What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Great Works Draft (6 Viewers)

Films do not have to be released in movie theaters first. They can be shown on DVD, TV, Movie screens, IMAX, Super 8 or not released at all. Clearly The Civil War is a documentary and clearly it should count. Good pick.
Thank you. You said it better than I could. A documentary is a documentary. There was no restriction to movies.From the American Heritage Dictionary:doc·u·men·ta·ry (dŏk'yə-měn'tə-rē) adj. Consisting of, concerning, or based on documents.Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.n. pl. doc·u·men·ta·riesA work, such as a film or television program, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration.
 
My statement that Fennis quoted was made before we firmed up the category. The actual rules say, "must be a film." Perhaps I should have written, "released in theatres"; that was certainly my intent. I think if we allow The Civil War we are opening up the category to documentary TV shows which was not intended. But again, DC is welcome to appeal this. I understand Fennis' argument, just disagree with it.
But you DIDN"T write "must be released in theatres". Your "intent" is totally irrelevent.Also, and I could be wrong, but The Civil War was shot on film, not video tape. Burns bills it as a "film" and calls himself a "filmmaker". It COULD have been shown in theatres. That's as relevant as your unspoken "intent" to restrict this category to "movies" whatever that means.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Until I am overruled by Krista and Doug (and if popular opinion goes, I will be) neither The Civil War nor Baseball will be accepted in the documentary category. They are both brilliant, and Ken Burns can call them what he wants, but they were both television miniseries. I could just as easily stick Roots in the movie category. If a program is intended to be watched on television, it is television. That's my position anyhow.

 
18.1 - I'm going song here to make sure I grab it now. Voted #5 song of the 20th century, it's another theme rich selection that is a great pick without the theme.

Everyone knows the opening:

A long, long time ago...

I can still remember

How that music used to make me smile.

And I knew if I had my chance

That I could make those people dance

And, maybe, they'd be happy for a while.

One of the better works of poetry set to music, Don McLean gave us an opus on America, on a moment in time that we all can look to as "better," and on the feelings of loss that shape a life for all time.

I select, American Pie

 
Until I am overruled by Krista and Doug (and if popular opinion goes, I will be) neither The Civil War nor Baseball will be accepted in the documentary category. They are both brilliant, and Ken Burns can call them what he wants, but they were both television miniseries. I could just as easily stick Roots in the movie category. If a program is intended to be watched on television, it is television. That's my position anyhow.
Tim you're making two different arguments. There *might* be a legitimate argument to say TV Movies cant count in the movie category (although I disagree with that). However, there is no legitimate argument to say documentaries must be shown in a movie house first.
 
Until I am overruled by Krista and Doug (and if popular opinion goes, I will be) neither The Civil War nor Baseball will be accepted in the documentary category. They are both brilliant, and Ken Burns can call them what he wants, but they were both television miniseries. I could just as easily stick Roots in the movie category. If a program is intended to be watched on television, it is television. That's my position anyhow.
No offense, but that's preposterous. Roots was no more a documentary than Seinfeld was while The Civil War and Baseball were both quite clearly documentaries. Documentary refers to the style of movie making, not the mechanism by which it's delivered to the audience.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
18.1 - I'm going song here to make sure I grab it now. Voted #5 song of the 20th century, it's another theme rich selection that is a great pick without the theme.

Everyone knows the opening:

A long, long time ago...

I can still remember

How that music used to make me smile.

And I knew if I had my chance

That I could make those people dance

And, maybe, they'd be happy for a while.

One of the better works of poetry set to music, Don McLean gave us an opus on America, on a moment in time that we all can look to as "better," and on the feelings of loss that shape a life for all time.

I select, American Pie
comes with invention: piano bar
 
Until I am overruled by Krista and Doug (and if popular opinion goes, I will be) neither The Civil War nor Baseball will be accepted in the documentary category. They are both brilliant, and Ken Burns can call them what he wants, but they were both television miniseries. I could just as easily stick Roots in the movie category. If a program is intended to be watched on television, it is television. That's my position anyhow.
:popcorn: Are you kidding?

