Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
NOTE: Board emails should be working again. Information on forum upgrade and style issues.
Podcast: Talking Images (Episode 22 released November 17th * EXCLUSIVE * We Are Mentioned in a Book!!! Interview with Mary Guillermin on Rapture, JG & More)
Polls: Favourite Movies (Results), 1998 (Apr 15th), DtC - Ratings (Apr 26th), Coming of Age (Apr 30th)
Challenges: Doubling the Canon, Animation, Middle East
Film of the Week: Foxtrot, May nominations (Apr 30th)

Which official lists shouldn't be official?

User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#201

Post by kongs_speech »

I mean, are you seriously claiming that a collection of films put together by the likes of Mekas and Kubelka isn't good enough for official status? I'm sorry it's not a Tarantino list thrown together haphazardly from several sources.
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 5868
Joined: February 9th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#202

Post by OldAle1 »

Well, realistically it's highly unlikely that ANY now-official list is going to be eliminated unless it's seen as "superseded" by something fairly similar - but better. And that's not going to happen with the Anthology list for example - most likely with country and genre lists but even there it doesn't happen often. I love the Anthology list myself, one of my favorites and it may well have the highest ratio of favorites-to-dislikes for any 500+ list for me. Pretty much the opposite of Ondherond on that one, as I am on nearly everything. :lol:
mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11806
Joined: May 8th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#203

Post by mjf314 »

kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 3:24 pm I'm sorry it's not a Tarantino list thrown together haphazardly from several sources.
If you're talking about the "coolest movies" list, it comes from a book, so it's a single source (unless the book compiled it from multiple sources, but I don't have the book, so I wouldn't know).
dirty_score
Posts: 542
Joined: October 10th, 2016, 6:00 am
Contact:

#204

Post by dirty_score »

kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 2:29 pm In regards to the Anthology, I think that's completely bogus. How is it not a "proper experimental list?" Why does it have to be for newbies, and why should it be streamlined? What's wrong with a huge collection of avant-garde cinema, one which holds great historical significance? This is also unfair to those of us who have been working hard on completing it. Nobody has apparently discussed this in years. I don't know why you're suddenly trying to dismantle possibly the best list on the site.
Take a chill pill buddy:
mjf314 wrote: ↑September 2nd, 2015, 7:35 pm We don't currently have any plans to unadopt lists. This thread is just to satisfy my curiosity.
Experimental is a very niche thing. They could have started with something smaller, perhaps, for everyone to commence their journey through this kind of cinema. I don't deny its historical value but how many Brakhage shorts of nothingness do you want to see? You could just see one and then if you're interested in more, click on the tab "In lists" and search for the personal list "Stan Brakhage filmography". It's possibly the best list on the site? Sure, if you want to check-whore your way in the rankings.

Hey, here's an idea if you don't like streamlined lists: How about expanding the badmovies list with the movies that got one and two slimes?
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#205

Post by kongs_speech »

So niches shouldn't have a presence on ICM? Interesting logic there. I don't deny their historical value, but how many Scorsese films of criminals do you want to see? You could just see one and then if you're interested in more, click on the tab "in lists" and search for the personal list "Martin Scorsese filmography." I love that you assume that someone who enjoys things you don't like just happens to be in it only for the checks. Avant-garde cinema is fucking awesome. Those little experimental shorts can be some of the coolest shit around. The fact that they only take a few minutes to watch is just a bonus. Why shouldn't they be checks? They're every bit as valid as anything else, whether they have Lord dirty_score's seal of approval or not. This isn't the first time you've been gratuitously rude to me, so I rather justifiably get the impression that you're just a condescending asswipe.
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#206

Post by kongs_speech »

Look at all the unofficial avant-garde shorts I've checked in the past few days since a friend sent me a wonderful playlist. Yeah, I'm really just check whoring it up over here, because that's clearly the only reason anyone would watch a short experimental film. :whistling:
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#207

Post by kongs_speech »

mjf314 wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 3:50 pm
kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 3:24 pm I'm sorry it's not a Tarantino list thrown together haphazardly from several sources.
If you're talking about the "coolest movies" list, it comes from a book, so it's a single source (unless the book compiled it from multiple sources, but I don't have the book, so I wouldn't know).
The Grindhouse Cinema Database list. It's not my favorite for that reason, despite an interest in the genre, but I'm certainly not trying to get it removed. Just pointing out how bizarre it is to attack the Anthology list.
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11806
Joined: May 8th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#208

