Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
Polls: 2006 (Results), Directors (Jan 3rd), 1968 awards (Jan 21st), Documentaries (Jan 26th), 2018 (Feb 17th)
Challenges: Russia, Sci-Fi/Fantasy, Rosenbaum
World Cup: Quarter Finals schedule, QF-A (Jan 16th), QF-B (Jan 27th)
Film of the Week: Pisma myortvogo cheloveka

Official lists updates

Post Reply
User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 21333
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

Re: Official lists updates

#1601

Post by PeacefulAnarchy » November 25th, 2018, 6:31 pm

joachimt wrote:
November 25th, 2018, 5:43 pm
I completely disagree with Onderhond, simply because he looks at it from a personal perspective. There are lots of movies on IMDb's Top 250 that I wouldn't put in a personal top 1000, but most of those movies are not a big surprise to me that they appeal to a large audience who are quickly giving stuff like that high ratings.
That dumb dog movie is in the IMdb top 250 too, it's not unique that unique to Douban. People like sentimental dog stories.

User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 901
Joined: Oct 31, 2015
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#1602

Post by Lakigigar » November 25th, 2018, 6:50 pm

It's not full of crap, or at least a majority of the people (apparently) don't. But they are in a lot of cases mainstream movies. That doesn't mean that mainstream movies can be good as well though.
PeacefulAnarchy wrote:
November 25th, 2018, 6:31 pm
joachimt wrote:
November 25th, 2018, 5:43 pm
I completely disagree with Onderhond, simply because he looks at it from a personal perspective. There are lots of movies on IMDb's Top 250 that I wouldn't put in a personal top 1000, but most of those movies are not a big surprise to me that they appeal to a large audience who are quickly giving stuff like that high ratings.
That dumb dog movie is in the IMdb top 250 too, it's not unique that unique to Douban. People like sentimental dog stories.
For some reason that movie just worked. I know i've seen it in a class, and almost half of our class was crying (4/5th of my class were girls though), and i also felt tears in my eyes. I think this partly explains why it's in the top 250. It's sentimental, and sometimes people like to see sentimental movies, especially the ones with few experience or just only occassionaly watch a movie for fun, and for that reason, i think such a movie belongs in the top 250 cause it isn't a critics list, but it's a list designed for and by mainstream cinema lovers that includes a variety of genres: classic cinema, mainstream cinema, the best arthouse foreign-language movies and also the best sentimental movies.

What i don't get though is how Twilight only has 5,2/10 on IMDb and Titanic only being at 7,7/10 while Hachi makes it in the top 250. It would be different though if more women voted on IMDb. (if you check IMDb ratings by Demographic, Titanic would be in the top 10 movies if only females voted for it). I think what partly explains it, is that Twilight generates a lot of hate (and Titanic too although to a lesser extent). Hachi doesn't seem to generate all that much 'hate' (aside from 'here' apparently)
Last edited by Lakigigar on November 25th, 2018, 6:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gershwin
Donator
Posts: 7070
Joined: May 17, 2011
Location: Leiden, NL
Contact:

#1603

Post by Gershwin » November 25th, 2018, 6:56 pm

joachimt wrote:
November 25th, 2018, 5:43 pm
I completely disagree with Onderhond, simply because he looks at it from a personal perspective. There are lots of movies on IMDb's Top 250 that I wouldn't put in a personal top 1000, but most of those movies are not a big surprise to me that they appeal to a large audience who are quickly giving stuff like that high ratings.
I don’t see why the Douban top 250 is so essentially different. It looks like some movies simply didn’t work for the American and/or European audiences, but did for the Chinese. Plenty of possible explanations. I‘ve noticed before that those audiences generally seem to be a bit more into sentimental films, for instance, which seems to explain part of their top 50 (haven’t looked beyond).
RokP 250

Profiles: Untappd - Last.fm - iCM

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 2144
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#1604

Post by Onderhond » November 25th, 2018, 8:00 pm

Yea, like Hachi (which is in fact listed in the IMDb Top 250?). The thing is that "big" audience of IMDb is mostly a Western audience and if we keep on adding Western-centric lists that isn't going to change. The pushback against Indian cinema is another good example of how people prefer to remain in their own little bubble rather than acknowledge that what we consider to be essential cinema history is mostly a Western view on cinema.

