Are awards a valid measure of a film's worth?

Yes
No
Resources for this issue
    Reviews of this issue

    This issue has been approved by whereIstand editors.

    Do not use this page to take a stand on this issue.

    This page shows the dialogue between users and editors regarding the merits of this issue. If you have comments about the issue's wording, relevance, etc., write them here. Only registered whereIstand members can edit an issue. Users must register in order to participate in all aspects of the whereIstand community.

    1/14/2007 3:46:22 PM

    issue prior to revisions:

    Are award shows a valid measure of a film's worth?
    Yes
    No
    No position or position not known.

    1/14/2007 9:47:28 AM

    it's ready for approval with marina's revision below.

    1/10/2007 3:27:18 PM

    Right, it's not the shows themselves.  "Are awards a valid measure of a film's worth?" I think it's firmly nailed now.

    1/10/2007 12:29:56 AM

    I think we really nailed this one. Just a few minor wording issues.

    First of all, I think it's more correct to say "awards shows."

    Second, it's not really the shows, it's the awards themselves we're talking about, right? How about, "Are awards a valid measure of a film's worth?"

    1/5/2007 12:36:20 PM

    issue revision:

    Per comments
    Do award shows matter?
    Yes
    No

    1/4/2007 9:56:34 PM

    "Valid measure of a film's worth" works for me. I think the wording works slightly better than "effective" since the real question here, in my opinion, does indeed center upon whether a film is validated by an award. I think with this change, we should get this bad  boy approved and up for voting.

    12/31/2006 1:51:49 PM

    "Effective measure of a film's worth" is good. I think "valid measure of a film's worth" might work even better.

    i'm a little uncomfortable about using "fair," since fairness is such a vague thing. interesting point about the Oscars vs. indie-focused awards. But since there are various shows (don't forget the Golden Globes), maybe we should keep it broad.

    12/30/2006 10:01:04 AM

    Are award shows an effective measure of a film's worth?

    or should we be more specific?  should we treat academy awards different than say sundance?

    what about:

    Are award shows fair?

    12/18/2006 2:25:43 PM

    I'd go with "important," and let the blogging begin.

    12/13/2006 11:32:04 AM

    I like the idea here, but something is off. It would be hard to argue that they don't "matter" at all - Oscar-winners often get big bumps in ticket sales, DVD sales, etc. Yet there's a sense that the choices aren't always in tune with the public's tastes, or even the critics' tastes. We need something a little less broad. Are they "relevant"? Are they "important"? Not sure. What's the pleasure of the board?

    12/7/2006 12:04:10 AM

    As long as we grow up taking tests in school as some type of measure of something then awards shows will matter.

    11/30/2006 10:53:04 AM

    This makes me think of a quote I heard from someone not too long ago about award shows like the oscars and grammys being silly.  It's art, so how can it be judged?  The actors are playing different roles and the musicians are all making different music.  It's all based on frame of mind and opinion, or what touches someone personally.  To try and equally judge across the board is silly.