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: Directors (Waiting for results), 1929 (Results), Directorial Debut Features (Mar 12th), DtC - Nominations (Mar 20th)
Challenges: Experimental/Avant Garde, Benelux, Run the Director
Film of the Week: Daisan no kagemusha, March nominations (Feb 26th)

Puzzled by ICM

User avatar
cinephage
Donator
Posts: 4279
Joined: November 11th, 2011, 7:00 am
Contact:

#121

Post by cinephage »

Who said TSZDT was a canonical list ?? What's the point of a horror canonical list ? There are many canon lists on ICM, but this is not one of them. And it shouldn't be.

That's why enjoy it so much : it remains linked to the daily production of new horror, a very lively and productive genre, it's a gathering of popular horror movies, allowing fans screams of fright surrounded by a virtual crowd of similar fans. This does not aim to make movie history.

It's wonderful that ICM offers such a wide range of lists, not just the canon. I personally can not appreciate 10 Godard or Tsai Ming Liang movies per week, yet I enjoy other less cerebral movies right within reach, especially those plebiscited by horror experts and amators.
The ICM 500 < 400, whose quality is globally admitted in these parts, results from the vote of 100 people, give or take. The TSZDT list gathers data from more than 1800 people ans websites. Of course it reveals something significant about the horror genre. How could it not ???
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#122

Post by monty »

cinephage on May 20 2016, 07:09:16 AM wrote:Who said TSZDT was a canonical list ??
It says so right in the TSZDT mission statement: intended to be the ultimate canonical top 1000 horror list.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#123

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 20 2016, 06:57:46 AM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 06:41:47 AM wrote:
monty on May 20 2016, 06:31:24 AM wrote:To the best of my knowledge the TSPDT guy doesn't use lists made by random people on some obscure film list site. If you really want to lay any real claim to authoritativeness, you'd ONLY go for widely recognized genre experts/film historians. The way it is now the mighty possee's megalist brings in too many questionable list choices for it to be nowhere near being authoritative/canonical.
We disagree about the use of fan lists for this, not having that discussion again.
But your post was against using more of any kind of lists for it and that a metalist would drop in authority using more list (those lists being of good repute), while the whole concept of such a metalist is using as much as good lists as available to make an overal overview about what is considered the best.

Btw I'm not involved in TSZDT, I don't care about horror enough for that. I just disagree with you about the whole general value of metalists.
It indeed isn't canon. But to me being canon (whatever the hell the criteria for that are) is not a criteria for adoptation.
Hehe, of course you wouldn't want to discuss the merits of fan lists seeing as your very own horror list is part of the TSZDT list pool - now I see why you defend the list so vehemently.
:huh: :blink: then you know more than me, including the fact that I supposedly made a horror list at some point in my life.
But even if I had, that would play no part in my view on using fan lists for a metalist.
I do understand that you're so upset about your own samurai fan list not being adopted, the use of fan lists for the TSZDT hurts you like a deep cut by a katana. And therefor you're now stretching the arguments made on that case to get those fan lists removed.

The rest of this we have discussed in length already. We disagree. Besides that my whole general point I'm trying to get trough to you is to be more pro-active and involved in making the list, if you are so concerned about its quality.
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 1:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
cinephage
Donator
Posts: 4279
Joined: November 11th, 2011, 7:00 am
Contact:

#124

Post by cinephage »

monty on May 20 2016, 07:13:08 AM wrote:
cinephage on May 20 2016, 07:09:16 AM wrote:Who said TSZDT was a canonical list ??
It says so right in the TSZDT mission statement: intended to be the ultimate canonical top 1000 horror list.
A canon can both be the illustration of esthetic laws, with rules-setting property, but it can also just be significant of a corpus of work, representative of it. I guess the second interpretation would work.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#125

