Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
500<400 (Nominations Sep 22nd)
Polls: Animation (Results), 2016 awards (Aug 25th), 1987 (Aug 25th), Benelux (Aug 30th), Knockout competition (Round 1)
Challenges: Romance, UK/Ireland, <400 Checks
Film of the Week: Hospital, September nominations (Aug 30th)

List Length

User avatar
mightysparks
Site Admin
Posts: 29336
Joined: May 05, 2011
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

List Length

#41

Post by mightysparks » May 31st, 2016, 1:28 am

I use lists for exploration, my goal isn't necessarily completion, so I like updates.
"I do not always know what I want, but I do know what I don't want." - Stanley Kubrick

iCM | IMDb | LastFM | TSZDT

Image

tommy_leazaq
Donator
Posts: 3372
Joined: May 18, 2011
Location: Chennai, India
Contact:

#42

Post by tommy_leazaq » May 31st, 2016, 4:24 am

I use lists for exploration, my goal isn't necessarily completion, so I like updates.
^ This.

There are many uncompletabale lists like Amos or Unesco. Or Bollywood list if you are not from India. For me, getting Platinum is not the only purpose of the lists.

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 6441
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#43

Post by xianjiro » May 31st, 2016, 7:07 am

Makes perfect sense - so would be fair to say you two (might and tommy) put less emphasis on official status than the coverage of a given list?

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

User avatar
cinephage
Donator
Posts: 3670
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Contact:

#44

Post by cinephage » May 31st, 2016, 8:05 am

I'm astounded to find out how some users actually watch movies just to finish official lists, with a seemingly serious approach. Like mighty and many others, I watch movies because I enjoy watching movies.

If I watch a film that I enjoy, I will never regret having "wasted my time" because it's not official anymore. If I watch a film I hate, I wasted my time no matter how many lists it is in.

Lists are guidelines and suggestions, nothing else. Good recs if the list is good, poor recs if it is not. It's fun to "work on lists" and explore cinema I'm not familiar with, it's fun to be "rewarded" with ranking when I watch certain films. But it's just a game with nothing at stake but my viewer's enjoyment, and added sociability with an amazing bunch of cinephiles.

But in itself, my ranking doesn't mean anything, it's just a marker.
Most cinephiles don't use ICM, and are not ranked. If I race with a few random friends, winning is nice, but it doesn't mean I should participate in the Olympics nor that I am a champion. Furthermore, watching many movies does not really make me knowledgeable about cinema, there's the important question of quantity and quality, and mostly of how I use the movies I watch to expand my reflexion and knowledge about that art, whether I read books, watch interviews, or explore the movies I like to determine what I like about them...

De Limgralois
Posts: 0
Joined: Apr 29, 2016
Contact:

#45

Post by De Limgralois » May 31st, 2016, 8:35 am

So if completing lists is not that important, any list could be deleted for not being significant. That's the best update sometimes.

The Anthology list and the Zombie list should be removed then.

And mighty, author of this marvellous site which is the source of this tremendous Zombie list didn't answer about the updates. She just doesn't care because she does it randomly. If a bunch of crooks can create an Anthology list with their own movies, a single person can create his own list without any verification. Both lists are biased, non-authoritative, long and useless.

Btw even with updates, the Zombie might be very fun, with a greater "exploration" experience, when a film ranked 986 leaves the 1 000 films with its beautiful 4,8 IMDb ranking and let another (not necessarily a horror film) enter with 4,7 IMDb ranking thanks to a random TOP20 21th century Zombie list updated. (Oh, or maybe the author of the list will never update the list verifying updates in 159 so-called horror lists?)

Explore my ass, it's cleaner than all this shit.
Last edited by De Limgralois on May 31st, 2016, 8:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
3rd
Posts: 1848
Joined: May 24, 2011
Contact:

#46

Post by 3rd » May 31st, 2016, 9:15 am

cinephage on May 31 2016, 02:05:13 AM wrote:I'm astounded to find out how some users actually watch movies just to finish official lists, with a seemingly serious approach. Like mighty and many others, I watch movies because I enjoy watching movies.

If I watch a film that I enjoy, I will never regret having "wasted my time" because it's not official anymore. If I watch a film I hate, I wasted my time no matter how many lists it is in.