And I wasn't even listing films based on "personal perspective" (I could list 90% of the IMDb Top 250 then), but come on ... Back to the Future, Indiana Jones, The Intouchables. I certainly wouldn't blame non-Western audiences looking at that list and having a little laugh.

User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 21333
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#1605

Post by PeacefulAnarchy » November 25th, 2018, 10:13 pm

Onderhond wrote:
November 25th, 2018, 8:00 pm
Yea, like Hachi (which is in fact listed in the IMDb Top 250?). The thing is that "big" audience of IMDb is mostly a Western audience and if we keep on adding Western-centric lists that isn't going to change. The pushback against Indian cinema is another good example of how people prefer to remain in their own little bubble rather than acknowledge that what we consider to be essential cinema history is mostly a Western view on cinema.

And I wasn't even listing films based on "personal perspective" (I could list 90% of the IMDb Top 250 then), but come on ... Back to the Future, Indiana Jones, The Intouchables. I certainly wouldn't blame non-Western audiences looking at that list and having a little laugh.
Intouchables 9.2(#23 on Douban): https://movie.douban.com/subject/6786002/ It made 166 million in France and 10 in the US. The other 250(!) million came from elsewhere.
Back to the Future 8.5(Not in the top 250, but probably quite close) https://movie.douban.com/subject/1300555/
Indiana Jones (and Star Wars) are rated lower on Douban though. Chinese people don't love George Lucas like the US does :shrug: .

User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 1773
Joined: Sep 10, 2012
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1606

Post by Ebbywebby » November 26th, 2018, 7:32 am

What crazy list update(s) happened? I lost something like 23 official checks tonight.

jeroeno
Posts: 2177
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
Location: Valkenswaard, The Netherlands
Contact:

#1607

Post by jeroeno » November 26th, 2018, 7:39 am

IMDB Shorts

User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 2795
Joined: Jun 03, 2014
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

#1608

Post by Fergenaprido » November 26th, 2018, 8:03 am

It's the same thing that happened with the 1920s list... the list is sorted in reverse from the source.

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 5718
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#1609

Post by xianjiro » November 26th, 2018, 10:25 am

So, that means it will return to normal in a couple days too, right?

Oy vey these IMDb lists are so much trouble. :angry: :lol:
Last edited by xianjiro on November 26th, 2018, 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

Listen, Daddy. Teacher says, 'every time a car alarm bleeps, into heaven a demon sneaks.'
sol can find me here

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 5718
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#1610

Post by xianjiro » November 26th, 2018, 10:25 am

this is a duplicate post that I'm not able to delete (tonight) :angry:

Listen, Daddy. Teacher says, 'every time a car alarm bleeps, into heaven a demon sneaks.'
sol can find me here

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 4749
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#1611

Post by sol » November 26th, 2018, 10:52 am

Is it time to just get rid of all of the IMDb lists (except the top 250)? They are not exactly great intros to the genres/decades at only 50 films long, they are incredibly volatile, and the majority of the films in the IMDb lists are already on other Official Lists.
Former IMDb message boards user /// iCM | IMDb | My Top 500+ Favourite Films /// Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

72allinncallme
Donator
Posts: 1908
Joined: Nov 13, 2016
Contact:

#1612

Post by 72allinncallme » November 26th, 2018, 11:46 am

I miss the days when we didn’t do updates on the IMDb lists.

User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 1773
Joined: Sep 10, 2012
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1613

Post by Ebbywebby » November 26th, 2018, 12:02 pm

Fergenaprido wrote:
November 26th, 2018, 8:03 am
It's the same thing that happened with the 1920s list... the list is sorted in reverse from the source.
Explain?

User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 2795
Joined: Jun 03, 2014
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

#1614

Post by Fergenaprido » November 26th, 2018, 12:03 pm

I don't mind the imdb lists. I don't think they're that volatile. These changes are a result of a mixup in the way they're updated, not in the lists themselves (they're correct in the source).

