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
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#81

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 19 2016, 07:38:10 PM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 19 2016, 07:33:10 PM wrote:
monty on May 19 2016, 07:28:00 PM wrote:Mighty, I find it somewhat of a double standard that you're allowed to include fan lists in your pet project, while others are told it's a no-go. If you think there's a lack of film historians/experts for the horror genre, it's nothing compared to the samurai genre where the lack of such iCM authoritative lists is massive. When we were debating introducing a samurai list, the consensus among the list domos here was that only lists by film historians/experts with a publishing history would be accepted as sources. Why should your pet project be exempted from the rules imposed on the rest of us here?
Cause it's not just only a fan list and mostly experts lists that are counted in it. And they are also weighed in the counting. That's completly different then it being a list made by just one fan, which that discussion was about.
The consensus reached in the samurai discussion was that any official list would have to be exclusively based on film historians/ recognized experts. Fan lists didn't factor anywhere in an official list as the list domos saw it. Consequently, I find it more than a little strange that mighty is allowed to deviate from the general rule set in that discussion. But I guess it helps being admin here...
I followed the discussion in that tread closely and that was not the consensus. The consensus was that lists should solid sources, like for example an expert list, an award list or a poll. Polls by random movies fans, like every IMDb lis, are also allowed. If a list is made by just one person, then that person should be a clear authority on the subject like being a film historian or critic.
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 1:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
weirdboy
Donator
Posts: 4032
Joined: January 3rd, 2016, 7:00 am
Contact:

#82

Post by weirdboy »

I'm compiling a list of the top 5000 films which contain no hats for submission as an official list.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#83

Post by monty »

Lonewolf2003 on May 19 2016, 07:47:30 PM wrote:
monty on May 19 2016, 07:38:10 PM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 19 2016, 07:33:10 PM wrote:Cause it's not just only a fan list and mostly experts lists that are counted in it. And they are also weighed in the counting. That's completly different then it being a list made by just one fan, which that discussion was about.
The consensus reached in the samurai discussion was that any official list would have to be exclusively based on film historians/ recognized experts. Fan lists didn't factor anywhere in an official list as the list domos saw it. Consequently, I find it more than a little strange that mighty is allowed to deviate from the general rule set in that discussion. But I guess it helps being admin here...
I followed the discussion in that tread closely and that was not the consensus. The consensus was that lists should solid sources, like for example an expert list, an award list or a poll. Polls by random movies fans, like every IMDb lis, are also allowed. If a list is made by just one person, then that person should be a clear authority on the subject like being a film historian or critic.
TSZDT - Compiled using 1,806 lists taken from various critics/polls/magazines/books/websites/forums/horror fans,

Clearly, her pet project contains lists made by individual fans of the genre, which would not be allowed under the consensus reached by list domos here. They insisted on sources being authoritative in every respect. I don't see why fan lists should be allowed if they're mixed with expert lists - it seems like neither fish nor fowl to me. We should settle for the one or the other once and for all - doing otherwise would simply be inconsistent and lead to endless discussion - for example, when would the tipping point for fan lists be reached in mix lists, etc.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 2:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#84

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 19 2016, 07:53:50 PM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 19 2016, 07:47:30 PM wrote:
monty on May 19 2016, 07:38:10 PM wrote:The consensus reached in the samurai discussion was that any official list would have to be exclusively based on film historians/ recognized experts. Fan lists didn't factor anywhere in an official list as the list domos saw it. Consequently, I find it more than a little strange that mighty is allowed to deviate from the general rule set in that discussion. But I guess it helps being admin here...
I followed the discussion in that tread closely and that was not the consensus. The consensus was that lists should solid sources, like for example an expert list, an award list or a poll. Polls by random movies fans, like every IMDb lis, are also allowed. If a list is made by just one person, then that person should be a clear authority on the subject like being a film historian or critic.
TSZDT - Compiled using 1,806 lists taken from various critics/polls/magazines/books/websites/forums/horror fans,

Clearly, her pet project contains lists made by single fans of the genre, which would not be allowed under the consensus reached by list domos here. They insisted on sources being authoritative in every respect. I don't see why fan lists should be allowed if they're mixed with expert lists - it seems like neither fish nor fowl to me.
I never said there weren't fan lists in TSZDT. Again it's about the difference between a list made by ONE person or a list using multiple lists as sources like a megalist or a poll. The consensus about a source being an authority on the subject only was about list made by one person.