Post by monty »

cinephage on May 20 2016, 07:45:49 AM wrote:
monty on May 20 2016, 07:13:08 AM wrote:
cinephage on May 20 2016, 07:09:16 AM wrote:Who said TSZDT was a canonical list ??
It says so right in the TSZDT mission statement: intended to be the ultimate canonical top 1000 horror list.
A canon can both be the illustration of esthetic laws, with rules-setting property, but it can also just be significant of a corpus of work, representative of it. I guess the second interpretation would work.
That's twisting of words. The TSZDT clearly intends to be an authoritative list, canon in the traditional sense.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#126

Post by monty »

Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 07:39:25 AM wrote:
monty on May 20 2016, 06:57:46 AM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 06:41:47 AM wrote:We disagree about the use of fan lists for this, not having that discussion again.
But your post was against using more of any kind of lists for it and that a metalist would drop in authority using more list (those lists being of good repute), while the whole concept of such a metalist is using as much as good lists as available to make an overal overview about what is considered the best.

Btw I'm not involved in TSZDT, I don't care about horror enough for that. I just disagree with you about the whole general value of metalists.
It indeed isn't canon. But to me being canon (whatever the hell the criteria for that are) is not a criteria for adoptation.
Hehe, of course you wouldn't want to discuss the merits of fan lists seeing as your very own horror list is part of the TSZDT list pool - now I see why you defend the list so vehemently.
:huh: :blink: then you know more than me, including the fact that I supposedly made a horror list at some point in my life.
But even if I had, that would play no part in my view on using fan lists for a metalist.

The rest of this we have discussed in length already. We disagree. Besides that my whole general point I'm trying to get trough to you is to be more pro-active and involved in making the list, if you are so concerned about its quality.
Hehe, methinks the lady protests too much. You made a horror list in 2013 and have been continually updating it, the last update being in 2015. Anyhow, it seems that TSZDT has made use of most ICM personal horror lists, which are fine as such but should not be part of any official megalist. Also, what about horror lists made by random forum members on thousands of other film sites? Are they all to be included as well? Claiming to be canonical on such a flimsy basis seems more than a little weird to me.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#127

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 20 2016, 07:50:19 AM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 07:39:25 AM wrote:
monty on May 20 2016, 06:57:46 AM wrote:Hehe, of course you wouldn't want to discuss the merits of fan lists seeing as your very own horror list is part of the TSZDT list pool - now I see why you defend the list so vehemently.
:huh: :blink: then you know more than me, including the fact that I supposedly made a horror list at some point in my life.
But even if I had, that would play no part in my view on using fan lists for a metalist.

The rest of this we have discussed in length already. We disagree. Besides that my whole general point I'm trying to get trough to you is to be more pro-active and involved in making the list, if you are so concerned about its quality.
Hehe, methinks the lady protests too much. You made a horror list in 2013 and have been continually updating it, the last update being in 2015.
Oh the list for our poll. I didn't know they were ranked individual for the TSZDT. Very nice try, playing on the man to make your point. But it's not working.

For the rest of it: raise your issues about the way TSZDT is made in its thread instead of complaining in other threads about its quality. Then you've a right to bring up these issues. And because I don't think any one ever really explained this in your life to you; people disagreeing with you and therefore making another decision, does not mean your opinion hasn't been heard and considered
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
De Limgralois
Posts: 0
Joined: April 29th, 2016, 6:00 am
Contact:

#128

Post by De Limgralois »

joachimt on May 20 2016, 06:04:09 AM wrote:
I wonder, if iCM would remove the overall rankings, would we still be having this endless discussion about TSZDT?
That's funny, because some members who actually questioning the Horror list, also ask that the global rankings disappear. It's pointless and it uses a lot of energy. I prefer to keep the list rankings yes, it's significant, knowing that mighty has already seen all horror films of her list, that's great for others; while having mighty in the top100 what does it say about her?