Lists are guidelines and suggestions, nothing else. Good recs if the list is good, poor recs if it is not. It's fun to "work on lists" and explore cinema I'm not familiar with, it's fun to be "rewarded" with ranking when I watch certain films. But it's just a game with nothing at stake but my viewer's enjoyment, and added sociability with an amazing bunch of cinephiles.

But in itself, my ranking doesn't mean anything, it's just a marker.
Most cinephiles don't use ICM, and are not ranked. If I race with a few random friends, winning is nice, but it doesn't mean I should participate in the Olympics nor that I am a champion. Furthermore, watching many movies does not really make me knowledgeable about cinema, there's the important question of quantity and quality, and mostly of how I use the movies I watch to expand my reflexion and knowledge about that art, whether I read books, watch interviews, or explore the movies I like to determine what I like about them...
I couldn't have said it better myself :thumbsup:
Neither a prude nor politically correct!
Minst sex års kritiskt granskande!

https://www.icheckmovies.com/profiles/3rd/

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 29108
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#47

Post by joachimt » May 31st, 2016, 9:53 am

Minkin on May 30 2016, 05:29:00 PM wrote:I can stand lists that add films each year/month, as the core list remains, you don't lose checks and don't have to worry about having watched something in vain. Whereas when the list changes each year, you start caring about it less /seeking out those films less -since you might have sat through something and gained no rewards for your troubles.
I've been thinking for an hour now if I should respond to your post at all and if I do, where to start. So I decided to just quote the most disturbing piece of your post and comment on your remarks about the forum list.

If you really feel the way you say in the above quote, you're seriously watching movies for the wrong reasons. I'm glad you're part of a minority on iCM. If most people would be like this, I'd leave iCM.

You say our forum list is pointless because it changes so drastically each year. Those changes are exactly what makes this list worthwhile!! The point is to highlight underseen movies. When a movie reaches 400 checks, there's a free spot for a new obscure recommendation. This list isn't about completion, I'll never try to get platinum on this. This list is about recommendations and lots of people use it that way.

But you say we failed because only 34 people have bronze. Do I really need to explain the statistics? Of course only a few people have bronze. If lots of people have lots of checks on this list, lots of movies would get above 400 checks, so they wouldn't be on the list anymore. Therefor the very nature of the list results in very few people getting bronze.

If you think 500 is too long for our forum list, you can just use a part of the list. That's the best part about a list being ranked. Just use the top X for recommendations and ignore the rest of the list.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
cinephage
Donator
Posts: 3670
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Contact:

#48

Post by cinephage » May 31st, 2016, 10:13 am

De Limgralois on May 31 2016, 02:35:42 AM wrote:So if completing lists is not that important, any list could be deleted for not being significant. That's the best update sometimes.

The Anthology list and the Zombie list should be removed then.

And mighty, author of this marvellous site which is the source of this tremendous Zombie list didn't answer about the updates. She just doesn't care because she does it randomly. If a bunch of crooks can create an Anthology list with their own movies, a single person can create his own list without any verification. Both lists are biased, non-authoritative, long and useless.

Btw even with updates, the Zombie might be very fun, with a greater "exploration" experience, when a film ranked 986 leaves the 1 000 films with its beautiful 4,8 IMDb ranking and let another (not necessarily a horror film) enter with 4,7 IMDb ranking thanks to a random TOP20 21th century Zombie list updated. (Oh, or maybe the author of the list will never update the list verifying updates in 159 so-called horror lists?)

Explore my ass, it's cleaner than all this shit.
Actually, as a horror fan, the TSZDT is one of the most useful lists I can find on ICM. Its large size allows me to pick various titles and enjoy myself. As a recommendation tool, it works perfectly, really. Don't forget this genre is the most popular even on the forum. A wide range of up-to-date recommendations is certainly not lost on me, nor on many ICM users.
Those who don't care for it can just work on other lists and ignore this one...