 
Until I am overruled by Krista and Doug (and if popular opinion goes, I will be) neither The Civil War nor Baseball will be accepted in the documentary category. They are both brilliant, and Ken Burns can call them what he wants, but they were both television miniseries. I could just as easily stick Roots in the movie category. If a program is intended to be watched on television, it is television. That's my position anyhow.
It may be your position, but it is wrong. The medium of presentation doesn't change the fact that it's a Documentary and that's what the category is called.

 
Until I am overruled by Krista and Doug (and if popular opinion goes, I will be) neither The Civil War nor Baseball will be accepted in the documentary category. They are both brilliant, and Ken Burns can call them what he wants, but they were both television miniseries. I could just as easily stick Roots in the movie category. If a program is intended to be watched on television, it is television. That's my position anyhow.
Tim you're making two different arguments. There *might* be a legitimate argument to say TV Movies cant count in the movie category (although I disagree with that). However, there is no legitimate argument to say documentaries must be shown in a movie house first.
Well, we disagree. I think it's the same argument. When Krista proposed the documentary category, her intent (so I believed) was to have a movie "sub-category", so that documentary movies would not be lost among the larger movie category. There was no intent to have television programs. I may be wrong about this; we'll have to wait for her comments. Tell you what I'll do- since Krista is the category judge, we'll leave it up to her: if she is OK with this, I'll change my vote and we won't even need Doug.

 
I get that everyone thinks I'm nuts about this. Let's just wait for Krista and I will defer to her judgment. She'll probably agree with the rest of you, so there's nothing to worry about.

 
Ok, I just caught up on tim's position on documentaries. Sorry, but it makes no sense. The Civil War and Baseball were every bit as much documentaries as Hoop Dreams. The reason that Burns dropped his two on TV was because the subject matter was so much greater then two kids playing basketball that 170 minutes (the run time of Hoop Dreams) wasn't nearly enough. The total run time of Civil War was 680 minutes and Baseball was 1140 minutes. The Civil War covered a 6 year period of the most crucial time in Americaan history and was as much a learning tool as entertainment.

Baseball covered over 100 years of material. These topics simpy had too much. I mean an actual movie about 1 simple battle in the Civil War was over 3 hours long. Movie audiences do not sit for more then that, let alone 680 or 1140 minutes. They weren't put in theaters because no one would have watched the entire thing right through in a sitting. Not because they are TV shows.

Your position makes no sense.

 
timschochet said:
Well, in that case, we could just do:

Movies (5)

TV shows (5)

Documentaries (movie or TV) (1)
First line of the Wiki entry:
The Civil War is an acclaimed documentary film created by Ken Burns about the American Civil War.
From the cover of the 12th Anniversary remastered edition DVD release:
The Civil War

A film by Ken Burns
 
Was checking over the google page - great job and idea there - massive kudos. I have some additions to my selections to help out:

03.20 Non-fiction Book The Federalist Papers were written by Madison Hamilton and Jay

05.20 Political Document Bill of Rights were "written" by the First Congress of the United States

06.01 Building/Structure World Trade Towers built by Minoru Yamasaki, Emery Roth and Sons consulting

09.20 Invention Baseball invented by Doubleday/Cartwright

10.01 Invention Football invented by Walter C. Camp

12.01 Song God Bless America written by Irving Berlin

16.01 Short Story The Legend of Sleepy Hollow Washington Irving

And Joe Ellis wrote Founding Brothers.

 
Regarding this film/documentary/TV debate, I just want to say PEOPLE! PLEASE! Let's not sway from Tim's vision.

We already swayed from wikkidpissah's vision. If we sway from Tim's vision too, then soon we'll be swaying from my vision, and nobody will see topless women on the internet again.

