Tournament Idea Thread 3 (Best Movie Villain Point Totals | Post 304)

[Runwildboys]

I don’t think anyone cares about Elvis but you. Maybe we let ya do one Elvis tournament to get it out of your system!

Or we give him his Elvis tourney, then all do write in votes for Donny Osmond.

 

[Runwildboys]

then it's settled...next tourney...Elvis' 32 GREATEST songs...ipso-fatso...solved.

"ipso-fatso"....Was that a Freudian slip?

 

[CouchCoach]

I don’t think anyone cares about Elvis but you. Maybe we let ya do one Elvis tournament to get it out of your system!

If you think that would get it out of his system, you ain't been around him as much as we have.

He could break Elvis down into at least a dozen separate tournaments including which celebrity had the most poop in him when he died. Rumor is Elvis and John Wayne had 40 lbs. I know this because my wife reminded me anytime either's name was brought up. I have no idea why she knew that or cared, just one of the lovable mysteries about our womenfolk.

 

[DFWJC]

I can get in on an Elvis tourney if it's the 25th tourney that we have.
All in favor, say "aye"

 

[Runwildboys]

I can get in on an Elvis tourney if it's the 25th tourney that we have.
All in favor, say "aye"

Nay.....unless it's, "Who's Elvis's #1 fan in CowboysZone?"

That, of course, would be @YosemiteSam .

 

[DallasEast]

I am game if others are also in favor having the member with the best voted idea submit a list of 32 nominees for a tournament. My personal view is multiple ballots create more diverse nominations for a list than from a single ballot, so I have a reservation or two.

First, a ballot list with only one perspective about a topic may create less opportunities for other members to share the same opinion. That could create some degree of disinterest in others. Second, the ballot creator themselves might bear witness to more 'upsets' than they might first anticipate if his or her upper seeds fall victim to their lower seeds more often then they initially thought.

I do agree that one perspective ballot list tournaments may not require more time in crowning champions. It might be prudent in reducing the voting time in the early rounds to one day each instead of two days each. Heck, I was thinking about doing that for the present format anyway lol.

It would be my choice in continuing allowing rounds to last for at least a day. Everyone, even when 'everyone' is few in number, has different real-life schedules that might hedge upon greater participation throughout any given day. I know it does for me.

 

[Runwildboys]

I am game if others are also in favor having the member with the best voted idea submit a list of 32 nominees for a tournament. My personal view is multiple ballots create more diverse nominations for a list than from a single ballot, so I have a reservation or two.

First, a ballot list with only one perspective about a topic may create less opportunities for other members to share the same opinion. That could create some degree of disinterest in others. Second, the ballot creator themselves might bear witness to more 'upsets' than they might first anticipate if his or her upper seeds fall victim to their lower seeds more often then they initially thought.

I do agree that one perspective ballot lists may not require more time in crowning champions. It might be prudent in reducing the voting time in the early rounds to one day each instead of two days each. Heck, I was thinking about doing that for the present format anyway lol.

It would be my choice in continuing allowing rounds to last for at least a day. Everyone, even when 'everyone' is few in number, has different real-life schedules that might hedge upon greater participation throughout any given day. I know it does for me.

Okay, how about we don't seed our own lists. Do it as we are now, but instead of ranking them according to the order in which we post them, only the most mentioned nominees move on to the vote?

Sorry, I'm at the gym. That may not make any sense at all.

 

[CouchCoach]

I am game if others are also in favor having the member with the best voted idea submit a list of 32 nominees for a tournament. My personal view is multiple ballots create more diverse nominations for a list than from a single ballot, so I have a reservation or two.

First, a ballot list with only one perspective about a topic may create less opportunities for other members to share the same opinion. That could create some degree of disinterest in others. Second, the ballot creator themselves might bear witness to more 'upsets' than they might first anticipate if his or her upper seeds fall victim to their lower seeds more often then they initially thought.

I do agree that one perspective ballot list tournaments may not require more time in crowning champions. It might be prudent in reducing the voting time in the early rounds to one day each instead of two days each. Heck, I was thinking about doing that for the present format anyway lol.

