The 2006 Xixax Awards [April Fools]

[Derek237]

I thought 2005 was a great year for movies but you wouldn't be able to tell by looking at the Xixax Awards nominees.

Yeah. Yeah, go Christopher Plummer. I'm actually surprised Tony Danza didn't get the supporting actor nom for Crash!

I'm the biggest supporter of Good Night and Good Luck here (self-proclaimed obviously) and to see its only nomination is for best supporting actress- patricia clarkson makes me wanna wretch. Even I didn't vote for her! I voted for just about every thing else for it, too! Unbelievable. So..obviously...people are aware of the film. But the consensus of Xixaxers feel its highlight is Patricia Clarkson. Hm.

At least I voted. And I felt my selections were good. I should start my own awards. So fuck you.

[ono]

I think part of the problem was: 1) We did it too late, so there was less enthusiasm.  2) It followed the Dekapenticon ... so there was less enthusiasm.  Still, it's hard to understand why people weren't more interested this year.  Then again, like I said, 2005 sucked.  So that is evidence to said lack of interest, and I think it's probably the biggest reason why people wouldn't be bothered to vote.  Granted, the Dekapenticon was a while ago, so maybe I'm just grasping at straws for that one.

[killafilm]

 

[squints]

It followed the Dekapenticon

really, if anything will be remembered from xixax 2005 it should be the Dekapenticon. i doubt its because such a tireless effort was put forth by the construction and participation of the d-con that no one had the nerve to vote for the fuckin awards but man what a great list the deka put forth. I agree with ono, 2005 sucked for movies but 2006 looks optimistic and i voted for capote for near everything and it seems neon voted several times under different aliases soley to sabatoge the integrity of the site joking. i'm still stickin with the idea that its a prolonged april fool's day joke.
What sucks the most is it seems the new world is a lock for the winner compared to the competion and i won't get to see it until may. i predict once There Will Be Blood comes out we can declare it the best movie for the next ten years and say "the hell with it" to the awards.

[Kal]

I just realized I missed the deadline to send my nominees... I have them here but forgot to send them.

Anyways, none of them are in the final list I think. And people were laughing at my TOP 10 of the Year list? That is awful!

[GoneSavage]

I don't think that waiting hurt anything at all.  Personally it helped me Netflix a lot of stuff I missed out on, like Junebug so that I could vote for Amy Adams.  But of course it didn't matter.  My voting did nothing.

[Jeremy Blackman]

In reponse to the public reaction to the nominations and a large number of PMs we've received in the last couple days, we have decided to cancel the 2006 Xixax Awards.

This is a very awkward decision to make, considering the work and anticipation that have gone in to the awards already, but we feel for several reasons that it is the right one. The low turnout has created a result that seems to have been widely rejected. The results are already an extremely inaccurate reflection of Xixax, and to proceed with the awards would just exacerbate the problem.

That's basically it. Xixax is not reflected in the nominations, so the awards, at this point, are not remotely in Xixax's interest. We have considered a re-vote, but that would be absurd, and it would almost reward the apathy of the many non-voters. It's not as if people were not given an opportunity (ten days) to contribute. Also, honestly, it might have been a mistake to start the awards so much later than last year (into April now). Next year we will have to find a balance between staying relevent and not starting so soon that people haven't been able to catch up.

[Kal]

I understand and agree, but really I think 10 days wasnt enough time. I login every other and try to keep updated, but sometimes you have no time to sit and do the work of the nominations and stuff. If you want to do it right (and not like it turned out) it takes time.  I was working on it but didnt have time to finish and review before submitting... and didnt realize the deadline was already now.

So... it sucks, but I understand the decision.

[GoneSavage]

I just don't think cancelling it because the right movies didn't get nominated is a little rash, since some people DID take the time to vote and that's apparently what they felt strongly about.  Anyone who didn't vote can't complain about what the nominations are -- it's just that those who did vote feel a little shocked about what happened.  I'm obviously not the most active person here but to see Crash up there means either people who voted did that as a joke or there are a lot of people that don't post much that ended up voting.

[Alexandro]

This totally sucks. I was having a horrible hangover and a killer 24 hour hiccus attack last friday and I still send the nominations...but seriously...how many people voted?? 3???

On the other hand, is not apathy. I was really close of not sending my nominations cause it actually takes a lot of time. We should re do this, with a minimum of ballots permitted, so if not enough people vote, the awards are cancelled. And that should be a rule for next years too.

[Fernando]

I agree with this even though I took the time to vote but honestly the list makes no sense at all, e.g.

- Brokeback with several nods including Best Director but no Best Picture nod.

- Crash making its way to Best Pic, didn't almost everyone hate it?

- Leading and supporting nominations are ridiculous, I thought we knew the difference between leading and supporting.

- The New World gets recognition but not best cinematography nod? 

- Again, Junebug gets recognition as best debut but no Amy Adams?

[polkablues]

Xixax is not reflected in the nominations, so the awards, at this point, are not remotely in Xixax's interest.

That's it exactly.  The fact that no one is piping up to defend the nominations (I mean, realistically, someone must have voted this crap in) is a pretty big no-confidence vote in them.  It seems like it takes some sort of unifying film (like PDL or Eternal Sunshine) to really make us care as a group about the awards, and that film just wasn't there this year.  Next year, it'll be The Fountain, and the year after that, There Will Be Blood.  But this year, there was just a black hole from which nothing was able to escape (good try, New World).

[ono]

We should re do this, with a minimum of ballots permitted, so if not enough people vote, the awards are cancelled. And that should be a rule for next years too.

It's called a "quorum," and it's really a good idea to enforce.  I don't know what traditional quorum figures are, but I'm sure a search would come up with some figures (which would differ from organization to organization).  Maybe, 30% of all active posters should submit a ballot?  Say that's 100 folks here who post consistently, so it shouldn't be too much to ask that we get 30 ballots.  I'm betting we didn't get that, so that's a good, rough estimate.

And the amount of time isn't the issue, really.  10 days should be plenty of time, all things considered.  Most cinephiles are aware of good movies they see anyway, and at the very least have that idea in their head.  So if 10 days isn't enough time, it's not like 14 or 21 days will change things either.  Time doesn't diminish voter apathy.  It only exacerbates it.

[life_boy]

Would it be inappropriate to post our ballots...like we did for the Dekapentacon?  It's fun to see what people voted for.

[Pubrick]

It's called a "quorum," and it's really a good idea to enforce.

hey, i'm as distraught as the next guy, but there's no reason to bring santorum into this.