I'd also be perfectly happy if they were updated less frequently. Instead of twice a week, twice a month would suit me.

User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 2795
Joined: Jun 03, 2014
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

#1615

Post by Fergenaprido » November 26th, 2018, 12:05 pm

Ebbywebby wrote:
November 26th, 2018, 12:02 pm
Fergenaprido wrote:
November 26th, 2018, 8:03 am
It's the same thing that happened with the 1920s list... the list is sorted in reverse from the source.
Explain?
I don't know what the cause was, but if you look at the source at the end of the description of the list, it will take you to the imdb filter. There, you'll see the list of top films that meet the criteria (i.e. x number of votes and y number of checks), sorted by highest rated. If you sort that source list by lowest rated, you'll get the current icm list. It's also why there are 50 new entries. When it happened to the 1920s list, there were fewer than 100 eligible films, so the bottom 2 or 3 films changed a few places while everything else was replaced (temporarily).

User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 1773
Joined: Sep 10, 2012
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1616

Post by Ebbywebby » November 26th, 2018, 12:11 pm

xianjiro wrote:
November 26th, 2018, 10:25 am
So, that means it will return to normal in a couple days too, right?
So "BlinkyTM" isn't really going to regain official status? Phew.

User avatar
Chilton
Posts: 480
Joined: Jan 05, 2013
Contact:

#1617

Post by Chilton » November 26th, 2018, 3:54 pm

We should get rid of the IMDb lists and replace them with ICM lists. The formula could be similar to the current ICM Most Favorites list, but different in a way as to not put the widely seen and popular films at a disadvantage.

User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 901
Joined: Oct 31, 2015
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#1618

Post by Lakigigar » November 26th, 2018, 5:40 pm

I think the IMDb top 250 is sufficient enough. We don't need like literally 40 IMDb lists, but all used in a slightly varied way. I mean, they are the same ratings. I'd prefer different user-based lists instead of 40 lists of the same site. What is wrong with adding letterboxd, douma (that chinese website) top 250, MM top 1000 and ICM top 1000, instead of all those genre and decade lists?

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 27262
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#1619

Post by joachimt » November 26th, 2018, 5:57 pm

Those 50 titles long genre and decade lists are a good place to start for people who just got into movies. If you're just starting, all those long lists are overwhelming. The technical problems at the moment are no reason to replace those lists. Technical problems can be solved.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
Gershwin
Donator
Posts: 7070
Joined: May 17, 2011
Location: Leiden, NL
Contact:

#1620

Post by Gershwin » November 26th, 2018, 6:47 pm

Just start by adopting those Taschen decade lists, and if necessary the Rough Guide to ... series and/or the 101 ... movies YMSBYD series. It’s really very easy to find short, starter genre lists that are equal to or better than the IMDb lists.
RokP 250

Profiles: Untappd - Last.fm - iCM

User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 2795
Joined: Jun 03, 2014
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

#1621

Post by Fergenaprido » November 27th, 2018, 4:06 am

Gershwin wrote:
November 26th, 2018, 6:47 pm
Just start by adopting those Taschen decade lists, and if necessary the Rough Guide to ... series and/or the 101 ... movies YMSBYD series. It’s really very easy to find short, starter genre lists that are equal to or better than the IMDb lists.
I'm not familiar with the Rough Guides, but I like the Taschen lists and we've already adopted some of the 101 YMSBYD lists, so I'd support this proposal. Even as a supplement to the existing lists if we're not willing to remove the imdb ones for now. Plus, some of the imdb "genres" aren't even genres.

wasabi
Posts: 120
Joined: Dec 28, 2016
Contact:

#1622

Post by wasabi » November 27th, 2018, 4:51 am

Douban has about 150 million registered users. It's not only a movie forum, people share books, music, and life on it. About 1.5 million people watched The Shawshank Redemption, only about 74,494 watched The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, maybe that's the reason it's only No. 226 of the list.

I think Douban Top 250 should be official since it represents a big group of people.

In China, I think People use Wechat groups more than forums to talk about movies.

