.

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
Created
4 years ago
Last Reply
4 years ago
8
( +1 hidden )
replies
2086
views
3
users
babypook
4
AMG
3
24Emmy
1
  • Jordan
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 24th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #178043

    .

    Reply
    24Emmy
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #178045

    Welcome to goldderby!

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #178046

    You sound like some of the people I work with. Lol.

     

    Great first post Jordan. W-E-L-C-O-M-E.

    I agree with your methodology. Unless you wish to drive yourself bonkers by factoring in all “Human Nature” elements. The focus on women voters is a good one.

    I’m not sure I’d eliminate SAG, although it might make things easier to compile in the first round. I’m also a little confused by the wording of “significantly lower” but “small” If you have the numbers, that might help.

     I dont see any mention of money other than Box Office, or the campaigns. I do believe, this is key.

    Good luck with your research. Hope you stay. Please.

    ReplyCopy URL
    AMG
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 20th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #178047

    Firstly, welcome to the forums. 

    As a Psychology undergraduate, I sympathise with/congratulate you on your apparent use of the utter ballache that is SPSS. 

    I like any statistic that puts Eddie Redmayne ahead in the Best Actor race.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    AMG
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 20th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #178048

    You sound like some of the people I work with. Lol.

     

    Great first post Jordan. W-E-L-C-O-M-E.

    I agree with your methodology. Unless you wish to drive yourself bonkers by factoring in all “Human Nature” elements. The focus on women voters is a good one.

    I’m not sure I’d eliminate SAG, although it might make things easier to compile in the first round. I’m also a little confused by the wording of “significantly lower” but “small” If you have the numbers, that might help.

     I dont see any mention of money other than Box Office, or the campaigns. I do believe, this is key.

    Good luck with your research. Hope you stay. Please.

    Interesting, I think the acting winners aren’t massively swayed by box office takings. If it did then Cooper, Pike, Duvall & Streep would be factored in more this year. Admittedly Cooper is the biggest potential utter upset for Oscar glory this year, but generally speaking, it doesn’t seem to follow in that line of thought. 

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #178049

    [quote=”babypook”]

    You sound like some of the people I work with. Lol.

     

    Great first post Jordan. W-E-L-C-O-M-E.

    I agree with your methodology. Unless you wish to drive yourself bonkers by factoring in all “Human Nature” elements. The focus on women voters is a good one.

    I’m not sure I’d eliminate SAG, although it might make things easier to compile in the first round. I’m also a little confused by the wording of “significantly lower” but “small” If you have the numbers, that might help.

     I dont see any mention of money “other than Box Office”, or “the campaigns”. I do believe, this is key.

    Good luck with your research. Hope you stay. Please.

    Interesting, I think the acting winners aren’t massively swayed by box office takings. If it did then Cooper, Pike, Duvall & Streep would be factored in more this year. Admittedly Cooper is the biggest potential utter upset for Oscar glory this year, but generally speaking, it doesn’t seem to follow in that line of thought. 

     [/quote]

    He mentions the box office, but not the campaigning. I think it helps if the campaigning bodies are noted, along with their percentage of wins.

    ReplyCopy URL
    AMG
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 20th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #178050

    [quote=”agloster94″][quote=”babypook”]

    You sound like some of the people I work with. Lol.

     

    Great first post Jordan. W-E-L-C-O-M-E.

    I agree with your methodology. Unless you wish to drive yourself bonkers by factoring in all “Human Nature” elements. The focus on women voters is a good one.

    I’m not sure I’d eliminate SAG, although it might make things easier to compile in the first round. I’m also a little confused by the wording of “significantly lower” but “small” If you have the numbers, that might help.

     I dont see any mention of money “other than Box Office”, or “the campaigns”. I do believe, this is key.

    Good luck with your research. Hope you stay. Please.

    Interesting, I think the acting winners aren’t massively swayed by box office takings. If it did then Cooper, Pike, Duvall & Streep would be factored in more this year. Admittedly Cooper is the biggest potential utter upset for Oscar glory this year, but generally speaking, it doesn’t seem to follow in that line of thought. 

     [/quote]

    He mentions the box office, but not the campaigning. I think it helps if the campaigning bodies are noted, along with their percentage of wins.

    [/quote]

    Ohhh, I read that completely wrong then. Yeah, I agree campaigning money has a lot to do with it. I think this year campaigning has a lot to account for American Sniper’s nods, and the lack of them for Selma. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #178051

    [quote=”babypook”][quote=”agloster94″][quote=”babypook”]

    You sound like some of the people I work with. Lol.

     

    Great first post Jordan. W-E-L-C-O-M-E.

    I agree with your methodology. Unless you wish to drive yourself bonkers by factoring in all “Human Nature” elements. The focus on women voters is a good one.

    I’m not sure I’d eliminate SAG, although it might make things easier to compile in the first round. I’m also a little confused by the wording of “significantly lower” but “small” If you have the numbers, that might help.

     I dont see any mention of money “other than Box Office”, or “the campaigns”. I do believe, this is key.

    Good luck with your research. Hope you stay. Please.

    Interesting, I think the acting winners aren’t massively swayed by box office takings. If it did then Cooper, Pike, Duvall & Streep would be factored in more this year. Admittedly Cooper is the biggest potential utter upset for Oscar glory this year, but generally speaking, it doesn’t seem to follow in that line of thought. 

     [/quote]

    He mentions the box office, but not the campaigning. I think it helps if the campaigning bodies are noted, along with their percentage of wins.

    [/quote]

    Ohhh, I read that completely wrong then. Yeah, I agree campaigning money has a lot to do with it. I think this year campaigning has a lot to account for American Sniper’s nods, and the lack of them for Selma. [/quote]

     

    Everything inside me hopes you are right about this. It’s a factor, and I wish it was the entire factor. I think, in order take a good long look at this, Jordon just may be looking at…..jumping majors…..What do you think Jordan? Factoring in the political clime of the times=films? Lol

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #178053

    Thanks for the clarification.

    Well, all films are political, from (let’s start with the 40’s) the enforced dance numbers and upbeat gloss, such as Yankee Doodle Dandy,  to the paranoia towards runaway “science” in the fifties (and rightly so), like The Fly and The Fifty Foot Woman, Invisible Man, and so on, to the affluent times during the sixties, when society had the time and monies to promote social changes and the role of women…and then, to now, with the media telling us what to think and what to believe (they always have, but it just may have been more balanced in the past); the paranoia of fear, the increasing hostility towards Muslims, four of whom were murdered recently, to the Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, by Charlotte Iserbyt…(this woman is highly qualified to write this book btw), and to initiating war to boost the economy, or turn them into enemies to take what we want.

    The Nazis needed to be taken out, dont get me wrong. But, I dont see the same correlation since that time.

    It’s a vast undertaking. I’m not sure I would personally go there, unless I had years to complete my paper. And of course, your own political nature is going to be a major factor.

    The demographics you’ve posted are very interesting. I laughed when I saw the negative for Globe nominations. And also, the negative dip where a woman’s age is concerned, but not for the men. We all know that here, so you’ve come to the right place.

    Great work btw.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
David M... - Nov 16, 2018
Movies
Brayden... - Nov 15, 2018
Movies
Tyler - Nov 15, 2018
Movies