Cause, talking about significance, that's all about lists. Lists has to be significant and authoritative; if there's a lack somewhere I'm for the list mods to use their head to improve them to avoid all kind of stupid and weird stuff. Mentioning a lost film in the description, it's helpful, you know what? because having it into the list, you say, ok, I might watch this one, then you click, you try to find it, and then you know it's not available. Where is the global rankings here? where is the significance? A lost film has to be put in the description because it provides easy help. And for suspicious films, list mods could also put them in the description, cause it's easy information, while in the list, there's thousand members thinking at the same time "what the fuck, why this film is in this list?!". Nothing to do with global rankings, just remove this shit. You talk about it, we don't talk about extra official films for a genre, we talk about films appearing in an official list while it's "weird" or not significant. Lists are used to help people to pick films, it's a matter of knowledge and choice. What film do you think you pick with a 1 000 films? "Oh, I've just checked Zoba Dar III and the violent spoof, I didn't expect find it in a list!... Oh, and there's also Zoba Dar 7 vs Dard the Zob!... Oh, and... Huh, wait, there's actually all the series and all films with a tag horror on IMDb". This members won a lot of official checks? yes, and? are they happy with their status or are they ashamed for this enormous and insignificant list?

What will you do if there's, for instance, three better thematic horror lists with authoritative value? You wouldn't even consider adopting them because there's already a list which will feed iCM world for the next millennium. Yeah yeah "shit, we said that we won't delete any official list, but... we have this enormous stupid horror list with everything possible... so we can't adopt these..."

It's not easy to justify cooptation. Try to think more about iCM own authoritative improving the way the lists should be add, describe and update, instead of being friendly with people who will never have enough authority and knowledge to deserve such consideration. Yes mighty worked a lot on this list, on her site, bravo, and so what? Give horror fans some decent lists, don't mention official checks or rankings, just do your "entertaining" job: picking significant and helpful lists.

And let me laugh about legitimacy of such a list when mighty says that she compiling all kind of sources, including shitty polls, while she refuses to add French sources from a well known magazine (in last June). Ah ah.

"No, your not my friend, so I won't add your sources."

Well well well... Just rename the list the Anthology of Horror Films Archives.
blocho
Donator
Posts: 4390
Joined: July 20th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#129

Post by blocho »

WalterNeff on May 19 2016, 10:40:29 PM wrote:I am working on a Best LGBT Noir on a Train list. So far I've got Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train.
Ripley's Game might qualify.

And I think Dressed to Kill had a scene on the subway, if I remember correctly.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33367
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#130

Post by joachimt »

Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 07:55:13 AM wrote:
monty on May 20 2016, 07:50:19 AM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 07:39:25 AM wrote: :huh: :blink: then you know more than me, including the fact that I supposedly made a horror list at some point in my life.
But even if I had, that would play no part in my view on using fan lists for a metalist.

The rest of this we have discussed in length already. We disagree. Besides that my whole general point I'm trying to get trough to you is to be more pro-active and involved in making the list, if you are so concerned about its quality.
Hehe, methinks the lady protests too much. You made a horror list in 2013 and have been continually updating it, the last update being in 2015.
Oh the list for our poll. I didn't know they were ranked individual for the TSZDT. Very nice try, playing on the man to make your point. But it's not working.
Hey, I see my list is counted as well. I didn't even know. :huh:
Link is dead though, because I removed the list.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#131

Post by monty »

Smart move by mighty to include iCM fan lists - it means the TSZDT will never be removed from official status no matter what other - better and authoritative in the real sense of the term - lists may appear; the list simply has too many stakeholders here for that to happen. Well played!
Anyhow, as long as random fan lists by unknown entities enter into the TSZDT list pool, it can never lay claim to being canonical or authoritative.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 2:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
WalterNeff
Donator
Posts: 3319
Joined: July 27th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#132

Post by WalterNeff »

blocho on May 20 2016, 07:59:29 AM wrote:
WalterNeff on May 19 2016, 10:40:29 PM wrote:I am working on a Best LGBT Noir on a Train list. So far I've got Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train.
Ripley's Game might qualify.