There is no tipping points, since list compiled complelty out of fans list, like FOK and Reddit, are also allowed.
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 2:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 8916
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#85

Post by xianjiro »

monty on May 19 2016, 05:33:17 PM wrote:Also, I think the sheer number of shitty bloat items on the TSZDT effectively deter anyone from completing it - and what is more, may even turn them off the horror genre for quite some time...
Oops, you miswrote Monty. There ARE people who've completed or are very near to completing TSZDT. As of now, 1 platinum, 6 golds, and 20 silvers.

I'm sure every hardcore genre fan wishes he or she had a list of 1000 titles - I'll leave the debate of the overall quality of items on genre lists of 500+ titles to those more knowledgeable - for all those 'easy checks.' If only I was so focused. Looking at my IMDb stats, I don't see a single genre where I know I'd have seen anything like the top 1000 best films. Even in something like drama, where I've seen 5000 titles, I'm not clear those would include the 1000 best dramas over screened since there are only 134,000 titles on IMDb classified as dramas. Horror, by contrast, only has 19,000 features.

So there's another interesting way to look at the complaint - one out of every nineteen horror films is an official top check! Using that ratio, we should only have 34 top noirs (interestingly, IMDb only lists 645 features as film noir), 3758 top comedies, 424 top musicals, and a new official fantasy list should have 503 titles. Same logic, we should have a list of 7098 top dramas - so even there, my measly 5000 checks would be hard stretched to make bronze.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#86

Post by monty »

So that means list domos are ok with there being official megalists where personal lists of dubious repute and questionable selection are included, megalists where the overall composition is decided by the whims of one person, someone who's neither a film historian or published expert in the field? Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me but hey, if that's the overall plan for iCM, so be it.

Btw, please remind me, are you among the list domos, lonewolf? If not, I stress again that I'd like to hear from them on this.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 2:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 8916
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#87

Post by xianjiro »

WalterNeff on May 19 2016, 07:24:29 PM wrote:The noir list is just fine, because even the worst noir is better than the best Godard ;-)
:clap: :worship:

Oh wait, I'm not allowed to agree with that because I'm a 'whinging film snob' because :think: well frankly, I'm very unclear why.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#88

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 19 2016, 08:10:36 PM wrote:So that means list domos are ok with there being official megalists where personal lists of dubious repute and questionable selection are included, megalists where the overall composition is decided by the whims of one person, someone who's neither a film historian or published expert in the field? Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me but hey, if that's the overall plan for iCM, so be it.
There is a whole tread with multiple people that really get involved in the compilation of the list (instead of complaining about it in other threads), so it's not compiled on the whims of one person.

Not a mod of any kind.
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 2:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#89

Post by monty »

Fine, that still leaves the personal lists issue. Also, I think the whole notion of megalists being given official status should be reconsidered as such lists exhibit a nasty tendency to bloat, as evidenced by TSZDT.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 2:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#90

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 19 2016, 08:17:45 PM wrote:Fine, that still leaves the personal lists issue.
It is possible of course that in a list compiled by fan lists, like the Reddit one or even our own lists, there are among them lists of dubious repute. But the whole idea behind polls is that movies in those lists get pushed to the bottom of a list by movies that are liked a lot by a lot of voters.
On top of that when a list is clearly a list compiled by fans, you can't really speak of the lists used being of dubious repute (not counting clear trolling ones).

