>or enough of everyone to push it into the best picture and
>best director lists. considering how limited its release was,
>the ratio of people here who had even seen it to those who
>then voted for it had to be overwhelming. for a film as
>inaccessible as amour-- subtitled (hey, it's an issue for some
>people), french, cold, unsentimental, confusing (even to
>people who liked it), a two-hour film shot entirely in one
>setting with mostly just two characters, sloth-like pacing,
>etc.-- it doesn't pass the smell test for me. and the master
>had similar issues.
>
>if this was a message board for owners of motorized
>wheelchairs or a french film school, maybe. but not around
>these parts. not this demo. it's some snob stuntin' going
>on.

Because if only four people were super passionate about Amour, and they were collectively joining forces in supporting it, then it got on. That's maybe twenty percent of the votes. But four 4-or-5 point votes got you on the ballot this year-- DIRECTLY because of the lack of turnout, and because of how different everyone's tastes were this year.

There were more films that got 4 and 5 point votes this year than maybe ever before, even with the voter count drop off. Everyone had different opinions. Which is a good thing.

So all it took was four people voting highly... or maybe three people voting highly and two voting lowly. That would get you in this year with everyone's preferences all over the map.

If Django had ONE more 5-point vote, it might have gotten into the nominee pool. It's nearly always that close, every year... but this year seemed to be less consensus bound than others.