And I think Dressed to Kill had a scene on the subway, if I remember correctly.
:thumbsup:
User avatar
3eyes
Donator
Posts: 7166
Joined: May 17th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

#133

Post by 3eyes »

After plowing though all this I think I'll start a "Puzzled by the ICM Forum" thread.
:run: STILL the Gaffer!
User avatar
cinephage
Donator
Posts: 4279
Joined: November 11th, 2011, 7:00 am
Contact:

#134

Post by cinephage »

monty on May 20 2016, 08:08:53 AM wrote:Smart move by mighty to include iCM fan lists - it means the TSZDT will never be removed from official status no matter what other - better and authoritative in the real sense of the term - lists may appear; the list simply has too many stakeholders here for that to happen. Well played!
Anyhow, as long as random fan lists by unknown entities enter into the TSZDT list pool, it can never lay claim to being canonical or authoritative.
Maybe, but it can certainly claim an official status on ICM. That's quite sufficient for me...
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#135

Post by monty »

cinephage on May 20 2016, 08:33:48 AM wrote:
monty on May 20 2016, 08:08:53 AM wrote:Smart move by mighty to include iCM fan lists - it means the TSZDT will never be removed from official status no matter what other - better and authoritative in the real sense of the term - lists may appear; the list simply has too many stakeholders here for that to happen. Well played!
Anyhow, as long as random fan lists by unknown entities enter into the TSZDT list pool, it can never lay claim to being canonical or authoritative.
Maybe, but it can certainly claim an official status on ICM. That's quite sufficient for me...
That's your prerogative. However, it does bug me that TSZDT tries to represent itself as something it clearly is not (nor ever will be under its current list pool selection), namely canon/authoritative. The mighty possee should be honest with themselves and the users of their list and tell it like it is - that the TSZDT is nothing but a lighthearted hodepodge list not too fussy about its sources as long as the word horror features somewhere in the list descriptions.
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 2083
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#136

Post by Torgo »

monty on May 20 2016, 08:08:53 AM wrote:Smart move by mighty to include iCM fan lists - it means the TSZDT will never be removed from official status no matter what other - better and authoritative in the real sense of the term - lists may appear; the list simply has too many stakeholders here for that to happen. Well played!
Image

:teehee:


I'd say everyone can have their last two posts about the issue and then we all pause for a moment, let that sink in and move on to something else. Alrighty?

Enjoy your weekend, guys. (Watching whatever kind of movies you enjoy. ;) )
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#137

Post by monty »

When will the TSZDT dishonesty regarding its claims to canonicalness end, I wonder?
User avatar
weirdboy
Donator
Posts: 4032
Joined: January 3rd, 2016, 7:00 am
Contact:

#138

Post by weirdboy »

That sounds like a poll question.
Noirville
Posts: 648
Joined: March 29th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#139

Post by Noirville »

If someone new entered this forum and this is the first topic they saw they'd probably think this forum is toxic... so much chatter about such a non issue. (u)
Cippenham
Donator
Posts: 13430
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Dorset England
Contact:

#140

Post by Cippenham »

Noirville on May 20 2016, 09:45:59 AM wrote:If someone new entered this forum and this is the first topic they saw they'd probably think this forum is toxic... so much chatter about such a non issue. (u)
good idea, this should be on hidden side then..
Turning over a new leaf :ICM:
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#141

Post by monty »

Interesting how mighty and her possee run and hide as soon as anyone voices the least bit of dissent...
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33367
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#142

Post by joachimt »

Good suggestion by Torgo. I counted two posts by monty since. Thread closed... :P
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#143

Post by monty »

Yeah, let's all avoid any discussion that doesn't suit our own views. Fair play!
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33367
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#144

Post by joachimt »

monty on May 20 2016, 10:03:00 AM wrote:Yeah, let's all avoid any discussion that doesn't suit our own views. Fair play!
:blink:
We've been discussing this again and again and again and again and now again for 8 pages more in a thread that didn't start about this in the first place.