It's another discussion of the whole site/magazine holding the poll is of dubious repute or not.
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 2:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#91

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 19 2016, 08:17:45 PM wrote:Fine, that still leaves the personal lists issue. Also, I think the whole notion of megalists being given official status should be reconsidered as such lists exhibit a nasty tendency to bloat, as evidenced by TSZDT.
It can be reconsidered. But personally I am all for megalists in other genres as well. (Although others could be bit smaller.) So if the majority decides in favor of adopting megalist, please stop complaining about it.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#92

Post by monty »

Why are there no selection criteria set out in the list description for the massive 1,806 lists used as basis for TSZDT? It seems to me that the only factor here is to have as many lists as humanly possible, disregarding all issues of quality. I sincerely doubt that all the lists included are of equal worth - there's bound to be quite a few highly dubious ones in there. This again shows why such humongous megalists really should not be given official status imo.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#93

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 19 2016, 08:41:33 PM wrote:Why are there no selection criteria set out in the list description for the massive 1,806 lists used as basis for TSZDT? It seems to me that the only factor here is to have as many lists as humanly possible, disregarding all issues of quality. I sincerely doubt that all the lists included are of equal worth - there's bound to be quite a few highly dubious ones in there. This again shows why such humongous megalists really should not be given official status imo.
If you want to get involved in how the TSZDT list is made, use its thread.
If you just want to keep any kind of megalists out of this site, First lets decide if more megalist are allowed. And If they are you can then get involved in how those megalists are compiled and help judge the quality of the list being used.
If you are even still hoping TSZDT will be removed, you can stop your futile attempts ;)
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 2:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 8916
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#94

Post by xianjiro »

For the record, I'm all for TSZDT staying. I've said my piece, and will try and resist using it as the example, whenever possible, when I'm making a point.

edit: and gee, is there any better way to be supportive than to try both to be in the Top 500 list users and see at least 50% of films listed?
Last edited by xianjiro on May 20th, 2016, 2:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#95

Post by monty »

I think a major flaw of the TSZDT is its numbers methodology; the more lists one compiles (who knows from where or by what overriding criteria) supposedly equates with increased authoritativeness. I suspect mighty's possee is scouring the web for more lists as we speak so that the next ed. of TSZDT will have a 2,000+ lists basis - THAT will be one helluva authoritative list, right? Methinks not.

Anyhow, I realize that getting it removed stands little chance. At best I can hope to achieve a reorienting of the underlying list philosophy among the TSZDT panel members but even that is probably pie in the sky, hehe.

As for the continued existence of megalists, I feel a poll coming up.
Clearly, I think they should be removed due to the bloat issue. And that More Noirs list still bugs the hell out of me - a major misstep if ever there was one by the powers-that-be..
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 3:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 3850
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#96

Post by Ebbywebby »

monty on May 19 2016, 06:03:23 PM wrote:The massive bloat lists, of which TSZDT is the prime example, will be the undoing of iCM - mark my words.
Of the 1019 films in the last "iCM Forum's Favourite Unofficial Checks" poll, 150 of them have become official checks in the short time since then. After the next four lists are adopted, that 150 tally will jump again. What will be left?
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#97

Post by monty »

Ebbywebby on May 19 2016, 09:13:13 PM wrote:
monty on May 19 2016, 06:03:23 PM wrote:The massive bloat lists, of which TSZDT is the prime example, will be the undoing of iCM - mark my words.
Of the 1019 films in the last "iCM Forum's Favourite Unofficial Checks" poll, 150 of them have become official checks in the short time since then. After the next four lists are adopted, that 150 tally will jump again. What will be left?
Just make any film official (esp. when it comes to horror films mighty & her possee like, hehe) - that seems to be the prevailing trend anyhow.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 3:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 3850
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#98

Post by Ebbywebby »

I'm enjoying watching your repeated editing efforts, Monty. ;)
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#99

Post by monty »

Ebbywebby on May 19 2016, 09:20:53 PM wrote:I'm enjoying watching your repeated editing efforts, Monty. ;)
I aim to please, hehe.
Cippenham
Donator
Posts: 13430
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Dorset England
Contact:

