caligulathegod

The hook of this challenge is that it is about Historical Time periods. It has a special emphasis on War movies and Westerns as those are specific genres of film and they fit into the Historical theme. Biographical films are included in that they are a related genre, that is, a history of a specific person or group. Sports films are a bugaboo, but I'll get into how those fit in a moment.

I view Period films as one time's attempt to tell a story about its past. Ideally, it would be about actual Historical events. How does one decide that one film is eligible over another? This is a general DVD discussion group movie challenge, not a dissertation. Do we go "truth police"? Most films about actual events and persons are almost entirely fictional. There's essentially no difference between Amadeus and Barry Lyndon. Amadeus was never meant to be a documentary, just an entertainment. In a movie challenge, you open it up a bit. The idea is to get a group of people together to watch a bunch of movies. What do these films have in common? They are attempts to portray another era. All one need do is not worry about it being inspired by true events or people. Even pure fiction is usually inspired by someone the author knew or heard of. Sherlock Holmes, for instance, was based upon Dr. Joseph Bell.

Pre-20th century is easy to determine. Those films aren't in question. Where it becomes difficult is in the 20th century.

That's a very good point about how Rebel Without a Cause being representative of its time. However, the hook here is History. Rebel was intended to be contemporary. It's not about another time, it's about its own time. Given enough time, literally EVERY movie ever made would become eligible. I'm all about inclusion, but there has to be a limit somewhere. Now, an argument can be made for films that are iconic time capsules, like Rebel, or Saturday Night Fever, but how does one quantify that? Once you allow in that argument, then the challenge becomes so broad to be unwieldy.

Sports films is probably the hardest to justify. Most sports films are Bio-pics, anyway, so they would count. Sports become historical events right after they happen. Consider the stat keeping obsession with baseball. It becomes its own genre that is tangentially related to History and is easy enough to define, so i can see including it as a lark.

caligulathegod

Oh, there was another thing I wanted to mention because there seems to be a bit of an issue for some people. These challenges by necessity and in the interest of variety often include multiple genres linked by a common theme. If you want to watch just one of the genres, then you can do that. If you want to watch only Westerns or War movies, then you are welcome to. If there's a genre you feel uncomfortable with or don't quite understand, then don't watch it. As long as the multiple genres can be justified (and they can be under the common theme of Historical perspectives) and someone might enjoy watching them, then we have a successful challenge, and that's the most important thing.

BuddhaWake

again I'm with caligula but he put it in much better words that I ever could. For me a period film is one made by another generation to reflect or review a prior generation/time with the guideline that it could have potentially happen or the story takes place in a real time but the events are completely fictional. A movie made in the 50s about the 50s wouldn't count by my definition as it was contemporary. Now the only distinction i would place would be on an event rather than an era, so things like vietnam movies made at the time of the vietnam war would count to give a simple example.

I do have a proposal though, right now i feel that we are mostly in agreement about everything else except maybe horror-esque and this "period" films discussion. Can we start setting the rules/guidelines on what there is consensus about? that way we can have that foundation and build on top of it.

The Man with the Golden Doujinshi

That's what I'm mainly worried about. One could argue that kung fu movie X is a period piece for a whatever Chinese Dynasty it takes place in. We still have time though and I'll end up just doing the simple approach Trevor is taking.

caligulathegod

I even put that on the checklist. Watch a Historical film about another country. I see nothing wrong if someone wanted to watch a whole month of period Kung Fu movies, or Westerns, or watching the Complete Jane Austen. I'm more reluctant to make it just "old" films, hence the emphasis on it being recreations of Olden times, even it that means The Wedding Singer, which is a "current" movie about the 80s. This could really be a fun challenge.

Travis McClain

I never considered that "the hook." I saw the appeal of the challenge simply being that it satisfied the expressed demand for a War Challenge and a Western Challenge all at once. The period pieces are nothing more than an outgrowth from that. Maybe they're just as relevant, maybe they're the most important thing to a given participant, but they're not the basis of the challenge. As for being the marketing lure of the challenge to other participants, if that's how you meant "hook," I think being able to justify a month of gunfights is sufficient for most.

I've taken the previous checklist suggestions into consideration, and begun incorporating them with my own previous ideas. What I want from the pro-period piece camp is a list of checklist suggestions. What kinds of things best represent the period piece to you? What are essential elements? So far, we've framed the discussion in terms of exclusions--it's time we got on to firm ideas about what is included that participants who follow the checklist should find beneficial to their challenge.

Dimension X

Since it's supposedly based on true events in the main character's life, I am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang could be considered a biopic, so it should be okay for the challenge.
I would say The Best Years of Our Lives counts as a War movie ("War" movies don't have to be just about battles) and would qualify for the Challenge under the "contemporaneous war film exemption."