Post by mjf314 »

I think the problem with the Anthology list is the bias, because the people who made the list included many of their own films, but it seems unlikely that it'll be unadopted.
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#209

Post by kongs_speech »

mjf314 wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:31 pm I think the problem with the Anthology list is the bias, because the people who made the list included many of their own films, but it seems unlikely that it'll be unadopted.
I disagree, because they're such important figures, but I can understand this and definitely see that you're not coming at it from a position of bad faith. That's a far more valid criticism than "I hate experimental films so they don't deserve a list."
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
User avatar
pitchorneirda
Posts: 795
Joined: February 11th, 2019, 12:07 pm
Location: France
Contact:

#210

Post by pitchorneirda »

Nobosy said that here, kongs
"Art is like a fire, it is born from the very thing it burns" - Jean-Luc Godard
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#211

Post by kongs_speech »

pitchorneirda wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:37 pm Nobosy said that here, kongs
Apparently it's so "niche" that Stan fucking Brakhage of all people should be restricted to one film.
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
User avatar
flavo5000
Posts: 4366
Joined: July 10th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Arkansas, USA
Contact:

#212

Post by flavo5000 »

I have no issue with the Anthology Archive list despite not really caring for a lot of the films on it. As it is, it represents a significant sub-genre of film that isn't represented well or at all by any other list save Amos Vogel's which is more scattershot in its approach.

Also on that Maltin's Films You've Never Seen list, while there are certainly very well known films on the list amongst cineastes like The Taste of Cherry or cult circles like Idiocracy, I get the feeling Maltin compiled the list for the average person. And I can almost guarantee that the average person has seen few to none of the movies on that list. It isn't as if he's calling out The Dark Knight or Fight Club as a hidden gem.
dirty_score
Posts: 542
Joined: October 10th, 2016, 6:00 am
Contact:

#213

Post by dirty_score »

kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:14 pm So niches shouldn't have a presence on ICM? Interesting logic there.
I never said they shouldn't...
kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:14 pm but how many Scorsese films of criminals do you want to see? You could just see one and then if you're interested in more, click on the tab "in lists" and search for the personal list "Martin Scorsese filmography."
I couldn't care less about Scorsese..
kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:14 pm I love that you assume that someone who enjoys things you don't like just happens to be in it only for the checks. Avant-garde cinema is fucking awesome. Those little experimental shorts can be some of the coolest shit around. The fact that they only take a few minutes to watch is just a bonus. Why shouldn't they be checks? They're every bit as valid as anything else, whether they have Lord dirty_score's seal of approval or not.
They will continue to be. The list won't be removed. I was just satisfiying mjf's curiosity.
kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:14 pm This isn't the first time you've been gratuitously rude to me, so I rather justifiably get the impression that you're just a condescending asswipe.
Wow, you sure hold a lot of grudges and seem to be worked up so easily.
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#214

Post by kongs_speech »

flavo5000 wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:47 pm I have no issue with the Anthology Archive list despite not really caring for a lot of the films on it. As it is, it represents a significant sub-genre of film that isn't represented well or at all by any other list save Amos Vogel's which is more scattershot in its approach.

Also on that Maltin's Films You've Never Seen list, while there are certainly very well known films on the list amongst cineastes like The Taste of Cherry or cult circles like Idiocracy, I get the feeling Maltin compiled the list for the average person. And I can almost guarantee that the average person has seen few to none of the movies on that list. It isn't as if he's calling out The Dark Knight or Fight Club as a hidden gem.
If the Maltin 100 has to go, I wouldn't be opposed to replacing it with his hidden gems. I have a major personal affinity for Leonard Maltin because his guides were invaluable in helping me discover cinema as a teen, but I don't think I'm biased when I say that his importance to film history and criticism requires a list of some kind.
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#215

Post by kongs_speech »

dirty_score wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:51 pm Wow, you sure hold a lot of grudges and seem to be worked up so easily.
Yeah, funny how that happens when people accuse you of check whoring because of some of the films you like...