All points have been made clear. The only problem that remains is that you don't agree with the few of others and just can't stop about it.
Last edited by joachimt on May 20th, 2016, 4:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#145

Post by monty »

Mighty and her possee should at a minimum explain their stand on the canonical issue. No such explanation has been forthcoming and hence there's a definite need to continue discussing. The TSZDT mission statement is disingenious the way it's presented now, I feel.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ChrisReynolds
Donator
Posts: 2642
Joined: December 29th, 2011, 7:00 am
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

#146

Post by ChrisReynolds »

Ebbywebby on May 19 2016, 07:17:36 PM wrote:
mightysparks on May 19 2016, 06:40:54 PM wrote:Your comments only reinforce the exact reason I made the list. The reason most films aren't on other lists is because the genre is dismissed and ignored. The fact that you refer to them as bloat and 'shitty teen horror' is, again, just dismissive. You not liking a film does not make it fluff or bloat. There are plenty of lists on the site with films that I think are pointless and would rather not be 'competing' against but iCM is supposed to have variety. If you don't want to compete against people watching films you're not interested in that's your own problem.

Also, the list is heavy on 21st century films simply because more horror films are being made - and watched - now. The 21st century has nearly the lowest percentage of films in the list from those that have been voted for. The 80s, 70s and 60s, if I recall correctly, actually have the highest percentage of films. And again, it's your own problem if you're dismissing films from a goddamn century.
And you labeling horror naysayers as snobs with their heads up their asses isn't "dismissive"?

You behave so shrill and childishly. It boggles my mind that you've gained so much "clout" on these sites. I guess sheer prolificacy counts for a lot. I mean, is there anything worse on this forum than those excruciatingly adolescent, indulgent threads you started about what boys might like you? I can't even believe my eyes, scanning that nonsense.

In any case, I do not say those films are fluff or bloat just based on MY tastes, but based on what other people say. People who AREN'T strongly slanted toward horror and are just general film lovers. How many of those 1000 films are rated "Fresh" on Rotten Tomatoes?

And on your list, I count 89 films from the 60s, 171 from the 70s and 194 from the 80s.
These are offensive personal attacks on a forum member who was sharing aspects of their personal life in a private thread in the Off-Topic section. I don't think they should be acceptable on this forum.

Incidentally, the number of films only on the TSZDT list drastically went up after the Top 500 Horror list was removed. There are only 321 films that were added as official checks by the TSZDT list. They include the following films that are unique to the TSZDT list:

123. Trick 'r Treat (2007), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 86%
183. Eden Lake (2008), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 80%
187. Tucker and Dale vs. Evil (2010), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 84%
249. The Loved Ones (2009), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 98%
271. Bakjwi (2009), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 81%
285. Trolljegeren (2010), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 82%
313. Lake Mungo (2008), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 93%
416. Triangle (2009), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 82%
579. Lemora: A Child's Tale of the Supernatural (1973), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 86%
625. Warm Bodies (2013), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 80%
643. Wild Zero (1999), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 100%
644. Excision (2012), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 81%
709. Snowtown (2011), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 83%
771. Los cronocrímenes (2007), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 88%
836. Frankenweenie (2012), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 87%
866. Housebound (2014), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 97%
928. Sightseers (2012), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 85%
948. Mute Witness (1994), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 81%
950. The Living and the Dead (2006), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 90%
979. A Field in England (2013), Rotten Tomatoes Score: 87%

That's just a subset of the ones that score above 80% on RT. That's even with the fact that horror films usually do poorly on Rotten Tomatoes as many mainstream critics dislike the genre. Other films unique to TSZDT are ones that had poor critical reception at the time but have since become cult films people fondly remember from their childhoods (e.g. The Burbs, RT score 47%. Hocus Pocus, RT score 30%).
monty on May 20 2016, 10:12:36 AM wrote:Mighty and her possee should at a minimum explain their stand on the canonical issue. No such explanation has been forthcoming and hence there's a definite need to continue discussing. The TSZDT mission statement is disingenious the way it's presented now, I feel.
On the description canonical appears once in the iCM description and once on the website, both times qualified as an opinion:

"intended to be the ultimate canonical top 1000 horror list"
"here lies possibly the most definitive canonical horror list."