Half of the films you named would count for this Challenge, the others you can watch during the Oscar Challenge (or you could wait and watch all four then). The line has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise we're opening it up to include any film which the viewer subjectively feels "defines its era."
How is including films about historical periods other than wars or the Old West complicated? It seems pretty simple to me.

caligulathegod

OK, so what do we have here. With a little help from Wikipedia.

War Films. A film genre concerned with warfare, usually about naval, air or land battles, sometimes focusing instead on prisoners of war, covert operations, military training or other related subjects. At times war films focus on daily military or civilian life in wartime without depicting battles. Their stories may be fiction, based on history, docudrama or, occasionally, biographical.The film can depict actual battle or just be associated with a war. For example, Casablanca does not depict any battles, but it takes place with the backdrop of WWII.

This also includes television shows about war, such as Band of Brothers, the Pacific and situation comedies such as MASH and Hogan's Heroes. Documentaries such as those on History Channel or BBC are also allowed.

Westerns. Westerns are devoted to telling stories set primarily in the later half of the 19th century in what became the Western United States (known as the American Old West or Wild West), but also in Western Canada, Mexico (The Wild Bunch, Vera Cruz), Alaska (The Far Country, North to Alaska) and even Australia (Quigley Down Under, The Proposition). Some Westerns are set as early as the Battle of the Alamo in 1836 but most are set between the end of the American Civil War and the massacre at Wounded Knee in 1890, though there are several "late Westerns" (e.g., The Wild Bunch and 100 Rifles) set as late as the Mexican Revolution in 1913. In the 1930s many B-Westerns were set in the present.

All Westerns are allowed, including TV shows, such as Gunsmoke or Brisco County and theatrical serials such as those with Tom Mix.

Biographical Films. A film that dramatizes the life of an actual person or people. They differ from films “based on a true story” or “historical films” in that they attempt to comprehensively tell a person’s life story or at least the most historically important years of their lives.

Period Films. A period piece is a work set in a particular era. This informal term covers all countries, all periods and all genres. It may be as long and general as the medieval era or as limited as one decade—the Roaring Twenties, for example. Most commonly seen in film. A period piece movie is also referred to as a costume drama. A costume drama is a period piece in which elaborate costumes, sets and properties are featured in order to capture the ambiance of a particular era.

The most common type of costume drama is the historical costume drama, both on stage and in movies. This category includes Barry Lyndon, Braveheart, From Hell, and Robin Hood. Films that are set in the 1930s and 1940s, such as Last Man Standing, may also be placed in this category. Other examples include Marie Antoinette, Middlemarch, and Pride and Prejudice.

For the purposes of this challenge, we are defining this as films produced in one era but set in an earlier era. WIKI Link WIKI Link 2

Sports Films. These are films that ones that revolve around a sport. These can be Biographical films about a particular player or team or completely fictional as long as it involves sports. Why sports? Well, sports are a proxy for war. They are also recorded as manufactured historical events. Sports stars become historical figures within their idiom and stats are kept and obsessed over as much as any History tome. Plus, think of it like recess. We're allowed to have a purely fun entry.WIKI Link

caligulathegod

Purely War and/or Westerns might interest a half dozen people by themselves but that really doesn't make much of a challenge. At that scale it might as well have been incorporated into the Make Your Own Challenge. To make it more interesting to more people it needed to have something besides just War Movies or Westerns. Well, what do they have in common? Even though both genres tend to be fictional, they both represent historical periods or events. Why not make it general Historical then and open it up to more types of of films and more participants? It's about the bigger picture. While the specific might have inspired it, the bigger picture is actually more "inspired". Outside of Mr Peepers and his 10,000 movies, does anyone really have more than a handful of war movies or Westerns? Everyone has films that can apply to this more expanded challenge. If someone wants to watch nothing but Westerns, then this is still perfect for him. It's just going to be more fun for more people with the greater variety. Several people mentioned in the Exploitation challenge thread that having so many related but varying genres to choose from kept the challenge really fresh.

Trevor

Just going by all the back-and-forth of this thread and the arguments in your very post.
Huge disagreement there. They may not have been as popular, at least initially, as other Challenges, but they have the same potential as Horror or any other genre-specific Challenge.
Or horror, or sci-fi? Wait.
Agreed. But my argument is more that we were running out of months on the calendar, as opposed to running out of possible interest in these specific genres. (admitting that my earlier arguments for combining things may have emphasized your same arguments here, but I'm compelled to always argue, no matter what)

BuddhaWake

I think the argument right now is based on what should be included or not in "period" so we are trying to define what we should count and not. I hink MinLShaw wrote in the very first post that it should be something based on an event or person. I agree with this and I would expand the margins a bit within that definition as I wrote in a prior post. I think is perfectly fine to have a different set of rules for each genre inside the challenge on top of the general challenge rules as have been discussed for westerns and wars. I would love to see some rules starting to get spelled out to see what needs to be addressed and what we could move on from.

On something somewhat unrelated, is that we should really take this challenge and all the possiblities it has to really get more female talkers and forum members in general to participate. doing a war/western emphasis would not do that IMO.