User avatar
monty
Posts: 12739
Joined: May 09, 2011
Contact:

#49

Post by monty » May 31st, 2016, 10:30 am

Regarding the forum list, who on earth is this cburns? He's the only one to have a perfect score on the 500<400 list, yet he ranks #1447 overall on the site. Even sander has but an 81 per cent completion rate for our obscure list...
Last edited by monty on May 31st, 2016, 10:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

Nathan Treadway
Donator
Posts: 3648
Joined: Jun 26, 2015
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Contact:

#50

Post by Nathan Treadway » May 31st, 2016, 10:35 am

De Limgralois on May 31 2016, 02:35:42 AM wrote:So if completing lists is not that important, any list could be deleted for not being significant. That's the best update sometimes.

The Anthology list and the Zombie list should be removed then.

And mighty, author of this marvellous site which is the source of this tremendous Zombie list didn't answer about the updates. She just doesn't care because she does it randomly. If a bunch of crooks can create an Anthology list with their own movies, a single person can create his own list without any verification. Both lists are biased, non-authoritative, long and useless.

Btw even with updates, the Zombie might be very fun, with a greater "exploration" experience, when a film ranked 986 leaves the 1 000 films with its beautiful 4,8 IMDb ranking and let another (not necessarily a horror film) enter with 4,7 IMDb ranking thanks to a random TOP20 21th century Zombie list updated. (Oh, or maybe the author of the list will never update the list verifying updates in 159 so-called horror lists?)

Explore my ass, it's cleaner than all this shit.
Dammit, here we go again.

I really don't understand why people come on here and bitch and moan about every little thing. If a list doesn't appeal to you (for the record, the one everyone is complaining about doesn't appeal to me), then just ignore the damn thing. It seems like it's the end of the world that there's a 1000 horror films list floating around the site. GET OVER IT!

Honestly, if I was running this group, you'd be gone by now. It seems like you don't like being here anyhow, so, why bother coming around?
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)

De Limgralois
Posts: 0
Joined: Apr 29, 2016
Contact:

#51

Post by De Limgralois » May 31st, 2016, 10:59 am

I'd start to believe that members who like horror films are at the same level of horror that they watch in these films. This list is useful? really? With thousands no-horror films, with thousands classics not being horror primary genre... That's a pot-pourri list, like my watchlist. You can pick on it randomly, yes. It doesn't mean it's a good list and a list that should be keep unchanged on iCM. If you watch horror films, wouldn't you prefer to have four of five thematic horror list? wouldn't be more significant and useful? A zombie list, an apocalypse list, a giallo list, a slasher list, a monster list, a gothic list?

I do. And I like all kind of genres in cinema. I just don't like the mess of this list.

Can you explain what have in common a serial killer film like Henry portrait of a serial killer, Shaun of the dead, The Birds, Vampyr, a war film like Come and See, a scifi movie like Terminator, a film noir like The Night of the Hunter, a mystery film like Picnic at Hanging Rock, a neo noir like Blue Velvet, a rape film like Irreversible, a surrealism film like Un chien andalou, a fantasy film like La Belle et la Bête? Nothing. In so doing, everything is horror (like everything could be fantasy).

De Limgralois
Posts: 0
Joined: Apr 29, 2016
Contact:

#52

Post by De Limgralois » May 31st, 2016, 11:05 am

treadwaynathan on May 31 2016, 04:35:00 AM wrote:
De Limgralois on May 31 2016, 02:35:42 AM wrote:So if completing lists is not that important, any list could be deleted for not being significant. That's the best update sometimes.

The Anthology list and the Zombie list should be removed then.

And mighty, author of this marvellous site which is the source of this tremendous Zombie list didn't answer about the updates. She just doesn't care because she does it randomly. If a bunch of crooks can create an Anthology list with their own movies, a single person can create his own list without any verification. Both lists are biased, non-authoritative, long and useless.

Btw even with updates, the Zombie might be very fun, with a greater "exploration" experience, when a film ranked 986 leaves the 1 000 films with its beautiful 4,8 IMDb ranking and let another (not necessarily a horror film) enter with 4,7 IMDb ranking thanks to a random TOP20 21th century Zombie list updated. (Oh, or maybe the author of the list will never update the list verifying updates in 159 so-called horror lists?)

Explore my ass, it's cleaner than all this shit.
Dammit, here we go again.