Let's not start down that slippery slope.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok, I just caught up on tim's position on documentaries. Sorry, but it makes no sense. The Civil War and Baseball were every bit as much documentaries as Hoop Dreams. The reason that Burns dropped his two on TV was because the subject matter was so much greater then two kids playing basketball that 170 minutes (the run time of Hoop Dreams) wasn't nearly enough. The total run time of Civil War was 680 minutes and Baseball was 1140 minutes. The Civil War covered a 6 year period of the most crucial time in Americaan history and was as much a learning tool as entertainment.Baseball covered over 100 years of material. These topics simpy had too much. I mean an actual movie about 1 simple battle in the Civil War was over 3 hours long. Movie audiences do not sit for more then that, let alone 680 or 1140 minutes. They weren't put in theaters because no one would have watched the entire thing right through in a sitting. Not because they are TV shows.Your position makes no sense.
OK, Yankee23fan makes a compelling argument here, one which I was unaware of. If these two documentaries were shown on television only because they were too long to be in movie theatres, that separates them from shows designed for television, which I had supposed they were. Therefore, I will reverse myself without waiting and accept them.This does NOT mean I accept Fennis' argument- the documentary category is limited to films, not to television shows. If you attempt to draft a documentary that was designed and produced for television, it will be rejected, at least by me.
 
Ok, I just caught up on tim's position on documentaries. Sorry, but it makes no sense. The Civil War and Baseball were every bit as much documentaries as Hoop Dreams. The reason that Burns dropped his two on TV was because the subject matter was so much greater then two kids playing basketball that 170 minutes (the run time of Hoop Dreams) wasn't nearly enough. The total run time of Civil War was 680 minutes and Baseball was 1140 minutes. The Civil War covered a 6 year period of the most crucial time in Americaan history and was as much a learning tool as entertainment.

Baseball covered over 100 years of material. These topics simpy had too much. I mean an actual movie about 1 simple battle in the Civil War was over 3 hours long. Movie audiences do not sit for more then that, let alone 680 or 1140 minutes. They weren't put in theaters because no one would have watched the entire thing right through in a sitting. Not because they are TV shows.

Your position makes no sense.
OK, Yankee23fan makes a compelling argument here, one which I was unaware of. If these two documentaries were shown on television only because they were too long to be in movie theatres, that separates them from shows designed for television, which I had supposed they were. Therefore, I will reverse myself without waiting and accept them.This does NOT mean I accept Fennis' argument- the documentary category is limited to films, not to television shows. If you attempt to draft a documentary that was designed and produced for television, it will be rejected, at least by me.
Did you never see either of these? If you aren's a baseball fan, that's one thing, but the Civil War should be required viewing by everyone in this country.
 
17.17--The Civil War by Ken Burns-Documentary

Debuting on PBS in September 1990, The Civil War was Ken Burns magnum opus and established him as a documentary film maker and led to other major projects by him. Shown on five consecutive nights, over 40 million people watched the initial run of the show on PBS, making it the most watched program ever to air on PBS. Repeated many times since, it has become the centerpiece of countless PBS pledge drives and is almost cliched in that way.

Transfered to DVD, it has sold millions of copies and is the preeminient treatment of the American Civil War in video or film.
Getting lost in the discussion on category is this was an outstanding pick. Much like Roots, it felt the entire country stopped going out for a week because you didn't want to miss a second. Everyone was talking about it. This film changed the way Americans think about the ACW. The impact on the National Military Battlefield Parks has been tremendous; huge upswing in attendence, donations for land preservation, and general ACW interest.Baseball is another fine pick, regardless of category. While the impact IMO has not been as great, the production quality was just as high. Highly entertaining.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MisfitBlondes said:
Regarding this film/documentary/TV debate, I just want to say PEOPLE! PLEASE! Let's not sway from Tim's vision.We already swayed from wikkidpissah's vision. If we sway from Tim's vision too, then soon we'll be swaying from my vision, and nobody will see topless women on the internet again.Let's not start down that slippery slope.
There's topless women on the internet? :coffee:
Nah, I was just making a joke.
 
MisfitBlondes said:
Regarding this film/documentary/TV debate, I just want to say PEOPLE! PLEASE! Let's not sway from Tim's vision.We already swayed from wikkidpissah's vision. If we sway from Tim's vision too, then soon we'll be swaying from my vision, and nobody will see topless women on the internet again.Let's not start down that slippery slope.
There's topless women on the internet? :coffee:
there are no women on the internet.
 