Outside of religious law and mathematics, canon has little meaning anyway. It's just a meaningless quibble over a word intended to undermine a list you don't like. I haven't participated in the past few discussions about TSZDT because they just go round and round. The people making the attacks on the list aren't looking for answers and they aren't helping to improve the list.


All these posts should be moved to their own thread.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#147

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 20 2016, 08:08:53 AM wrote:Smart move by mighty to include iCM fan lists - it means the TSZDT will never be removed from official status no matter what other - better and authoritative in the real sense of the term - lists may appear; the list simply has too many stakeholders here for that to happen. Well played!
Anyhow, as long as random fan lists by unknown entities enter into the TSZDT list pool, it can never lay claim to being canonical or authoritative.
The authority of a list can come from different aspects. Different kind of lists have different purposes and need to be approached differently. Authority can come from it being made by an expert, but also by it being a poll held among fans. Nobody ever claimed that lists made by experts are the only kind of lists that can claim to be authoritative. A list made by polls among fans or experts can also by authoritative, in the sense that it is a list with movies that are liked by a lot of fans. That's also a kind of authority, the authority of the strength of numbers. It's the same basis every imdb list has. Therefor the authority of metalists like TSZDT comes from the fact that it is a list liked by a movies by a lot of fans and experts, and I don't see it claiming it to be anything else otherwise.

If you really feel that expert list are the only authoritative lists that should be allowed on iCM; that firstly is a big turn around in your views on the subject since we been discussing the adaptation of a samurai list. Secondly that means in your view there are many lists that should be removed from iCM and only list made experts/critics and polls among them should remain.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#148

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 20 2016, 10:03:00 AM wrote:Yeah, let's all avoid any discussion that doesn't suit our own views. Fair play!
By now my only reaction to you is this:
Image
Cause once again; people disagreeing with you and therefor coming to a different decision does not equal your arguments aren't heard and considered.
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 5:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
weirdboy
Donator
Posts: 4032
Joined: January 3rd, 2016, 7:00 am
Contact:

#149

Post by weirdboy »

If the issue is strictly that the authority of lists being based on fan votes, none of the IMDB lists should be official based on that logic.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33367
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#150

Post by joachimt »

weirdboy on May 20 2016, 11:10:47 AM wrote:If the issue is strictly that the authority of lists being based on fan votes, none of the IMDB lists should be official based on that logic.
True. Weird if you think of it that way, because the IMDb-lists are the whole foundation of the start of iCM.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#151

Post by monty »

ChrisReynolds on May 20 2016, 10:50:42 AM wrote:On the description canonical appears once in the iCM description and once on the website, both times qualified as an opinion:

"intended to be the ultimate canonical top 1000 horror list"
"here lies possibly the most definitive canonical horror list."

Outside of religious law and mathematics, canon has little meaning anyway. It's just a meaningless quibble over a word intended to undermine a list you don't like. I haven't participated in the past few discussions about TSZDT because they just go round and round. The people making the attacks on the list aren't looking for answers and they aren't helping to improve the list.


All these posts should be moved to their own thread.
Yes, the term appears twice, once as an opinion and once as a statement of intent.
When attaching the word "canonical" to a list, I expect it to be a list whose sources are recognized experts/film historians with in-depth knowledge of the genre, not the half-baked efforts of some random forum members. A canonical film list is one where the items have proven to have stood the test of time, items whose individual worth are generally acknowledged by the leading experts in the field. With its current hodepodge list pool methodology, the TSZDT should stop laying claim to any form of canonicalness. Continuing with spurious claims of canonicalness is deceiving the users of the list.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 5:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#152

Post by monty »

Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 10:54:42 AM wrote:The authority of a list can come from different aspects. Different kind of lists have different purposes and need to be approached differently. Authority can come from it being made by an expert, but also by it being a poll held among fans. Nobody ever claimed that lists made by experts are the only kind of lists that can claim to be authoritative. A list made by polls among fans or experts can also by authoritative, in the sense that it is a list with movies that are liked by a lot of fans. That's also a kind of authority, the authority of the strength of numbers. It's the same basis every imdb list has. Therefor the authority of metalists like TSZDT comes from the fact that it is a list liked by a movies by a lot of fans and experts, and I don't see it claiming it to be anything else otherwise.