I really don't understand why people come on here and bitch and moan about every little thing. If a list doesn't appeal to you (for the record, the one everyone is complaining about doesn't appeal to me), then just ignore the damn thing. It seems like it's the end of the world that there's a 1000 horror films list floating around the site. GET OVER IT!

Honestly, if I was running this group, you'd be gone by now. It seems like you don't like being here anyhow, so, why bother coming around?
Because I care much iCM for being a useful site, properly managed, than a social fucked place.

So it is what it is. A fan group list, and people who are not part of the party are not allowed to talk about it. Cooptation and corrupted list, that's all. Stop pretending that it's a good and a useful list and admit it's a shitty list adopted because "we are all friends". No, I'm not part of these kind of stupid mafia. What's gone, by now, it's iCM legitimacy and honesty.

User avatar
Minkin
Posts: 332
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
Contact:

#53

Post by Minkin » May 31st, 2016, 1:02 pm

joachimt on May 31 2016, 03:53:36 AM wrote:
Minkin on May 30 2016, 05:29:00 PM wrote:I can stand lists that add films each year/month, as the core list remains, you don't lose checks and don't have to worry about having watched something in vain. Whereas when the list changes each year, you start caring about it less /seeking out those films less -since you might have sat through something and gained no rewards for your troubles.
I've been thinking for an hour now if I should respond to your post at all and if I do, where to start. So I decided to just quote the most disturbing piece of your post and comment on your remarks about the forum list.

If you really feel the way you say in the above quote, you're seriously watching movies for the wrong reasons. I'm glad you're part of a minority on iCM. If most people would be like this, I'd leave iCM.

You say our forum list is pointless because it changes so drastically each year. Those changes are exactly what makes this list worthwhile!! The point is to highlight underseen movies. When a movie reaches 400 checks, there's a free spot for a new obscure recommendation. This list isn't about completion, I'll never try to get platinum on this. This list is about recommendations and lots of people use it that way.

But you say we failed because only 34 people have bronze. Do I really need to explain the statistics? Of course only a few people have bronze. If lots of people have lots of checks on this list, lots of movies would get above 400 checks, so they wouldn't be on the list anymore. Therefor the very nature of the list results in very few people getting bronze.

If you think 500 is too long for our forum list, you can just use a part of the list. That's the best part about a list being ranked. Just use the top X for recommendations and ignore the rest of the list.
Fortunately you pick and choose your quotes without fully comprehending my post! I'm not sure what caused you such grief with my post, but to each their own.

Regarding bad films watched for a list/check, you must realize that two possibilities exist to this end:

1) If a person is one film away from completing a list /an award, they'd rather be inclined towards watching a film from said list. I know there are some people on here who purposefully avoid completing lists, but others do like to have some sort of closure. Its of course a gamble though, since you're preconceived notions of distaste towards a film can frequently turn out to have been wrong. I give films the benefit of the doubt, but tend to put off certain ones as long as I can.

2) One doesn't have knowledge of every film ever made - thus its always a gamble. I choose to finish every film that I start, thus if I pick wrong - I get to suffer through it, but know that I don't have to do that ever again. If you end up watching something terrible, and it falls off the list that caused you to initially pick it in the first place - then you've suffered for nothing (this has indeed happened to me).

As I've already indicated in my initial post, I don't watch things based only on their list designation, so you can sleep easy at night! My initial point was annoyances over having "seen bad films" drop off a list - thus you have nothing to gain from your misery! Of course not very many lists change frequently/at all, and Im not suggesting that TS(Z/P)DT? stop updating, but it is nice to know that a check will remain one, and not disappear one day.

------------------
I understand what the point of the ICM Forum list is, that its meant to spotlight lesser seen films, but you haven't resolved the basic problem with the list - no human can possibly see 500 films in a year. And as a recommendation tool, 500 films is far too many to be useful. I know everyone loves recommending movies, but a smaller, more manageable list of the greater films that should be spotlighted should instead be the focus. When you use a highlighter on everything on a page, there's nothing left to catch your eye. That only 34 have completed a bronze for the list indicates that the recommendation function of the list isn't working - especially when its the ICM Forum people themselves who dominate the rankings of that list (all sort of self perpetuating). I just don't see why anyone thought it would be a good idea to have such a large list that changes completely every year! A better idea would have been to make an initial list, which updates once a year to remove all of the films that have had 400+ checks, thus allowing a new vote to fill in the remaining amount (or am I mistaken, and this is exactly the current function of the list?). That still makes the list unwieldy and a poor recommendation tool (at its length), but at least it doesn't dump its recommendations out the window each year, offering a new set of films for the 100 or so people on this forum to torrent.
Last edited by Minkin on May 31st, 2016, 1:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ChrisReynolds
Donator
Posts: 2406
Joined: Dec 29, 2011
Location: London, UK
Contact:

#54

Post by ChrisReynolds » May 31st, 2016, 1:43 pm

Minkin on May 31 2016, 07:02:48 AM wrote:As I've already indicated in my initial post, I don't watch things based only on their list designation, so you can sleep easy at night! My initial point was annoyances over having "seen bad films" drop off a list - thus you have nothing to gain from your misery! Of course not very many lists change frequently/at all, and Im not suggesting that TS(Z/P)DT? stop updating, but it is nice to know that a check will remain one, and not disappear one day.

------------------
I understand what the point of the ICM Forum list is, that its meant to spotlight lesser seen films, but you haven't resolved the basic problem with the list - no human can possibly see 500 films in a year.
I think this is part of the basic fun and frustration of watching movies. You watch a bad one, not just because it's on a list but maybe because it's popular or critically acclaimed, and then later the critical standing of the film dips. What was the point of watching it in the first place? For me, being curious about a film is what makes me watch them. I think you underestimate how many movies people watch. I've seen 563 movies in the past year, and I still watch far less than the most hardcore on this site. TS(Z/P)DT don't actually change as much as they seem; films come in and leave, but it tends to be from a pool of films that are just under the cutoff. When TSZDT updated, I actually gained 2 checks because I've naturally seen a lot of the films that didn't quite make the list. If you're a fan of classic films or horror then neither of these lists seem too long or uncompletable.

User avatar
mightysparks
Site Admin
Posts: 29336
Joined: May 05, 2011
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#55

Post by mightysparks » May 31st, 2016, 2:20 pm

ChrisReynolds on May 31 2016, 07:43:25 AM wrote:
Minkin on May 31 2016, 07:02:48 AM wrote:As I've already indicated in my initial post, I don't watch things based only on their list designation, so you can sleep easy at night! My initial point was annoyances over having "seen bad films" drop off a list - thus you have nothing to gain from your misery! Of course not very many lists change frequently/at all, and Im not suggesting that TS(Z/P)DT? stop updating, but it is nice to know that a check will remain one, and not disappear one day.

------------------
I understand what the point of the ICM Forum list is, that its meant to spotlight lesser seen films, but you haven't resolved the basic problem with the list - no human can possibly see 500 films in a year.
I think this is part of the basic fun and frustration of watching movies. You watch a bad one, not just because it's on a list but maybe because it's popular or critically acclaimed, and then later the critical standing of the film dips. What was the point of watching it in the first place? For me, being curious about a film is what makes me watch them. I think you underestimate how many movies people watch. I've seen 563 movies in the past year, and I still watch far less than the most hardcore on this site. TS(Z/P)DT don't actually change as much as they seem; films come in and leave, but it tends to be from a pool of films that are just under the cutoff. When TSZDT updated, I actually gained 2 checks because I've naturally seen a lot of the films that didn't quite make the list. If you're a fan of classic films or horror then neither of these lists seem too long or uncompletable.
I finished TSPDT a few years ago (though still have 20-something to go since the last update) and TSZDT I already completed as well. I've only watched 113 films this year because I don't have much time anymore, but from 2010-2015 my viewing figures range from 328 to 1140 in a year. iCM probably caters for the more hardcore film watchers, but I agree that simple curiosity should be the main urge to watch anything. I did go through a phase where I would just watch anything and I would race through lists because I just constantly wanted more, but now I tend to be more selective and am more interested in research and practical work since that's what takes up most of my time these days.