There's a thread on Zhihu(Chinese Quora) talked about movies they think shouldn't be on Douban 250 in case someone is interested.
https://www.zhihu.com/question/22177103

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 4749
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#1623

Post by sol » November 27th, 2018, 10:49 am

joachimt wrote:
November 26th, 2018, 5:57 pm
Those 50 titles long genre and decade lists are a good place to start for people who just got into movies. If you're just starting, all those long lists are overwhelming. The technical problems at the moment are no reason to replace those lists. Technical problems can be solved.
On the contrary, I think the IMDb lists are pretty poor starter lists. Many of the lists contain the same few titles, e.g.:

https://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/the ... ght+rises/ is on 3 IMDb Genre/Decade lists and in the Top 250
https://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/rush-2013/ is on 4 IMDb Genre/Decade lists and in the Top 250
https://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/ave ... inity+war/ is on 5 IMDb Genre/Decades lists and in the Top 250

Thus, none of the IMDb genre lists give a true snapshot of the genre. They are just popularity lists with a lot of overlap with the Top 250.

A large number of the BFI Screen Guides have already been adopted. I think we should adopt the rest of their genre lists as Official and ditch the IMDb ones. That would be more consistent too, rather than have some Screen Guides as Official and others not. But that's just my opinion...
Former IMDb message boards user /// iCM | IMDb | My Top 500+ Favourite Films /// Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

User avatar
Teproc
Posts: 100
Joined: Sep 23, 2015
Contact:

#1624

Post by Teproc » November 27th, 2018, 11:01 am

There's also the fact that the IMDB lists are bugged in more than one way currently: there's the weirdness of the Shorts and 1920s list fully reversing, but it's also happening in a bunch of other IMDB lists where films with (I assume) a very close rating are simply ranked chronologically, with the order of that ranking changing with every update. That makes the lists extremely volatile in a way that's basically random, which can't be good.

If that can be fixed, that's fine and all, but is it even worth fixing ? The IMDB lists are not lists at all, rather they're a glorified search filter. I get the use of them as short lists for beginners (in fact I've worked on them some precisely because awards are more attainable on such lists), but it sounds like there would be other options for that, such as the Taschen lists.

User avatar
Gorro
Donator
Posts: 575
Joined: Aug 28, 2011
Contact:

#1625

Post by Gorro » November 27th, 2018, 2:21 pm

The fact that they are average rating based instead of opinions of a (or several) critics or based on ranked lists of enthusiast gives another lens on cinema which I think is valuable for a site like iCheckMovies. So I am very much opposed to removing them.

Also, I like the slight volatility of the IMDb lists. It makes these lists alive. I get the feeling that there would be less complains about them if there were not bi-weekly messages with the changes sent out to all the users. Why are update to other lists not broadcasted like this to the user-base anyway? Probably a backend reason, but policy wise it doesn't make any sense. It makes the IMDb more prominent than other lists, which I think is wrong.

User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 2829
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#1626

Post by OldAle1 » November 27th, 2018, 3:23 pm

I don't necessarily mind having the "average Joe" viewpoint on some lists - elitist as I am I still have one foot in commercial American cinema myself for sure. My problem with the IMDb lists is more about how poorly that site does - and has always done - about campaign and troll voting, which has resulted in lists that really don't bear much relation to what is actually popular. Does the film have a black or female director? It's not going to get on any lists - at least not for long. Is it Indian? Well, that's changed, but for years the moment an Indian film showed up on the Top 250 it got hit with a flurry of "1" votes - clearly from people who hadn't seen it - and it disappeared again. And when several films showed up and weren't disappearing, IMDb would tweak the algorithm slightly and they'd disappear for that reason. They've only changed that, I'm sure, because of the money Amazon India is making, and if Amazon Turkey ever starts to really rake in the dough we'll see more Turkish films staying on the list. Believe me, I paid a fair amount of attention to it at one time. And I've mentioned before here how fucked up the 1910s list is because numerous well-known titles (i.e. Feuillade films and Napoleon) at one time had 25-50% "1" votes. The 1920s list is deformed by obsessive Gloria Swanson nuts. Etc, etc.

Not that I particularly want the list to be filled with Bollywood (or Turkish) films, or that I know 1910s cinema well enough to say what a list "should" look like, but the vote-stuffing both for and against films there on a regular basis is enough reason alone for me not to take the lists seriously. I suppose similar elements are at play on the Reddit list and some others and I can't take them seriously either, anything that is so open to trolling and fucking with by determined assholes just isn't a list that's worth caring about IMO, and I would be very happy to see all the IMDb lists and probably Reddit go by the wayside. There are, as folks have mentioned, other "entry level" lists of 50 or 100 films in various categories that are assuredly better and less compromised.

User avatar
Knaldskalle
Moderator
Posts: 9160
Joined: May 09, 2011
Location: New Mexico, Trumpistan
Contact:

#1627

Post by Knaldskalle » November 27th, 2018, 3:44 pm

OldAle1 wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 3:23 pm
And I've mentioned before here how fucked up the 1910s list is because numerous well-known titles (i.e. Feuillade films and Napoleon) at one time had 25-50% "1" votes. The 1920s list is deformed by obsessive Gloria Swanson nuts. Etc, etc.
Napoleon is from 1927, it should never be on a 1910s list no matter what. :P
Personal film goals for 2019.
ImageImageImageImage

User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 2829
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#1628

Post by OldAle1 » November 27th, 2018, 3:47 pm

Oh yeah duh. Well what I should have said was "the silent era, in particular 1912-1919" - most of the 20s films weren't as compromised as Napoleon from what I remember.

Then again we could just be talking fake news. People are saying that Napoleon actually came out in 1911. People are saying...

User avatar
beavis
Posts: 1682
Joined: Jun 20, 2011
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

#1629

Post by beavis » November 27th, 2018, 4:01 pm

Sol and OldAle1 have fair points, that I agree with, and of course this discussion has been had before. But then we also have to acknowledge Imdb is a brand name people recognise and there was not an overwhelming support for the Taschen decade lists that were in the recent polls; or a lot of discussion about this at that time. So it is a very hard discission to make if we wanted to replace the Imdb lists with better curated starter lists. I can see additional starter lists for decades and genres happening at some point, but this is not something actively being discussed by the mods at this point (you see how long it takes just to get a grip on all the poll results ;)) But as with a lot of things, when we see a great majority asking for something, then we will look into it. The polls were to know what the broader majority wants, but I feel the most outspoken are still the members on here, so... maybe a little campaingning on here is all it takes ;)

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 2144
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#1630

Post by Onderhond » November 27th, 2018, 5:18 pm

Replacing "popular votes" lists with "curated entries" lists doesn't make sense. Like others said, they offer a different take on cinema and you can't just ditch one for the other without losing something in the process.

I actually kind of like the IMDb lists. They're volatile alright, but that's a plus because that way new films get dragged up all the time. There are definitely improvements possible, but that has mostly to do with genre labelling imo.

User avatar
Teproc
Posts: 100
Joined: Sep 23, 2015
Contact:

#1631

Post by Teproc » November 27th, 2018, 5:23 pm

I'm fine with popular votes lists (and I agree that the Douban list should be a consideration), but these aren't lists, these are search filters on IMDB. The 250 is already there, these aren't needed aside from being good starting points, but there are other lists that could fulfill that role.

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 5718
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#1632

Post by xianjiro » November 27th, 2018, 6:18 pm

It would be interesting to publish a poll question or two along the lines of Should the IMDb Decade/Genre lists be ditched? or Should the IMDb Decade/Genre lists be replaced by X or Y? Would be interesting to see what kind of support the IMDb lists have outside of the impassioned messages above (both for and against).

Listen, Daddy. Teacher says, 'every time a car alarm bleeps, into heaven a demon sneaks.'
sol can find me here

User avatar
Gershwin
Donator
Posts: 7070
Joined: May 17, 2011
Location: Leiden, NL
Contact:

#1633

Post by Gershwin » November 27th, 2018, 6:29 pm

xianjiro wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 6:18 pm
It would be interesting to publish a poll question or two along the lines of Should the IMDb Decade/Genre lists be ditched? or Should the IMDb Decade/Genre lists be replaced by X or Y? Would be interesting to see what kind of support the IMDb lists have outside of the impassioned messages above (both for and against).
Only don’t poll on the ‘official forum’, or you’ll get the same bland, generic result as for the last polls, which in turn results in endless indecision because the people actually voted for nothing. That’s what you get when you ask random passers-by to vote for something, and then present them extremely long polls.
RokP 250

Profiles: Untappd - Last.fm - iCM

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 5718
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#1634

Post by xianjiro » November 28th, 2018, 2:57 am

Gershwin wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 6:29 pm
xianjiro wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 6:18 pm
It would be interesting to publish a poll question or two along the lines of Should the IMDb Decade/Genre lists be ditched? or Should the IMDb Decade/Genre lists be replaced by X or Y? Would be interesting to see what kind of support the IMDb lists have outside of the impassioned messages above (both for and against).
Only don’t poll on the ‘official forum’, or you’ll get the same bland, generic result as for the last polls, which in turn results in endless indecision because the people actually voted for nothing. That’s what you get when you ask random passers-by to vote for something, and then present them extremely long polls.
Wouldn't this forum be an appropriate place? I know more users have an opinion than have been expressed. And that isn't meant to invalidate any of what has been said. I'm just curious how the sentiment translates out to the larger audience. Or are those not responding likely in the "don't care one way or the other camp"? But this (IMDb Decade/Genre lists) does seem to be a recurrent topic that elicits strong statements each time someone brings it up.

Listen, Daddy. Teacher says, 'every time a car alarm bleeps, into heaven a demon sneaks.'
sol can find me here

User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 2795
Joined: Jun 03, 2014
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

#1635

Post by Fergenaprido » November 28th, 2018, 5:22 am

Teproc wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 5:23 pm
I'm fine with popular votes lists (and I agree that the Douban list should be a consideration), but these aren't lists, these are search filters on IMDB. The 250 is already there, these aren't needed aside from being good starting points, but there are other lists that could fulfill that role.
Filtered lists are still lists. They're simply not curated lists. The biggest distinction between filtered vs curated is that curated lists reflect the opinions of a select few individuals, while filtered lists reflect the opinions of a large-scale audience. Both have merit and I think there is space for both types of lists on icm.

User avatar
Gorro
Donator
Posts: 575
Joined: Aug 28, 2011
Contact:

#1636

Post by Gorro » November 28th, 2018, 8:01 am

xianjiro wrote:
November 28th, 2018, 2:57 am
Gershwin wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 6:29 pm
xianjiro wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 6:18 pm
It would be interesting to publish a poll question or two along the lines of Should the IMDb Decade/Genre lists be ditched? or Should the IMDb Decade/Genre lists be replaced by X or Y? Would be interesting to see what kind of support the IMDb lists have outside of the impassioned messages above (both for and against).
Only don’t poll on the ‘official forum’, or you’ll get the same bland, generic result as for the last polls, which in turn results in endless indecision because the people actually voted for nothing. That’s what you get when you ask random passers-by to vote for something, and then present them extremely long polls.
Wouldn't this forum be an appropriate place? I know more users have an opinion than have been expressed. And that isn't meant to invalidate any of what has been said. I'm just curious how the sentiment translates out to the larger audience. Or are those not responding likely in the "don't care one way or the other camp"? But this (IMDb Decade/Genre lists) does seem to be a recurrent topic that elicits strong statements each time someone brings it up.
No. We should not decide what happens on the iCM site. We are only a subset of the public of iCM, a subset which is not the best reflection of the general audience of iCM as was show in the disappointment by many users here on the results of the previous polls. This disappointment should not be the reason to change the rules in our benefit. Especially not on an issue which is more likely to be relevant to the general public of iCM.

I don't think The Guys would want the IMDb lists removed anyway, since it was the whole reason they started iCheckMovies in the first place.

User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 2795
Joined: Jun 03, 2014
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

#1637

Post by Fergenaprido » November 28th, 2018, 8:22 am

For me the only drawback to the imdb lists is the volatility. I may not agree with certain films being on some lists, but it's a reflection of the imdb userbase and I'm okay with that. If we reduce the frequency at which the lists are updated (twice a month would be enough I think), then it would calm things down a little, and people would be able to view the source to see upcoming changes in the list if they wanted to prioritize watches in order to maintain or gain awards. One of the most irritating things is having the awards come and go for a list because of films (re)entering and (re)leaving a list due to an error in the formula, or someone adding/removing a genre that gets reverted a few days later, or a spike in popularity for a recent film that then dies down. I don't see why these lists need to be so completely up-to-date considering even now we only update them twice a week even though imdb updates the data (and the Top 250 list) several times a day. We (thankfully) don't strive to keep up that pace.

User avatar
Gershwin
Donator
Posts: 7070
Joined: May 17, 2011
Location: Leiden, NL
Contact:

#1638

Post by Gershwin » November 28th, 2018, 9:39 am

Gorro wrote:
November 28th, 2018, 8:01 am
xianjiro wrote:
November 28th, 2018, 2:57 am
Gershwin wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 6:29 pm


Only don’t poll on the ‘official forum’, or you’ll get the same bland, generic result as for the last polls, which in turn results in endless indecision because the people actually voted for nothing. That’s what you get when you ask random passers-by to vote for something, and then present them extremely long polls.
Wouldn't this forum be an appropriate place? I know more users have an opinion than have been expressed. And that isn't meant to invalidate any of what has been said. I'm just curious how the sentiment translates out to the larger audience. Or are those not responding likely in the "don't care one way or the other camp"? But this (IMDb Decade/Genre lists) does seem to be a recurrent topic that elicits strong statements each time someone brings it up.
No. We should not decide what happens on the iCM site. We are only a subset of the public of iCM, a subset which is not the best reflection of the general audience of iCM as was show in the disappointment by many users here on the results of the previous polls. This disappointment should not be the reason to change the rules in our benefit. Especially not on an issue which is more likely to be relevant to the general public of iCM.

I don't think The Guys would want the IMDb lists removed anyway, since it was the whole reason they started iCheckMovies in the first place.
I really think you're overestimating the popular vote and the meaning of those votes on the official forum, Gorro. I think many people are simply voting for familiar names (e.g. Oscar, IMDb), without ever looking into the individual lists. That is no way to decide what lists should be official.
RokP 250

Profiles: Untappd - Last.fm - iCM

User avatar
Gershwin
Donator
Posts: 7070
Joined: May 17, 2011
Location: Leiden, NL
Contact:

#1639

Post by Gershwin » November 28th, 2018, 9:50 am

Also, I couldn't care less if the IMDb lists are abolished or not.

But if we all agree there is need for more introductory decade or genre lists, just do it already, go ahead and make those Taschen, 101 YMSBYD, Rough Guide or whatever series of your choice official. That will generate more, renewed interest for the website. And it's better than the current indecisiveness.

I don't want to be too pushy, but to be honest it really sounds like the mods are completely stuck in some discussion. You don't need to be. Just follow your intuition. The people are not your master, neither forum members here nor official forum members. YOU decide, in the end. Then please do decide on something.
RokP 250

Profiles: Untappd - Last.fm - iCM

User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 901
Joined: Oct 31, 2015
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#1640

Post by Lakigigar » November 28th, 2018, 9:57 am

I've seen some on other forums complaining about the fluctuating lists too. I really don't think those separate IMDb lists are of any value, as they're just all already in the top 250 mostly. I don't think we need to give IMDb 40 separate lists, and they're now more of an annoyance than something else.
Onderhond wrote:
November 27th, 2018, 5:18 pm
Replacing "popular votes" lists with "curated entries" lists doesn't make sense. Like others said, they offer a different take on cinema and you can't just ditch one for the other without losing something in the process.

I actually kind of like the IMDb lists. They're volatile alright, but that's a plus because that way new films get dragged up all the time. There are definitely improvements possible, but that has mostly to do with genre labelling imo.
I don't think this is about volatility anymore. I like volatile lists, but this is extremely volatile. Like 36 movies got replaced in IMDb shorts top 50 list, because IMDb changes algorithms (or something like that). That's not a question of volatility anymore.

Post Reply