If you really feel that expert list are the only authoritative lists that should be allowed on iCM; that firstly is a big turn around in your views on the subject since we been discussing the adaptation of a samurai list. Secondly that means in your view there are many lists that should be removed from iCM and only list made experts/critics and polls among them should remain.
The samurai issue was a special case as there's a virtual non-existence of such film lists by recognized experts/film historians/published sources. (This stands in distinct contrast to the horror genre where there are plenty such sources.) Many individual fans of the genre both here and elsewhere have found my modest genre contribution the more worthwhile effort out there so far. When the list domos (and the majority of users here, who are not genre experts) thought differently, I accepted their decision. In stark contrast to mighty's list, however, I never laid claim to my list being canonical or definite in any sense - it is purely a fan list. Sure, fan lists can have their place here on iCM but then they should be labelled as such, not as "canon". Why do mighty and her gang find that so hard to understand?
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 5:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
brokenface
Donator
Posts: 13808
Joined: December 29th, 2011, 7:00 am
Contact:

#153

Post by brokenface »

I'd call TSZDT a popular canon, in that includes both critic and fan lists and therefore both critical opinion and general popularity factor into it. Don't know the ins and outs of how the weighting's been done and people can always quibble on that (as we no doubt would if we knew the inner workings of TSPDT) but I think the list stands up well as a very useful reference for people interested in horror. It's ranked, so you can only look at the top 100/200/whatever and ignore the stuff below if you think it's too long. I certainly have no intention of ever completing it, but I've taken note of films in the top 200 or so that I haven't seen..

Rather than being the death knell for ICM, I think lists like TSZDT will draw in a wider audience as there are plenty of horror buffs out there who might catch the checking bug from discovering such a list

And monty, it's really not too hard to get your head round the difference between a list compiled from multiple sources and one that comes from a single source. In the latter case, it's reasonable that the site has taken approach of only making official lists from single sources who have some sort of authority (published books/well-known critics/filmmakers)
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#154

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 20 2016, 11:29:17 AM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 10:54:42 AM wrote:The authority of a list can come from different aspects. Different kind of lists have different purposes and need to be approached differently. Authority can come from it being made by an expert, but also by it being a poll held among fans. Nobody ever claimed that lists made by experts are the only kind of lists that can claim to be authoritative. A list made by polls among fans or experts can also by authoritative, in the sense that it is a list with movies that are liked by a lot of fans. That's also a kind of authority, the authority of the strength of numbers. It's the same basis every imdb list has. Therefor the authority of metalists like TSZDT comes from the fact that it is a list liked by a movies by a lot of fans and experts, and I don't see it claiming it to be anything else otherwise.

If you really feel that expert list are the only authoritative lists that should be allowed on iCM; that firstly is a big turn around in your views on the subject since we been discussing the adaptation of a samurai list. Secondly that means in your view there are many lists that should be removed from iCM and only list made experts/critics and polls among them should remain.
The samurai issue was a special case as there's a virtual non-existence of such film lists by recognized experts/film historians/published sources. (This stands in distinct contrast to the horror genre where there are plenty such sources.) Many individual fans of the genre both here and elsewhere have found my modest genre contribution the more worthwhile effort out there so far. When the list domos (and the majority of users here, who are not genre experts) thought differently, I accepted their decision. In stark contrast to mighty's list, however, I never laid claim to my list being canonical or definite in any sense - it is purely a fan list. Sure, fan lists can have their place here on iCM but then they should be labelled as such, not as "canon". Why do mighty and her gang find that so hard to understand?
It depends on the definition of canon you use. If TSZDT really is supposed to be canonical in the definition of items that have proven to have stood the test of time, items whose individual worth are generally acknowledged, then you do have a case and that claim should not be made. But I don't think it claims to be that or anyone. besides you, thinks it claims to be that. If the definition used is more in the general sense of it being an effort to make a most encompassed list of horror movies, which I think is the way the word is used for the list, then the list can be canonical while including fanlists.