Ok, I just caught up on tim's position on documentaries. Sorry, but it makes no sense. The Civil War and Baseball were every bit as much documentaries as Hoop Dreams. The reason that Burns dropped his two on TV was because the subject matter was so much greater then two kids playing basketball that 170 minutes (the run time of Hoop Dreams) wasn't nearly enough. The total run time of Civil War was 680 minutes and Baseball was 1140 minutes. The Civil War covered a 6 year period of the most crucial time in Americaan history and was as much a learning tool as entertainment.Baseball covered over 100 years of material. These topics simpy had too much. I mean an actual movie about 1 simple battle in the Civil War was over 3 hours long. Movie audiences do not sit for more then that, let alone 680 or 1140 minutes. They weren't put in theaters because no one would have watched the entire thing right through in a sitting. Not because they are TV shows.Your position makes no sense.
OK, Yankee23fan makes a compelling argument here, one which I was unaware of. If these two documentaries were shown on television only because they were too long to be in movie theatres, that separates them from shows designed for television, which I had supposed they were. Therefore, I will reverse myself without waiting and accept them.This does NOT mean I accept Fennis' argument- the documentary category is limited to films, not to television shows. If you attempt to draft a documentary that was designed and produced for television, it will be rejected, at least by me.
It takes a big man to admit he's wrong, even if you didn't quite do that. Nevertheless, thank you for not dragging this out any further.
 
Fennis/Krista4
I just saw this on post #2. The agenda for the next Team Fennis board meeting is getting very long. Lack of a mission statement.

Becoming the identy of Team Fennis Krista

Showing me up by making better picks every round.

Drinking wine.

Getting married without running it by me.

Refusal to send a pic of oliver humanzee bookcase (short story shelf)
:lmao: I'm flying to London later today; should give me some time to work on the mission statement. :lmao:

 
Was checking over the google page - great job and idea there - massive kudos. I have some additions to my selections to help out:

03.20 Non-fiction Book The Federalist Papers were written by Madison Hamilton and Jay

05.20 Political Document Bill of Rights were "written" by the First Congress of the United States

06.01 Building/Structure World Trade Towers built by Minoru Yamasaki, Emery Roth and Sons consulting

09.20 Invention Baseball invented by Doubleday/Cartwright

10.01 Invention Football invented by Walter C. Camp

12.01 Song God Bless America written by Irving Berlin

16.01 Short Story The Legend of Sleepy Hollow Washington Irving

And Joe Ellis wrote Founding Brothers.
Updated both in the results page and your team page. :lmao:

 
Did you never see either of these? If you aren's a baseball fan, that's one thing, but the Civil War should be required viewing by everyone in this country.
I have seen both. I'm a huge fan of Ken Burns, and I've tried to watch most of everything he's done. Last year there was a documentary draft here, and I actually drafted The Civil War - in the television show category. I was not aware that it was intended as a "film". I thought he had received public funding for a television show, and that's why it was on PBS. But I stand corrected.
 
17.17--The Civil War by Ken Burns-Documentary

Debuting on PBS in September 1990, The Civil War was Ken Burns magnum opus and established him as a documentary film maker and led to other major projects by him. Shown on five consecutive nights, over 40 million people watched the initial run of the show on PBS, making it the most watched program ever to air on PBS. Repeated many times since, it has become the centerpiece of countless PBS pledge drives and is almost cliched in that way.

Transfered to DVD, it has sold millions of copies and is the preeminient treatment of the American Civil War in video or film.
Getting lost in the discussion on category is this was an outstanding pick. Much like Roots, it felt the entire country stopped going out for a week because you didn't want to miss a second. Everyone was talking about it. This film changed the way Americans think about the ACW. The impact on the National Military Battlefield Parks has been tremendous; huge upswing in attendence, donations for land preservation, and general ACW interest.Baseball is another fine pick, regardless of category. While the impact IMO has not been as great, the production quality was just as high. Highly entertaining.
:lmao: These were the first two things that popped into my head when we added the Documentary category.

 
In keeping with our game plan, Bonzai and I have decided it's time for another play. We've already got a couple of Aces in A Midsummer Night's Dream and Oedipus Rex, but in a deep category like this, a lot of separation can be created, and I think we're doing just that with out triumvirate of novels and now adding our third exceptional piece of drama.