It would be my choice in continuing allowing rounds to last for at least a day. Everyone, even when 'everyone' is few in number, has different real-life schedules that might hedge upon greater participation throughout any given day. I know it does for me.

Well, when we get onto Sports Movies, you have my list to start with and people can make suggestions that I may have overlooked. That wasn't actually in my order, just off the top of my head and looking at my collection.

If cocktails becomes a category, I cannot be limited to 32, might want to start with 128 and work our way up the list giving a yay or nay or maybe just a grunt to get down to 32. Then we can list the 32 best rehab centers.

 

[CouchCoach]

Okay, how about we don't seed our own lists. Do it as we are now, but instead of ranking them according to the order in which we post them, only the most mentioned nominees move on to the vote?

Sorry, I'm at the gym. That may not make any sense at all.

No, it doesn't make any sense. Why are you at the gym when it's Happy Hour time up there on a Friday afternoon.

 

[DallasEast]

Okay, how about we don't seed our own lists. Do it as we are now, but instead of ranking them according to the order in which we post them, only the most mentioned nominees move on to the vote?

Sorry, I'm at the gym. That may not make any sense at all.

It is an idea. Would there be a set minimum of 'most mentioned nominees each' for an acceptable field?

That may be a stupid question to ask since the best voted idea *should* be any topic with *enough* shared opinions amongst multiple participants. Even so I have a concern that a certain topic will draw VERY diverse nominations that are unique to each participant.

Perhaps 2 should be minimum number for each 'most mentioned nominee'. Methinks 32 nominees is a nice round figure for a tournament field. 16 is okay but I am not feeling a good vibe for a tournament of 8 or 4 regardless how predictable the finalists may be perceived before a tournament begins.

 

[DallasEast]

Well, when we get onto Sports Movies, you have my list to start with and people can make suggestions that I may have overlooked. That wasn't actually in my order, just off the top of my head and looking at my collection.

If cocktails becomes a category, I cannot be limited to 32, might want to start with 128 and work our way up the list giving a yay or nay or maybe just a grunt to get down to 32. Then we can list the 32 best rehab centers.

Perhaps we should wait for a vote on best idea first before automatically choosing one for the any tournament in advance. We do not want @cowboyec getting any more bright ideas.

"128?" Now I understand completely why that cat in your avatar looks completely tore up!

 

[DallasEast]

Another thought: 'most mentioned nominee' should be an exact match in my opinion. Case in point: this tournament. I adored Joaquin Phoenix's performance in Joker. Phoenix has clearly defined the character's beginning in better context to what was originally created by Bob Kane and Bill Finger, before oversight nonsense twisted their creation for almost four decades.

That said, I will take Heath Ledger's Best Supporting Actor over Phoenix's Best Actor performance any day given the choice. 'Most mentioned nominee' would mean Ledger's character should be considered instead of Phoenix's character using my example in my opinion.

 

[Runwildboys]

It is an idea. Would there be a set minimum of 'most mentioned nominees each' for an acceptable field?

That may be a stupid question to ask since the best voted idea *should* be any topic with *enough* shared opinions amongst multiple participants. Even so I have a concern that a certain topic will draw VERY diverse nominations that are unique to each participant.

Perhaps 2 should be minimum number for each 'most mentioned nominee'. Methinks 32 nominees is a nice round figure for a tournament field. 16 is okay but I am not feeling a good vibe for a tournament of 8 or 4 regardless how predictable the finalists may be perceived before a tournament begins.

Basically, I think anything that was listed by only one person is an automatic out. If there aren't enough double listed items to get 32, then maybe have a vote first to fill the remaining spots with items from the single mention items?

 

[DallasEast]

~And now a thread interlude of belated self-bragging by DallasEast~

How did y'all like the animated character nominees in my ballot list? I wanted to give it a bit more juice instead of the static pic format I had previously used (although any pic of Halle Berry requires zero extra juice).