#100

Post by Cippenham »

People on the dark side have no right anyway to complain about what are official lists or checks anyway it seems to me. Anyway Reddit and some other lists are it seems to me mainly or completely based on fan lists, also not sure exclusion of fan lists would make a massive difference to non horror fans.
Last edited by Cippenham on May 20th, 2016, 3:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Turning over a new leaf :ICM:
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 8916
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#101

Post by xianjiro »

Question for clarification: is the issue with 'fan lists' a concern that all fan lists are suspect or is it more a desire to not have xianjiro's 1000 Best Train Movies become official? Fans can be quite knowledgeable about their interest area, but clearly, making xianjiro's 1000 Best Train Movies official wouldn't serve iCM's mission (as best I can tell).

But given the discussion around possible LGBT lists a few months back, I can understand how easy it is to get the wrong message about what's not quite right with a given list. It can be quite confusing for someone who is just dipping their toes into the iCM pool (like @benhere, who's topic has been so very thoroughly hijacked - sorry Ben!)

My wish is this: to better understand and evaluate lists, a sticky thread with stated goals for what will make up a future official list. But would I be wrong to say that maybe the mods aren't in complete agreement?
Last edited by xianjiro on May 20th, 2016, 4:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
WalterNeff
Donator
Posts: 3319
Joined: July 27th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#102

Post by WalterNeff »

I am working on a Best LGBT Noir on a Train list. So far I've got Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train.
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 8916
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#103

Post by xianjiro »

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.
:thumbsup:

lmao
User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 3850
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#104

Post by Ebbywebby »

How about "Terror Train" (1980)? That's LGBT Horror on a Train. I think it's somehow even on an official list, but I can't recall which one.

PS "Trans-Europ Express" is #8 on my gotta-see list.
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 8916
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#105

Post by xianjiro »

Library doesn't have a Terror Train, so settled for Terrore nello spazio as my pick from TSZDT for next week. And while we have the book and music CD, no DVD for Trans-Europ/e/a Express.

Tried to think up a film that would work on @WalterNeff's list, and best thing I could come up with is Trainspotting. Didn't Renton give Sick Boy a handjob for some smack? (Though I'll admit, I don't think it was on a train, per se, even if he did, and my second admission is this is probably just wishful thinking.)

Har!
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33365
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#106

Post by joachimt »

Ebbywebby on May 19 2016, 05:20:38 PM wrote:Almost half of the films (493/1000) on your ESTHFIC list are on no other official list. A testament to how little general value they hold and how bloated this list is.
62% of the Unesco list is on no other official list. Sure, that list holds little general value as well. What does Unesco know about value? <_<
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
Nathan Treadway
Donator
Posts: 4410
Joined: June 26th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Springfield, MO, USA
Contact:

#107

Post by Nathan Treadway »

Just for clarification, aren't most horror experts also fans? I mean, if you chose to acquire extensive knowledge about a subject, I would hope you are at least a fan. So, what difference does it make if Jimmy's list makes the cut, versus, say, a Rosenbaum list making the cut for Zombies?

That being said, I'm not a horror fan; I just ignore the damned list. It really isn't all that hard to do, even if it means that I'm stuck in the 600s overall on icm, so be it. The rhetoric has gone on long enough, and is getting quite tiresome. /end rant. Carry on.
iCM

“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ (Matthew 25:37-40)
mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11660
Joined: May 8th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#108

Post by mjf314 »

xianjiro on May 19 2016, 10:10:14 PM wrote:Question for clarification: is the issue with 'fan lists' a concern that all fan lists are suspect or is it more a desire to not have xianjiro's 1000 Best Train Movies become official? Fans can be quite knowledgeable about their interest area, but clearly, making xianjiro's 1000 Best Train Movies official wouldn't serve iCM's mission (as best I can tell).
Official lists have to come from an authoritative source, but it has to be a source that'll seem authoritative to the average iCM user, so just being knowledgeable isn't enough. The most authoritative source would be a large poll of critics or experts, followed by an individual critic list, a book, a large poll of non-critics, and a popular website. Each source is examined on a case-by-case basis so it's not always that exact order.