18.03 - A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen - Play

Ibsen creates one of the most important and studied character in theater history in Nora Helmer. Nora was a good 100 years ahead of her time, and her role and Ibsen's play are rife with themes that reverberate today nearly 150 years after the play was first published and performed. What roles and responsibilities do people have to one another in a marriage? What is love? How do we define ourselves as people? As husbands or wife? As friends and lovers? As parents? A genuine masterpiece of dramatic writing that is performed the world over to this day, we're pretty please to add A Doll's House to our collection.

Plot Synopsis

A rave review from a modern performance of Ibsen's iconoclastic masterpiece.

 
tim, a couple of album questions:

1. I assume multi-album sets count as one album?

2. Originally I think you had written that "best of" albums and some other categories would not be eligible, but the rule now says "all genres welcome". Is it now the case that any album can be drafted?

Thanks.
as the music judge, i can prolly shed some light on criteria. no "best of"s or box sets, multi-disc releases qualify as albums unto themselves as long as it was the intention of the artist to offer their work that way. live albums are out unless they constitute defining moments for the acts involved ("break-out" or "farewell" records or those which marked the advent of a "sound" in artists' careers). you are welcome to make the case for any recording (i may need to consult with unc hummas on some jazz records, with many of the early albums being compilations of old 78rpm single releases), but any any attempt to get most-hits-for-the-buck out of their album selections will see them sink quickly to the bottom of wikkidlists. nufced
Thanks. I think the one I'm considering would qualify under the wikkidcriteria, but I might PM you if we get there and I'm about to choose it.While I'm here, I'll say a few words about the new documentary film category. As judge, I'll admit to the category any film that was intended to be a documentary--that is, as to the earlier question about Michael Moore movies, of course they are documentaries. A documentary might have a perspective (many of the best ones do), or it might contain reenactments of actual events, but the core of the notion is that they are presenting reality rather than fiction, without (except in instances of reenactments and the like) use of actors. If you have a question as to whether something qualifies, please PM me. tim can confirm this, but I believe that TV documentaries should be placed in the TV category, as this category should only apply to documentary films.

It's hard for me to describe what I see as making a great documentary, but I think emotional impact, topic, depth into which topic is addressed, and superior technical filmmaking play a role. In some cases even-handedness is called for in a documentary; in some cases it isn't. I will admit to being irritated by documentary filmmakers who insert themselves too heavily into their films unless the films are supposed to be about them or their families (for instance, a film by a son about his father). I'll also give bonus points for societal value (which is hard to define without spotlighting), though some of my favorite documentaries are not about "important" topics. The applicable categories upon which films in generally will be evaluated (use of sound, cinematography, etc.) will also impact rankings.
Bump.
 
I'm getting to the documentary issue; want to read all the posts first.
I've already changed my mind based on Yankee's argument. But I would like your opinion though; I still hold that television shows designed for television should not be accepted as documentaries.
 
In keeping with our game plan, Bonzai and I have decided it's time for another play. We've already got a couple of Aces in A Midsummer Night's Dream and Oedipus Rex, but in a deep category like this, a lot of separation can be created, and I think we're doing just that with out triumvirate of novels and now adding our third exceptional piece of drama.

18.03 - A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen - Play

Ibsen creates one of the most important and studied character in theater history in Nora Helmer. Nora was a good 100 years ahead of her time, and her role and Ibsen's play are rife with themes that reverberate today nearly 150 years after the play was first published and performed. What roles and responsibilities do people have to one another in a marriage? What is love? How do we define ourselves as people? As husbands or wife? As friends and lovers? As parents? A genuine masterpiece of dramatic writing that is performed the world over to this day, we're pretty please to add A Doll's House to our collection.

Plot Synopsis

A rave review from a modern performance of Ibsen's iconoclastic masterpiece.
Absolutely was going to take this if it got back to me. I was shocked when I realized that it was still on the board. :lmao:
 
In keeping with our game plan, Bonzai and I have decided it's time for another play. We've already got a couple of Aces in A Midsummer Night's Dream and Oedipus Rex, but in a deep category like this, a lot of separation can be created, and I think we're doing just that with out triumvirate of novels and now adding our third exceptional piece of drama.