I don't know what the question about TSZDT updates was, but it is updated once a year in late April/early May. I am not bothering to go into debates about people's opinions on the list anymore because no-one can have a proper discussion about it, but I would like to point out that I spent a year developing it using a thread on here in which many people made suggestions and helped me curate it. And a few people who have messaged me privately to give suggestions on formulas and such which are now in practice. ChrisReynolds has created a new weighting program which I am still experimenting with to see if it gives 'better' results. I also made it for fun and other than expressing that it would be nice for it to be official, I was not the one that pushed for official status. It was other people that made requests and pushed for it to be official. Making it sound like I secretly made it in my basement and then bribed The Guys to make it official doesn't make it so.
"I do not always know what I want, but I do know what I don't want." - Stanley Kubrick

iCM | IMDb | LastFM | TSZDT

Image

Torgo
Posts: 1283
Joined: Jun 30, 2011
Location: Germany
Contact:

#56

Post by Torgo » May 31st, 2016, 2:21 pm

Minkin on May 30 2016, 05:29:00 PM wrote:In all honestly, this same issue has rather killed the TSZDT? list as well. I was making excellent progress on the old Horror list, but now I fear how much of the list will change for the next update. I know its meant to be dynamic, but it would be nice to know how much will change with each update - like will several hundred films be dropped off /removed, or will it just be a handful? The result of the TSZDT being favored over the other is that my horror film watching has dropped WAY back - and I've mostly only been watching horror films that Im interested in, a placement in the TSZDT list doesn't motivate me to want to watch it (whereas if its on another list (other than 21st century) - I'll be much more likely to see it). I'll likely be more open to TSZDT once I find out how much changes each year - but even then, I think it would've been better as 10 subgenre lists, rather than 1 unwieldy list that changes each year.

Edit - I see that it has been updated and there are 45 additions. Thats about the same as the standard TSPDT list, but still - having a list with that many films really puts you off of it, regardless of genre/type/etc. It still remains a list that would take you several years to make any meaningful progress on -and only if you focus entirely on it! Assuming you watch a film /day, thats still 3 years -and only if you watch nothing but horror films! Madness.

I can stand lists that add films each year/month, as the core list remains, you don't lose checks and don't have to worry about having watched something in vain. Whereas when the list changes each year, you start caring about it less /seeking out those films less
Hey Minkin!
Let me just say that you don't have to worry nearly as much.

When you click on the "New" updates for TSZDT, it's 45 films, which may seem like quite a few at first - but mind that only 4 of these new entries rank higher than #700; only #198, #466 and #648 for the 2014 films, to be exact. Those were what could be described as the recent highlights in horror, making solid additions for the kind-of-canon that TSZDT strives to be. The rest of the 45 list updates is completely scattered among the list's last third, many even in the 900's. This means the "core" of the list stays untouched. Nothing is lost from the, say, Top 500, or even Top 200.

The general hint for such big lists is to handle it like it serves you: you were a fan of the old Horror Top 500 and thought it had a ideal length to work on? Then use TSZDT just as a Top 500! It IS ranked, after all. Pick your watchlist by going through what you have left from the highest ranks and work on to the lower part of the top entries, until you at one point can proudly say: "So, I have watched all of the best 250 horror films as computed by TSZDT! Nice. That was fun actually - now I will complete everything in the 300s and 400s." If you start feeling that it's not worth it and quality is going down at this point or you're starting to get sick of horror films - fair enough, stop there (or pick your horror films independently from the list). If you can't get enough and enjoy your zombie flick no matter if it's a Top 200 entry or obscure 900ish Italian outing with 5.2 on IMDb - great, the list will be very helpful to explore further and deeper where the old Top 500 already stopped.

If your not crazy about a genre, don't watch a lot of films and encounter an all-time list with an awe-ispiring length of 1000 films; just to go randomly through the entries at rank 700, 900 which are less-celebrated and then eventually drop of the list while you were trying to get your medals on it or even 100% complete it ... well, it may get frustrating. Better do it systematically.

(Interestingly, I observed many watchers of horror films who don't care so much if their filmfood really is "great"; they enjoy the tropes, the clichés, the kick, the violence and whatever, even if the scores on IMDb and RT are deservedly low. It adds to their knowledge, to their canon, it plain entertains them.
You wouldn't meet so many people who watch tons of every bad film from the genre "drama" and feel lucky about it.)



With the iCM 500<400, it's different, as already pointed out. It's a demanding task to really work on it and reach for even a bronze. For me, personally, it's continually getting too obscure, to be completely frank. I just sort the list by a) most favorited, b) most official lists or c) look out for Asian films I may have overseen. Other than that, I'm happy to get any check on it for my overall statistics, but getting beyond my solid #200 ranking in this no option because I have enough else left to see.
Other people will love its approach and keep looking out for less renowned films or use the poll as a means to promote their very own yet-unpopular favorites. (Which might be part of the reason why it's a Top 500 and not Top 250; thus, more votes have the chance to get into the list and shine in an official list maybe for the first time.) That is fine, too. I will just look somewhere else and leave them their fun. :)

I'd also have a hint here to add to your "all-time <400" idea: older versions are saved and posted on iCM, like the 2014 edition or films that have vanished from later editions. They naturally contain more popular titles and offer a good compromise for cinephiles who want to look further than your casual 1001BYD movie, yet are scared by a load of films with not even 200 or 100 checks.


Hope this helps!

De Limgralois
Posts: 0
Joined: Apr 29, 2016
Contact:

#57

Post by De Limgralois » May 31st, 2016, 2:44 pm

mightysparks on May 31 2016, 08:20:22 AM wrote: I was not the one that pushed for official status. It was other people that made requests and pushed for it to be official. Making it sound like I secretly made it in my basement and then bribed The Guys to make it official doesn't make it so.
That's a straw man. Nobody said that there were a conspiracy. Cooptation is more subtile, you don't need to create secret efforts, you just have to let local authoritative value talking. That's another bias. Another bias is the way to think that the non-silent majority, especially in a forum were sometimes a series of two or three posts going in the same directions would tend to create such a large opinion in which the silent majority would follow and the silent minority wouldn't care or would be seen as trouble makers against the ideal world of the "group". Everything is biased and you and your horror followers, and the list mods, continue to play with those biases, refusing to answer legitimate questions and crying for only few members who don't "like horror films". That's actually a good example of how people are quickly involved into these cognitive biases and a good example of how people who profit and are involved in it just refusing to face their biases. Actually, in my mind, falling into mediocracy and wearing voluntarily blinkers, is far more problematic than a farfetched conspiracy.

User avatar
monty
Posts: 12739
Joined: May 09, 2011
Contact:

#58

Post by monty » May 31st, 2016, 2:47 pm

Torgo on May 31 2016, 08:21:03 AM wrote:... yet are scared by a load of films with not even 200 or 100 checks.
Then again, iCM check count really is no reliable yardstick as to the quality of a film. There is plenty of good/great stuff out there that has but a two-digit check count, if that...

User avatar
cinephage
Donator
Posts: 3670
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Contact:

#59

Post by cinephage » May 31st, 2016, 2:53 pm

The fact that the list can't be easily completed is, in my opinion, a plus. A completed list stops being interesting altogether, whereas a list that offers ever more treasures and hidden gems (or, in the case of TSZDT, popular recommendations) is always appealing to me.

User avatar
mightysparks
Site Admin
Posts: 29336
Joined: May 05, 2011
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#60

Post by mightysparks » May 31st, 2016, 3:00 pm

De Limgralois on May 31 2016, 08:44:51 AM wrote:
mightysparks on May 31 2016, 08:20:22 AM wrote: I was not the one that pushed for official status. It was other people that made requests and pushed for it to be official. Making it sound like I secretly made it in my basement and then bribed The Guys to make it official doesn't make it so.
That's a straw man. Nobody said that there were a conspiracy. Cooptation is more subtile, you don't need to create secret efforts, you just have to let local authoritative value talking. That's another bias. Another bias is the way to think that the non-silent majority, especially in a forum were sometimes a series of two or three posts going in the same directions would tend to create such a large opinion in which the silent majority would follow and the silent minority wouldn't care or would be seen as trouble makers against the ideal world of the "group". Everything is biased and you and your horror followers, and the list mods, continue to play with those biases, refusing to answer legitimate questions and crying for only few members who don't "like horror films". That's actually a good example of how people are quickly involved into these cognitive biases and a good example of how people who profit and are involved in it just refusing to face their biases. Actually, in my mind, falling into mediocracy and wearing voluntarily blinkers, is far more problematic than a farfetched conspiracy.
I've answered all legitimate questions about the list and as I said, was more than open about the development of it. And you're still creating conspiracy theories by suggesting some weird subtle tactics. I'd been wanting a list like this and I came up with the idea and decided to pursue it. I thought others would be interested and posted about it. People expressed interest. People like horror films. No other genre or film movement has such a rabid fan base. There is no conspiracy.
"I do not always know what I want, but I do know what I don't want." - Stanley Kubrick

