's not a series either because in the process of making/releasing it, Frederick Wiseman didn't chop it up into smaller pieces. the harder cases are something like Small Axe (miniseries or separate movies?) and Scenes from a Marriage which was created as a miniseries and then edited down to feature-length to try (and fail) to be eligible for the Oscars. Still not sure where to put that one. And admittedly I haven't seen things like The Dekalog or Berlin Alexanderplatz yet but so far I haven't run into that many obstacles in my lifelong mission to keep things in tidy boxes.  but even beyond consistency and convenience, I think episodic structures fundamentally change the medium both in how they're made and consumed. I don't watch an 7-hour miniseries with 7 episodes the same way I watch a 2 or 3 or even 4-hour movie, even if I watch that movie in multiple sittings. It's a totally different vibe. I wouldn't even know how to begin comparing something like Maid to Power of the Dog because my brain has them so compartmentalized. Each of those episodes is distinct and I felt differently with each one as I watched them. With miniseries you're watching the story evolve more gradually but in a more pronounced way (the punctuation of episode beginnings & endings contributes a lot to that) whereas that process is much less visible in films. ugh, sorry for the rant but you DID ask! |
|