18.03 - A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen - Play

Ibsen creates one of the most important and studied character in theater history in Nora Helmer. Nora was a good 100 years ahead of her time, and her role and Ibsen's play are rife with themes that reverberate today nearly 150 years after the play was first published and performed. What roles and responsibilities do people have to one another in a marriage? What is love? How do we define ourselves as people? As husbands or wife? As friends and lovers? As parents? A genuine masterpiece of dramatic writing that is performed the world over to this day, we're pretty please to add A Doll's House to our collection.

Plot Synopsis

A rave review from a modern performance of Ibsen's iconoclastic masterpiece.
Great pick here. Was on my short list of targets with my next pick.
 
In keeping with our game plan, Bonzai and I have decided it's time for another play. We've already got a couple of Aces in A Midsummer Night's Dream and Oedipus Rex, but in a deep category like this, a lot of separation can be created, and I think we're doing just that with out triumvirate of novels and now adding our third exceptional piece of drama.

18.03 - A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen - Play

Ibsen creates one of the most important and studied character in theater history in Nora Helmer. Nora was a good 100 years ahead of her time, and her role and Ibsen's play are rife with themes that reverberate today nearly 150 years after the play was first published and performed. What roles and responsibilities do people have to one another in a marriage? What is love? How do we define ourselves as people? As husbands or wife? As friends and lovers? As parents? A genuine masterpiece of dramatic writing that is performed the world over to this day, we're pretty please to add A Doll's House to our collection.

Plot Synopsis

A rave review from a modern performance of Ibsen's iconoclastic masterpiece.
I was wondering when somebody would select this. A Doll's House belongs in the upper echelon of plays, and will get a high ranking.
 
18.1 - I'm going song here to make sure I grab it now. Voted #5 song of the 20th century, it's another theme rich selection that is a great pick without the theme.

Everyone knows the opening:

A long, long time ago...

I can still remember

How that music used to make me smile.

And I knew if I had my chance

That I could make those people dance

And, maybe, they'd be happy for a while.

One of the better works of poetry set to music, Don McLean gave us an opus on America, on a moment in time that we all can look to as "better," and on the feelings of loss that shape a life for all time.

I select, American Pie
Nice pick.
 
Ok, I just caught up on tim's position on documentaries. Sorry, but it makes no sense. The Civil War and Baseball were every bit as much documentaries as Hoop Dreams. The reason that Burns dropped his two on TV was because the subject matter was so much greater then two kids playing basketball that 170 minutes (the run time of Hoop Dreams) wasn't nearly enough. The total run time of Civil War was 680 minutes and Baseball was 1140 minutes. The Civil War covered a 6 year period of the most crucial time in Americaan history and was as much a learning tool as entertainment.

Baseball covered over 100 years of material. These topics simpy had too much. I mean an actual movie about 1 simple battle in the Civil War was over 3 hours long. Movie audiences do not sit for more then that, let alone 680 or 1140 minutes. They weren't put in theaters because no one would have watched the entire thing right through in a sitting. Not because they are TV shows.

Your position makes no sense.
OK, Yankee23fan makes a compelling argument here, one which I was unaware of. If these two documentaries were shown on television only because they were too long to be in movie theatres, that separates them from shows designed for television, which I had supposed they were. Therefore, I will reverse myself without waiting and accept them.This does NOT mean I accept Fennis' argument- the documentary category is limited to films, not to television shows. If you attempt to draft a documentary that was designed and produced for television, it will be rejected, at least by me.
It takes a big man to admit he's wrong, even if you didn't quite do that. Nevertheless, thank you for not dragging this out any further.
timschochet has a strong opinion, but he readily admits he is wrong; its one of his best qualities.timschochet - I think I understand your thinking in rejecting other t.v. documentaires. krista4 seems to be a big fan of the "you can pick it because it fits the category but it may not score well" school of thought, so I'm not sure it matters. Ken Burns two best documentaries (IMO) are off the board. They are incredibly well done. If somebody takes some fluff piece from the History Channel shot on video, they're going to get slammed by the judge - the artistic quality, influence and impact on society, et al, are just not there. I don't disagree with what you are saying, but I honestly don't think we will see other t.v. documentaries taken - there are just too many great theatre release films to chose from.