I realize I have "check whore" in my signature. It was a joke, based on a comment I made myself. I can call myself a check whore in jest. You cannot.
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 2655
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#216

Post by Torgo »

kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:14 pm whether they have Lord dirty_score's seal of approval or not. This isn't the first time you've been gratuitously rude to me, so I rather justifiably get the impression that you're just a condescending asswipe.
Guys! Calm down. dirty hasn't been 'gratuitously rude' towards you. To me, his concerns just look like dealing with the list itself, nothing personal.

I would second that there are problems to the way in which the Anthology list is assembled (and Onderhond's quotation of the introduction is indeed a bit preposterous), but it's official and adopted and the mods were probably giving it good thought before doing so. I don't like a list becoming inofficial for which people hunted down and researched titles over several years.

I also don't like the concept of shortwhoringβ„’ on ICM, because the gamification and bragging with insignificant numbers are really fucking cool. But short films are important and crucial to many of our lists, so as long as we're not weighting runtimes, they will stay and stay there for good.
User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 5868
Joined: February 9th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#217

Post by OldAle1 »

kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:57 pm
dirty_score wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:51 pm Wow, you sure hold a lot of grudges and seem to be worked up so easily.
Yeah, funny how that happens when people accuse you of check whoring because of some of the films you like...

I realize I have "check whore" in my signature. It was a joke, based on a comment I made myself. I can call myself a check whore in jest. You cannot.
But there ARE or have been a lot of check whores here, witness this thread for example. There's nothing "wrong" with it of course - it's just one way to limit the infinite possibilities - but I think it's one of those cases where admitting that all you care about is official titles is something that some people will see in a negative light.
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 2655
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#218

Post by Torgo »

OldAle1 wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 5:14 pm this thread
Thanks. Another one I'm reviving from the dead. B)
mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11806
Joined: May 8th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#219

Post by mjf314 »

kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:35 pm
mjf314 wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:31 pm I think the problem with the Anthology list is the bias, because the people who made the list included many of their own films, but it seems unlikely that it'll be unadopted.
I disagree, because they're such important figures, but I can understand this and definitely see that you're not coming at it from a position of bad faith. That's a far more valid criticism than "I hate experimental films so they don't deserve a list."
I agree they're important, but to include 44 Brakhage films and 12 Broughton films seems a little excessive to me, especially when some other important experimental directors are left out entirely.
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#220

Post by kongs_speech »

OldAle1 wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 5:14 pm
kongs_speech wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:57 pm
dirty_score wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:51 pm Wow, you sure hold a lot of grudges and seem to be worked up so easily.
Yeah, funny how that happens when people accuse you of check whoring because of some of the films you like...

I realize I have "check whore" in my signature. It was a joke, based on a comment I made myself. I can call myself a check whore in jest. You cannot.
But there ARE or have been a lot of check whores here, witness this thread for example. There's nothing "wrong" with it of course - it's just one way to limit the infinite possibilities - but I think it's one of those cases where admitting that all you care about is official titles is something that some people will see in a negative light.
Yeah, I know, but it's wrong and hurtful to assume that anyone who's working towards completion of the official avant-garde shorts is a check whore and not just someone with a genuine love of experimental cinema. I watch unofficial features every day, and I've recently taken to the unofficial shorts on a massive experimental playlist that was sent to me. I think devoting 100% of your viewing time to official checks would be pretty sad. That's certainly not my agenda.
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 6576
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#221

Post by Onderhond »

flavo5000 wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:47 pm I have no issue with the Anthology Archive list despite not really caring for a lot of the films on it. As it is, it represents a significant sub-genre of film that isn't represented well or at all by any other list save Amos Vogel's which is more scattershot in its approach.
Both lists fail to address the past 40 years of cinema though, which I think IS a problem.

Oh, and just for the record, I am check whoring those lists.
User avatar
flavo5000
Posts: 4366
Joined: July 10th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Arkansas, USA
Contact:

#222

Post by flavo5000 »

Onderhond wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 6:10 pm
flavo5000 wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:47 pm I have no issue with the Anthology Archive list despite not really caring for a lot of the films on it. As it is, it represents a significant sub-genre of film that isn't represented well or at all by any other list save Amos Vogel's which is more scattershot in its approach.
Both lists fail to address the past 40 years of cinema though, which I think IS a problem.