There are other criteria as well, for example it has to be a category of movies that's large enough and that enough people will be interested in, so even a S&S train movies poll would probably not get adopted.

Other criteria would be list quality and length, and there are probably a few other criteria that I'm forgetting.
Last edited by mjf314 on May 20th, 2016, 8:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33365
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#109

Post by joachimt »

So you want a response from a mod, monty? It just took me almost an hour reading the last few pages I missed since I went to bed last night. I can't believe we're having this discussion again.

First of all, Lonewolf mainly said it all. You twist words in your own favor. There is no rule fan-lists aren't allowed. Our own 500<400 is a consensus of fanlists. Of course we're not excluding such lists from adoption-possibilities. With samurai the discussion was mainly about your list not qualifying, because it is a list by ONE fan.

Second, Cippenham just beat me. For someone in the dark you care a hell of a lot about which movies are official. We don't select lists to make movies official checks. We select lists because a list should be useful for people interested in that department. As Torgo already said, people are clearly interested in this list.

TSZDT include movies for the masses? Sure, might be true. If the masses like this list, I think we're doing a good job offering interesting lists for both the mainstream masses and on the other hand classic and arthouse fans as well.

TSZDT is one list out of almost 200 official lists. For fans of the genre it is very useful. If you're not interested, don't look at it. The only difference it makes for everyone is the general ranking, but you don't care about that, right? EbbyWebby cares about it, but he thinks someone who watches 5000 arthouse movies is a more worthwhile moviefan than someone who watches 5000 horror movies. EbbyWebby and I disagree about that.

Last, @EbbyWebby, please be polite.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 3850
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#110

Post by Ebbywebby »

JoachimT: [Ebbywebby] thinks someone who watches 5000 arthouse movies is a more worthwhile moviefan than someone who watches 5000 horror movies. EbbyWebby and I disagree about that.

-- We sure do. And reading the above and realizing your position of ICM power, I can understand why the site is slowly but steadily evolving toward a "quantity, not quality" game just to see who can check off the most movies. Regardless of whether they're junk or not. I see little evidence that you'd mind this. Since you think all movies are equal, why do you even fuss over which lists are made official? Why even make a distinction between official and unofficial lists?

JoachimT again: 62% of the Unesco list is on no other official list. Sure, that list holds little general value as well.


--- Comparing the Zombie list and the UNESCO list isn't fair. You can hardly expect UNESCO films to have the same kind of visibility as horror films. Esoteric field documentaries (many of them not even feature-length) are not going to be as well-exposed as mainstream horror movies. There's a difference between being left off a list because the film wasn't seen and being left off because everyone saw the film and thought it was sub-par. Secondly, horror films are more versatile to belonging on multiple lists. Decade lists, all-time lists, won-an-award lists, country lists.... Dry little UNESCO films with primitive production values aren't likely to get on those lists, no matter how academically worthwhile they are.

And on the subject of "politeness," I'm not the one writing screechy rants with "fucking" and "arsehole" inserted into every sentence.
Last edited by Ebbywebby on May 20th, 2016, 10:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33365
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#111

Post by joachimt »

Ebbywebby on May 20 2016, 04:30:24 AM wrote:I can understand why the site is slowly but steadily evolving toward a "quantity, not quality" game just to see who can check off the most movies.
Watching movies is not a game. If you feel that way, you need to take Monty's advice, go dark and go into rehab.
EbbyWebby on wrote:Since you think all movies are equal, why do you even fuss over which lists are made official? Why even make a distinction between official and unofficial lists?
I don't think all movies are equal. I think most classics are a lot more worthy to me than recent slasher movies, but that's MY opinion about these movies. Other people value those slashers more. I repeat: We don't select lists to make movies official checks. We select lists because a list should be useful for people interested in that department.