 
I'm getting to the documentary issue; want to read all the posts first.
I've already changed my mind based on Yankee's argument. But I would like your opinion though; I still hold that television shows designed for television should not be accepted as documentaries.
See above; I'm not vetoing you.The Ken Burns shows are excellent choices for TV or wildcard.
Wait a minute- are you saying you don't accept the argument that they are films? I thought Yankee's arguments here were compelling, but if you don't see them as films, then we probably shouldn't accept them. Please clarify.
 
In keeping with our game plan, Bonzai and I have decided it's time for another play. We've already got a couple of Aces in A Midsummer Night's Dream and Oedipus Rex, but in a deep category like this, a lot of separation can be created, and I think we're doing just that with out triumvirate of novels and now adding our third exceptional piece of drama.

18.03 - A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen - Play

Ibsen creates one of the most important and studied character in theater history in Nora Helmer. Nora was a good 100 years ahead of her time, and her role and Ibsen's play are rife with themes that reverberate today nearly 150 years after the play was first published and performed. What roles and responsibilities do people have to one another in a marriage? What is love? How do we define ourselves as people? As husbands or wife? As friends and lovers? As parents? A genuine masterpiece of dramatic writing that is performed the world over to this day, we're pretty please to add A Doll's House to our collection.

Plot Synopsis

A rave review from a modern performance of Ibsen's iconoclastic masterpiece.
I was wondering when somebody would select this. A Doll's House belongs in the upper echelon of plays, and will get a high ranking.
Stunned and ecstatic that both Pride/Prejudice and A Doll's House made it back to us. We very seriously considered drafting both of them rounds earlier and feel like we just stole something getting both of them here.
 
I have to leave now for a while- I am still waiting for Krista to clarify herself. It sounds like she agrees with my original opinion that the Ken Burns should not be accepted. Whatever she decides, I am deferring to her judgment as category judge. So this issue is still not decided yet.

 
I'm getting to the documentary issue; want to read all the posts first.
I've already changed my mind based on Yankee's argument. But I would like your opinion though; I still hold that television shows designed for television should not be accepted as documentaries.
See above; I'm not vetoing you.The Ken Burns shows are excellent choices for TV or wildcard.
Ok, hang on. I think we need to be sure what we are doing here. I appreciate tim changing his mind after hearing the sides, but we should make sure what's going on here. Similar to my TV problem with the sports events, it looks like krista may have a judging problem with these picks.I do not mean to stir the pot or creat problems. But if Baseball by Burns isn't going to be considered in the documentary category by the judge then (1) I certainly would not have picked it now as I was trying to get that category out of the way and saw my top choice in The Civil War get taken right before it, and (2) i still would want it in the TV spot then, but now that the cat is out of the bag im in a tight spot.Again, I was in the same boat with the Super Bowl, so I'm not using any vitriol here, just need confirmation. If Krista says its the Super Bowl of the category, then I would like to repick and throw Baseball by Burns back into the pot because in the end I don't see myself going after any TV show for another 10 rounds or so.
 
I'm getting to the documentary issue; want to read all the posts first.
I've already changed my mind based on Yankee's argument. But I would like your opinion though; I still hold that television shows designed for television should not be accepted as documentaries.
See above; I'm not vetoing you.The Ken Burns shows are excellent choices for TV or wildcard.
Wait a minute- are you saying you don't accept the argument that they are films? I thought Yankee's arguments here were compelling, but if you don't see them as films, then we probably shouldn't accept them. Please clarify.
No, I don't. I wish you had not given in.Ken Burns won Emmys for these. He did not win, nor was he eligible for, Academy Awards for them. They fit into TV, not movies.
 
Staying in my Civil War theme, I will pick a song that was very closely identified with the ACW. It was written by Julia Ward Howe based on a tune that was a camp meeting song, but became the marching song of the Union Army. Even today, it has the power to make grown men weep with the majesty of the words and music. Images from this song have made it into the American vernacular and into famous speeches and books and so much else.