Trevor

I wonder if IB, or Geoff before, ever did a survey to know what are make-up here at DVDTalk is like?

How many members?
How many active members?
How do you define active?
How many female? male?
Ages?
Incomes?

I'm sure some of that data is available, but maybe they won't share.

I know we have several active posters who claim to be female, but who knows? Maybe we're all female.

NoirFan

EDIT: Nevermind, didn't notice the poll was multiple-choice.

BuddhaWake

oops. I clicked on all the ones i will watch. which is all but the sports one. I don't think i have any that would apply.

Travis McClain

Sorry, folks...I had a post that addressed a lot of things and when I clicked to submit, I got an error page and lost the entire thing!

With regards to the poll, I want you to choose all that apply. I'll be editing the first post in the thread to say so in just a minute. As for an "other" option, I don't think anything other than those five things have been considered for inclusion to date. If you have a suggestion for a different field, this is the place to offer it for discussion.

Dimension X

I think people are trying to make it more complicated than it needs to be.

The point of contention seems to be that if we can count a movie about the fifties (or some other period), we should also be able count a movie made in the fifties (or some other period) because, arguably, it is more reflective or representative of its time than a period film could possibly be. Following that reasoning would just open us up to allowing pretty much any movie ever made to be counted, which defeats the purpose of a themed challenge.
CTG did a good job defining each type in his post. Here's his definition for period films.

Travis McClain

Okay, now that the poll has been addressed...

My first ruling is that content intended to be contemporary is out. No Leave It to Beaver, Rebel Without a Cause, etc. I agree that they are helpful for reflecting the attitudes and aesthetics of a specific era, but I've decided that isn't specific enough for our purposes. It simply opens too many arguments for inclusion that go off-topic, and for our inaugural challenge I think we're better off closing that door.

I promise, though, that we'll revisit the subject on 1 July when we assess the challenge.

As for female participation, I'm all for it. I still think it's misguided to assume that women will flock to a challenge that includes romances set in the past. I agree that Westerns and War are more masculine in nature and appeal, but biopics and documentaries are pretty wide open. I really do hope that this challenge is popular with members of both genders, but I think it's more important to concentrate on ways of recognizing content that spotlights the important roles women have played throughout history than it is to focus on women as participants.

acubfaninmd

Just a quick question about if these movies would count for this challenge, I believe they do but just wanted verification.

Inglourious Bastards (2009)
Hurt Locker
Dr. Strangelove

NoirFan

The second part of that statement is almost sig-worthy.

Travis McClain

Yes, yes, and as far as I know, yes.

We can have a discussion about the historical validity of biblical epics, but I want to be clear about this: There is no room in this thread for questioning a forum member's beliefs (or lack thereof).

caligulathegod

I had one thought about something that was brought up earlier. Some films are so culturally significant that they are not only set in the time they were made but are truly representative of that time. Films like Rebel Without a Cause, Easy Rider, Saturday Night Fever were contemporary when they were made, but more than other movies they truly define their era. There's no way to really quantify it, you just have to know it or feel it. I propose our old friend the Wild Card for such films. Although this challenge really doesn't have a set goal, to prevent abuse the Wild Card should be limited to 3 or 6. Not that any will ever be turned down, as this selection will be your opinion of what film defines the era, but it should be understood that you are making a conscious choice rather than just grabbing an old film off the unwatched pile.

Travis McClain

Given that we already have five pretty wide open fields that qualify for this challenge, I'm against wild cards. It seems to me that if you're participating in this challenge and what you want to watch doesn't fit one of those fields, then you're too far off topic. As always, I'm open to being persuaded, but I think we keep coming back to one camp trying to open the doors to nearly every movie ever made counting, and the other side wanting to finally get clear ideas of what is excluded from eligibility. Wild cards only add to the sense that "anything goes."

caligulathegod

Not that I'm totally for them, either, but it's an interesting idea. Of course they have to be limited and only brought out for the obvious ones. It's definitely the hardest to define and for people to get a firm grasp on. It might be more trouble than it's worth, honestly.

Doc Moonlight

Limiting the number of wild cards for iconic films to 3-6, though, pretty much keeps a lid on blowing the challenge wide open and allows those of us who want to focus on an era or series of films a little leeway. Another option would be to agree on a series of approximately 10 titles (many of which have been mentioned in posts) which would be OK for the Challenge. It hearkens back to a time when TV shows weren't allowed for the Horror Challenge, but "It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown" was the acceptable exception. When we appraise the Challenge in July we could discuss whether to keep or drop teh wild cards or drop or expand the iconic films list.

Travis McClain

Then the question becomes, "Why not just allow the 10 title Iconic sub-list?" I'm sorry, but I just think this challenge is bloated enough accommodating period pieces. Sports are on a much shorter leash: they must be based upon real people/events to qualify, which is why I'm fine with their inclusion. (So, yes, Hoosiers is in; Kevin Costner's excellent trio of baseball features is out.)