All pics are 200X200 in dimension with a set duration of approximately two seconds each. I wanted them to be animated representations of a memorable scene from their movies but not so long as to steal too much bandwidth. @Reality would have my hyde if I went all cray cray making them too huge.

Does anyone have a favorite out of the bunch I posted? It may come as a surprise but my personal favorite is #31 Cody Jarrett, played by James Cagney in the movie White Heat. Yep. It is an old movie for any young whippersnappers out there reading this but it is a really good one with an even better ending:

"LOOK AT ME MA! TOP OF THE WORLD!" BOOOOOOOOOM!

 

[DallasEast]

Basically, I think anything that was listed by only one person is an automatic out. If there aren't enough double listed items to get 32, then maybe have a vote first to fill the remaining spots with items from the single mention items?

That is a good compromise I think.

 

[cowboyec]

Another thought: 'most mentioned nominee' should be an exact match in my opinion. Case in point: this tournament. I adored Joaquin Phoenix's performance in Joker. Phoenix has clearly defined the character's beginning in better context to what was originally created by Bob Kane and Bill Finger, before oversight nonsense twisted their creation for almost four decades.

That said, I will take Heath Ledger's Best Supporting Actor over Phoenix's Best Actor performance any day given the choice. 'Most mentioned nominee' would mean Ledger's character should be considered instead of Phoenix's character using my example in my opinion.

i think the character itself...regardless of who/what/when/where/why...should be the representation.
the joker....in all his forms....should stand.
this isnt a tourney for best performance by an actor.
its best villain.
i take that to mean character.
the joker....as a character...should be the representitive.
i think we make it hard.
best villain.
the joker.
which one?
who cares?
its best villain...not best individual performance by an actor as the villain.

when we get to the hero tourney....batman,superman....themselves should stand....not an individual performance.
the character.

 

[Runwildboys]

i think the character itself...regardless of who/what/when/where/why...should be the representation.
the joker....in all his forms....should stand.
this isnt a tourney for best performance by an actor.
its best villain.
i take that to mean character.
the joker....as a character...should be the representitive.
i think we make it hard.
best villain.
the joker.
which one?
who cares?
its best villain...not best individual performance by an actor as the villain.

when we get to the hero tourney....batman,superman....themselves should stand....not an individual performance.
the character.

At first I thought the same thing, but if you've only ever seen Ben Affleck's Daredevil, you'd probably think he was a crappy hero, where as if you watched the Netflix series, your opinion would probably be the opposite, so should you just average out those two incarnations and base your opinion on that, or do you choose the better performance?

Same goes for The Punisher.

 

[DallasEast]

i think the character itself...regardless of who/what/when/where/why...should be the representation.
the joker....in all his forms....should stand.
this isnt a tourney for best performance by an actor.
its best villain.
i take that to mean character.
the joker....as a character...should be the representitive.
i think we make it hard.
best villain.
the joker.
which one?
who cares?
its best villain...not best individual performance by an actor as the villain.

when we get to the hero tourney....batman,superman....themselves should stand....not an individual performance.
the character.

Totally disagree.

Which one? For me it matters. Who cares? I do. Trying not to start any thread fights but in MY opinion any character should be the closest representation of what its creator or creators initially envisioned.

Example? The Joker. The character was not first conceived as a clown but as sociopathic mass murderer. Any closest depiction of that particular character description is Best Movie Villain in my opinion. Just my two cents.

 

[DallasEast]

At first I thought the same thing, but if you've only ever seen Ben Affleck's Daredevil, you'd probably think he was a crappy hero, where as if you watched the Netflix series, your opinion would probably be the opposite, so should you just average out those two incarnations and base your opinion on that, or do you choose the better performance?

Same goes for The Punisher.

Ben Affleck was a joke in comparison to Charlie Cox.

Jon Bernthal IS Frank Castle. Most of the world simply does not know the truth.

 

[Runwildboys]

Ben Affleck was a joke in comparison to Charlie Cox.

Jon Bernthal IS Frank Castle. Most of the world simply does not know the truth.

Agreed!