My post about Unesco was a silly comparison to your silly attempt to proof TSZDT is a bad list full of unworthy movies. Such a statistic doesn't mean anything to me.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 3850
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#112

Post by Ebbywebby »

JoachimTV: Watching movies is not a game.

Watching movies is not a game? Well, what is it then? A sacred calling? A job? I guess I should have known it couldn't have anything to do with entertaining oneself.

JoachimT: We don't select lists to make movies official checks. We select lists because a list should be useful for people interested in that department.

This position makes little sense. A list is useful to someone interested in its subject, regardless of whether it's official or not. And if a person ignores personal lists and only pays attention to official lists, he's probably not much of an "explorer" who uses lists as research tools.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 33365
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#113

Post by joachimt »

Ebbywebby on May 20 2016, 05:13:38 AM wrote:JoachimTV: Watching movies is not a game.

Watching movies is not a game? Well, what is it then? A sacred calling? A job? I guess I should have known it couldn't have anything to do with entertaining oneself.
"entertaining" is not the same as "game"
I watch movies for entertainment, whether it's a 10 hour Béla Tarr or the latest blockbuster. All different forms of "entertaining". You make watching movies into a game with a set of rules where the person who has seen the most movies that fit these rules is the biggest cinephile or at least the biggest iCM-er. That's just silly.

I wonder, if iCM would remove the overall rankings, would we still be having this endless discussion about TSZDT?
Last edited by joachimt on May 20th, 2016, 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#114

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 19 2016, 09:09:11 PM wrote:I think a major flaw of the TSZDT is its numbers methodology; the more lists one compiles (who knows from where or by what overriding criteria) supposedly equates with increased authoritativeness. I suspect mighty's possee is scouring the web for more lists as we speak so that the next ed. of TSZDT will have a 2,000+ lists basis - THAT will be one helluva authoritative list, right? Methinks not.

Anyhow, I realize that getting it removed stands little chance. At best I can hope to achieve a reorienting of the underlying list philosophy among the TSZDT panel members but even that is probably pie in the sky, hehe.

As for the continued existence of megalists, I feel a poll coming up.
Clearly, I think they should be removed due to the bloat issue. And that More Noirs list still bugs the hell out of me - a major misstep if ever there was one by the powers-that-be..
The more good lists it uses the better the list becomes me thinks.. Especially if those new lists found by mighty possee are from authoritive sources. The guy from TSPDT also is always expanding the lists he uses with new lists, are you against that also?
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#115

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

Ebbywebby on May 20 2016, 04:30:24 AM wrote:JoachimT: [Ebbywebby] thinks someone who watches 5000 arthouse movies is a more worthwhile moviefan than someone who watches 5000 horror movies. EbbyWebby and I disagree about that.

-- We sure do. And reading the above and realizing your position of ICM power, I can understand why the site is slowly but steadily evolving toward a "quantity, not quality" game just to see who can check off the most movies. Regardless of whether they're junk or not. I see little evidence that you'd mind this. Since you think all movies are equal, why do you even fuss over which lists are made official? Why even make a distinction between official and unofficial lists?
It's not just joachim (or the mods) that hold this view you disagree with, but as far as I know you're one of the very few people who feel that way about someone who watches 5000 arthouse movies being more worthwile. So most people have no problems at all the way the site is going in.

Making lists official is a kind of extra seal of quality, it shows that the list is of good quality (in the way the list is made and such, not about the movies on it). That's why we are all so passionate discussing about what lists should get adopted and not and why. Otherwise we could indeed drop that whole distinction between official and unofficial lists
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#116

Post by monty »

Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 06:10:32 AM wrote:
monty on May 19 2016, 09:09:11 PM wrote:I think a major flaw of the TSZDT is its numbers methodology; the more lists one compiles (who knows from where or by what overriding criteria) supposedly equates with increased authoritativeness. I suspect mighty's possee is scouring the web for more lists as we speak so that the next ed. of TSZDT will have a 2,000+ lists basis - THAT will be one helluva authoritative list, right? Methinks not.