But for the sake of the argument let's say you're right and it's a false claim; if that claim is removed from the introduction, would you then agree that TSZDT meets this criteria for adaptation?
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 6:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#155

Post by monty »

If the TSZDT intends no more than to be an attempt at a folk/popular canon, then it should unequivocally state so. The wording as of now is very unclear - intentionally so methinks. It seems to me that one tries to infuse the list with more authority than its hodepodge collection of sources merit..

If the claim were to be removed/corrected, that list would not be sailing under a false flag anymore and I'd rest somewhat easier about its inclusion. That still doesn't mean to say that I find humongous megalists as the TSZDT particularly desirable for official adoption.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 6:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#156

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 20 2016, 12:28:26 PM wrote:If the TSZDT intends no more than to be an attempt at a folk/popular canon, then it should unequivocally state so. The wording as of now is very unclear - intentionally so methinks. It seems to me that one tries to infuse the list with more authority than its hodepodge collection of sources merit..
Till you raised this issue today I never heard anyone being confused about this before, so it can't be that unclear. But okay it could be described a bit more specific as a folk/popular canon.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#157

Post by monty »

Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 12:35:40 PM wrote:
monty on May 20 2016, 12:28:26 PM wrote:If the TSZDT intends no more than to be an attempt at a folk/popular canon, then it should unequivocally state so. The wording as of now is very unclear - intentionally so methinks. It seems to me that one tries to infuse the list with more authority than its hodepodge collection of sources merit..
Till you raised this issue today I never heard anyone being confused about this before, so it can't be that unclear. But okay it could be described a bit more specific as a folk/popular canon.
Just because anyone hasn't raised the issue before doesn't mean that nobody has thought so. Possibly they even felt intimidated by mighty and her possse - after all, you guys are a fearsome lot. B)
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#158

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 20 2016, 12:41:14 PM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 12:35:40 PM wrote:
monty on May 20 2016, 12:28:26 PM wrote:If the TSZDT intends no more than to be an attempt at a folk/popular canon, then it should unequivocally state so. The wording as of now is very unclear - intentionally so methinks. It seems to me that one tries to infuse the list with more authority than its hodepodge collection of sources merit..
Till you raised this issue today I never heard anyone being confused about this before, so it can't be that unclear. But okay it could be described a bit more specific as a folk/popular canon.
Just because anyone hasn't raised the issue before doesn't mean that nobody has thought so. Possibly they even felt intimidated by mighty and her possse - after all, you guys are a fearsome lot. B)
Well aren't all those people lucky then that you are hear to give voice to them. They sure do keep themselves hidden very well. People would almost start to believe that they don't exist.

Mighty and her posse sure must be very intimidating, that's probably why nobody complained about the adaptation of the list before in no thread here ever.
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#159

Post by monty »

No matter the exact number of dissenting voices, what's more important is what mighty will do about the legitmate concerns voiced in this discussion. Somehow I fear her tiff with ebby has scared her from checking in here. That means her possee will have to notify her but will they do so or will they do as they're wont to - namely, run and hide in the shadows? :P
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MMDan
Posts: 211
Joined: January 10th, 2016, 7:00 am
Contact:

#160

Post by MMDan »

TSZDT isn't my favorite list, I was satisfied with the old Top 500 horror list. But I just shrugged and moved on. Horror is a genre I'm least likely to watch, so who am I to say what is canon.

Long internet arguments about things such as this make me realize I'll be dead one day, and I'd rather spend some time outside instead of arguing over lists.
Post Reply