18.04--The Battle Hymn of the Republic-by Julia Ward Howe-Song

Link to a great performance of the song:

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord:

He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;

He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword:

His truth is marching on.

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

His truth is marching on.

I have seen Him in the watch-fires of a hundred circling camps,

They have builded Him an altar in the evening dews and damps;

I can read His righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps:

His day is marching on.

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

His day is marching on.

I have read a fiery gospel writ in burnished rows of steel:

"As ye deal with my contemners, so with you my grace shall deal;

Let the Hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with his heel,

Since God is marching on."

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Since God is marching on.

He has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;

He is sifting out the hearts of men before His judgment-seat:

Oh, be swift, my soul, to answer Him! be jubilant, my feet!

Our God is marching on.

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Our God is marching on.

In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea,

With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me:

As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free,

While God is marching on.

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

While God is marching on.

He is coming like the glory of the morning on the wave,

He is Wisdom to the mighty, He is Succour to the brave,

So the world shall be His footstool, and the soul of Time His slave,

Our God is marching on.

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Our God is marching on.

 
I'm getting to the documentary issue; want to read all the posts first.
I've already changed my mind based on Yankee's argument. But I would like your opinion though; I still hold that television shows designed for television should not be accepted as documentaries.
See above; I'm not vetoing you.The Ken Burns shows are excellent choices for TV or wildcard.
Wait a minute- are you saying you don't accept the argument that they are films? I thought Yankee's arguments here were compelling, but if you don't see them as films, then we probably shouldn't accept them. Please clarify.
No, I don't. I wish you had not given in.Ken Burns won Emmys for these. He did not win, nor was he eligible for, Academy Awards for them. They fit into TV, not movies.
Fair enough.I am officially throwing Baseball by Burns back into the pool. Repick coming in 5.
 
Krista has decided, and she agrees with my original opinion. Neither Ken Burns film will be accepted. You can submit them as TV shows, or you may choose to repick.

 
I'm getting to the documentary issue; want to read all the posts first.
I've already changed my mind based on Yankee's argument. But I would like your opinion though; I still hold that television shows designed for television should not be accepted as documentaries.
See above; I'm not vetoing you.The Ken Burns shows are excellent choices for TV or wildcard.
Ok, hang on. I think we need to be sure what we are doing here. I appreciate tim changing his mind after hearing the sides, but we should make sure what's going on here. Similar to my TV problem with the sports events, it looks like krista may have a judging problem with these picks.I do not mean to stir the pot or creat problems. But if Baseball by Burns isn't going to be considered in the documentary category by the judge then (1) I certainly would not have picked it now as I was trying to get that category out of the way and saw my top choice in The Civil War get taken right before it, and (2) i still would want it in the TV spot then, but now that the cat is out of the bag im in a tight spot.Again, I was in the same boat with the Super Bowl, so I'm not using any vitriol here, just need confirmation. If Krista says its the Super Bowl of the category, then I would like to repick and throw Baseball by Burns back into the pot because in the end I don't see myself going after any TV show for another 10 rounds or so.
I'm sorry. I hate to put you into a bad spot on these. But really I don't think that anyone in this draft wouldn't be aware of these two works and how fantastic they are, so I'm hoping no real harm is done here. By bumping my post above, I'm trying to relay that I have always seen this category as documentary film, which would not include TV documentaries in whatever form.I don't know how I'd rate them if they were thrown into the category, but I have to imagine it would not be all that high since, despite their artistic merit, I don't see them as fitting the category. Again, I'm really sorry and wish I had been on earlier as I usually am. Figures this is the one day I had work to do in the morning. :moneybag:
 
Staying in my Civil War theme, I will pick a song that was very closely identified with the ACW. It was written by Julia Ward Howe based on a tune that was a camp meeting song, but became the marching song of the Union Army. Even today, it has the power to make grown men weep with the majesty of the words and music. Images from this song have made it into the American vernacular and into famous speeches and books and so much else.

18.04--The Battle Hymn of the Republic-by Julia Ward Howe-Song
And there goes my repick. :moneybag: Sonuva. Great pick.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top