Anyhow, I realize that getting it removed stands little chance. At best I can hope to achieve a reorienting of the underlying list philosophy among the TSZDT panel members but even that is probably pie in the sky, hehe.

As for the continued existence of megalists, I feel a poll coming up.
Clearly, I think they should be removed due to the bloat issue. And that More Noirs list still bugs the hell out of me - a major misstep if ever there was one by the powers-that-be..
The more good lists it uses the better the list becomes me thinks.. Especially if those new lists found by mighty possee are from authoritive sources. The guy from TSPDT also is always expanding the lists he uses with new lists, are you against that also?
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. It is a fun project for you guys, I get that, but canon it is not.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 12:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 10628
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#117

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

monty on May 20 2016, 06:31:24 AM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 06:10:32 AM wrote:
monty on May 19 2016, 09:09:11 PM wrote:I think a major flaw of the TSZDT is its numbers methodology; the more lists one compiles (who knows from where or by what overriding criteria) supposedly equates with increased authoritativeness. I suspect mighty's possee is scouring the web for more lists as we speak so that the next ed. of TSZDT will have a 2,000+ lists basis - THAT will be one helluva authoritative list, right? Methinks not.

Anyhow, I realize that getting it removed stands little chance. At best I can hope to achieve a reorienting of the underlying list philosophy among the TSZDT panel members but even that is probably pie in the sky, hehe.

As for the continued existence of megalists, I feel a poll coming up.
Clearly, I think they should be removed due to the bloat issue. And that More Noirs list still bugs the hell out of me - a major misstep if ever there was one by the powers-that-be..
The more good lists it uses the better the list becomes me thinks.. Especially if those new lists found by mighty possee are from authoritive sources. The guy from TSPDT also is always expanding the lists he uses with new lists, are you against that also?
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.
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on May 20th, 2016, 12:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
bal3x
Donator
Posts: 13073
Joined: May 26th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#118

Post by bal3x »

I'd just like to step in with one comment: I do agree that "quantity, not quality" seems to have slowly, but surely taken root and that's a rather worrying development. At a time when many genres and countries are still unrepresented we adopt new general mega-lists, which IMHO is rather strange.

Anyways, I'm actually in favor of shorter more manageable lists, i.e. 100, 250 or 500 max. All the lists containing 1000 films (except for the one TSPDT main list) is really an overkill.
Last edited by bal3x on May 20th, 2016, 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#119

Post by monty »

Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 06:41:47 AM wrote:
monty on May 20 2016, 06:31:24 AM wrote:
Lonewolf2003 on May 20 2016, 06:10:32 AM wrote:The more good lists it uses the better the list becomes me thinks.. Especially if those new lists found by mighty possee are from authoritive sources. The guy from TSPDT also is always expanding the lists he uses with new lists, are you against that also?
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.

We disagree about the megalist concept. I think personal lists should be excluded, instead only lists by film historians/widely recognized experts in the field should be allowed in. Otherwise, a megalist could lay no claim to being canonical or authoritative as you guys do with TSZDT. Allow me to remind you that the TSZDT mission statement explicitly says: "intended to be the ultimate canonical top 1000 horror list."

As for using as many good lists as possible, that sounds fine to me but when you're so desperate to find ever more lists that you include any list whatsoever by totally unknowns it has gone too far. Again, 1,800+ lists compiled from a hodepodge of sources - some questionable in the extreme - can lay no claim to being canonical. It may be "ultimate" but only in the sense of being the megalist with the highest list count.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 1:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
monty
Posts: 12791
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#120

Post by monty »

bal3x on May 20 2016, 06:57:23 AM wrote:Anyways, I'm actually in favor of shorter more manageable lists, i.e. 100, 250 or 500 max. All the lists containing 1000 films is really an overkill.
Hear, hear. And again, the focus should always be on QUALITY.
Last edited by monty on May 20th, 2016, 1:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply