bobbybrown on Sep 23 2015, 01:10:38 PM wrote: PeacefulAnarchy on Sep 23 2015, 12:57:19 PM wrote:
bobbybrown on Sep 23 2015, 12:49:35 PM wrote:What are the drawbacks of limiting it to Top-200 (or Top-500 so the change is less drastic) or bumping the minimum to $250/300 mln?
The main one is that it cuts off whatever older films are on the list and essentially turns the list into a revolving door of increasingly popular recent films knocked out by equally popular more recent films.
IIUC, you are arguing that raising the box-office requirement damages the list in a way that is qualitatively different from having a $200 mln limit at all, right? I hope I'm misunderstanding you, because that sounds really strange.
A list with a $200 mln limit is just as much a revolving door as one with $250 mln or any other kind of limit, and removing items from the list is kinda the same as preventing them from entering the list in the first place (I guess it feels worse?).
Sorry I wasn't clear, I was responding to the first suggestion of having a fixed length limit. Having a higher dollar limit is just like the current list only shorter. It solves no actual problems with the list.
Current list over $200 million: Everything on the list stays, every year we get more new films and the $200 million mark is less and less meaningful because of inflation and wider distribution.
Increasing the limit to X million: The current bottom of the list gets cut off, eliminating some unworthy new films but also some worthy older films. Afterwards, though it's the same problems as the limit being over $200.
Top X films: With a hard cutoff the list doesn't explode, but every year films keep falling off, particularly and the list essentially becomes a "popular films from the last 10 years and a handful of all time blockbusters randomly thrown in" list.
The concern about removing films isn't really the new films (as you say it's like they never enter) but rather the old films. That drop off.
I would probably never support raising the limit to $250 million or $300 million or whatever. It's a stopgap solution with all the current problems. I would probably support making it a top X list and accepting that it's just a recent films list with a handful of older films, which is mostly what it is now I guess.