Oh, and just for the record, I am check whoring those lists.
I don't disagree on that point either. I think avant-garde cinema, like asian cinema and cult cinema, needs a companion list that represents more recent films.
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 2655
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#223

Post by Torgo »

Onderhond wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 6:10 pm
flavo5000 wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 4:47 pm I have no issue with the Anthology Archive list despite not really caring for a lot of the films on it. As it is, it represents a significant sub-genre of film that isn't represented well or at all by any other list save Amos Vogel's which is more scattershot in its approach.
Both lists fail to address the past 40 years of cinema though, which I think IS a problem.
Yes, indeed. It is interesting and enriching to have an academic look at avant-garde cinema; but as it is represented by lists on ICM, we have a shitton of pioneering shorts from 1895-1902, then enough stuff from the silent era, LOADS AND LOADS of experimental stuff from the 50s to the 70s and then ... and then that's it. Unfortunately, experimentation with cinematic forms didn't occur from 1975-2020. Kbye!
Onderhond wrote: ↑March 5th, 2021, 6:10 pmOh, and just for the record, I am check whoring those lists.
Yes, it didn't escape my attention how you were behind me in rankings and now overtook, leading by 30 ranks in a few weeks .. :folded:
Last edited by Torgo on March 5th, 2021, 6:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 1337
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Location: FL
Contact:

#224

Post by kongs_speech »

I would love to have a more contemporary avant-garde list, just not at the expense of the Anthology or Vogel.
πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
Image
dirty_score
Posts: 542
Joined: October 10th, 2016, 6:00 am
Contact:

#225

Post by dirty_score »

Another old list I believe is redundant is the Empire's The 100 Best Films of World Cinema list. Not only is outdated, it's the concept that doesn't quite work for me, the same way the BBC's foreign list didn't, because it's a list that says "hey, did you know that besides Hollywood, the rest of the world also makes movies? Here's a list of some of them you should watch."

As we grow rapidly into a ever multicultural film world, these type of lists become redundant. Or you a make a best-of list and include everything and everyone (like S&S) or you don't. Even the Oscars, an association to promote and award american movies only is waking up to this. Parasite won, Minari gets nominated while the Golden Globes got criticized by calling it Foreign.. I think in the future it will be merged and be like in the film festivals. It's the same with best actor/actress, you don't have best male director/female director, but that's another story for another thread.

I don't think it would be missed too. 85 of the movies are in more than 10 lists. Of the remaining 15, 10 are in more than 5.
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 2655
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#226

Post by Torgo »

dirty_score wrote: ↑March 15th, 2021, 9:54 pm As we grow rapidly into a ever multicultural film world
Well, do we? It didn't occur to me. The 2000s looked just as multicultural to me as the 2010s - if anything really did scratch the US hegemony, it's Netflix and other Streaming Services. But it's far from equal. It's not even 50% America vs. 50% world cinema (I let others decide where to put Europe's Western output) - maybe for the ineffable arthouse category, yeah.

How Parasite won in 2020 was an absolute sensation and anything than the peak of an 2010s evolution towards a multiculturalized Academy Award and film industry (or: audience) in general. Such as Minari is an exception - an American-made, American-directed and A24-distributed in fact - in the nominees field.

I like the Empire list. :folded:
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 9247
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#227

Post by xianjiro »

dirty_score wrote: ↑March 15th, 2021, 9:54 pm Another old list I believe is redundant is the Empire's The 100 Best Films of World Cinema list. Not only is outdated, it's the concept that doesn't quite work for me, the same way the BBC's foreign list didn't, because it's a list that says "hey, did you know that besides Hollywood, the rest of the world also makes movies? Here's a list of some of them you should watch."
While I generally agree with this, I do have a couple thoughts: 1) There still are people who are only exposed to Hollywood and might only just beginning to explore cinema from outside the American bubble. So a starter list isn't a terrible idea, but yeah, it needs to be updated now and then. 2) One of the problems with having so many lists is this very target audience might miss the 'starter' lists. If I had a dream about how iCM would work, one of the functions would be to layer or filter lists - a list suggestion option wouldn't go amiss.

I'm certainly not opposed to removing official status for lists, but do recognize this is one of those topics that gets under some people's skin and I derive no pleasure from upsetting people. Also wish we had page view stats for lists to get a sense of which lists aren't very interesting to those using the website. (I subscribe to the theory that what interests forumites might not necessarily match the interests of other users.)
Post Reply