iCM | IMDb | LastFM | TSZDT

Image

Torgo
Posts: 1283
Joined: Jun 30, 2011
Location: Germany
Contact:

#61

Post by Torgo » May 31st, 2016, 3:07 pm

Minkin on May 31 2016, 07:02:48 AM wrote:1) If a person is one film away from completing a list /an award, they'd rather be inclined towards watching a film from said list. I know there are some people on here who purposefully avoid completing lists, but others do like to have some sort of closure. Its of course a gamble though, since you're preconceived notions of distaste towards a film can frequently turn out to have been wrong. I give films the benefit of the doubt, but tend to put off certain ones as long as I can.
Well, that really depends on the list, doesn't it? You wouldn't believe how many Platinums I would get for the IMDb Top 50s if I forced myself to watch a few Indian films; I do know how the ratings for them are skewed though and decided to ignore these last gaps for an indefinite time.
It's different with sources you would rather find yourself trusting: lists like the Taschen Top 100, Leonard Martin's Top 100 or the Cahiers Top 100 come to mind. "There should be something to justify the film's placing on the list, some relevance whatsoever - damn, I'm just going to watch it for the last missing check, even if I'm put off by the description, genre or persons involved."


Of course it's way harder to set your priorities if you don't invest as excessively much time into the whole film and ICM thing like some of our power users; when you watch 500 films a year anyway, 5 more titles to complete list x don't hurt. If you, on the other hand, have to carefully choose your film for the precious Sunday evening and only have a handful of spare time left for the month, maybe better follow your instinct than hunting for medals on a list which doesn't completely satisfy you.


By the way, how to watch an awful lot movies...
Age really helps. It doesn't matter how many films I watch in my free time (might be up to 4 or 5 titles a day when I'm tripping, usually balances between 300 and 500 per year); I'm not even 30 years old. Try to multiplicate that for approximately a decade. Someone who's in his 40s or 50s had about 3 times as much time to catch up with film history without giving up his private life completely. He might be done with the TSPDT Top 1000 already and start looking beyond that without being a 3-films-a-day freak since it just adds up. Age is a massive factor if you ask me.
Absolute Dedication is another thing, up to obsession or addiction.

You know what also helps? Being a student in his 20s with A LOT of free time and hardly any duties whatsoever. Other people will never fathom how much damn downtime it really can be. :lol:
Then lists with the length of another's lifetime don't seem too long anymore ..

User avatar
Cocoa
Donator
Posts: 1475
Joined: Jul 17, 2013
Location: Chicago, USA
Contact:

#62

Post by Cocoa » May 31st, 2016, 3:19 pm

De Limgralois on May 31 2016, 04:59:05 AM wrote:I'd start to believe that members who like horror films are at the same level of horror that they watch in these films. This list is useful? really? With thousands no-horror films, with thousands classics not being horror primary genre... That's a pot-pourri list, like my watchlist. You can pick on it randomly, yes. It doesn't mean it's a good list and a list that should be keep unchanged on iCM. If you watch horror films, wouldn't you prefer to have four of five thematic horror list? wouldn't be more significant and useful? A zombie list, an apocalypse list, a giallo list, a slasher list, a monster list, a gothic list?

I do. And I like all kind of genres in cinema. I just don't like the mess of this list.

Can you explain what have in common a serial killer film like Henry portrait of a serial killer, Shaun of the dead, The Birds, Vampyr, a war film like Come and See, a scifi movie like Terminator, a film noir like The Night of the Hunter, a mystery film like Picnic at Hanging Rock, a neo noir like Blue Velvet, a rape film like Irreversible, a surrealism film like Un chien andalou, a fantasy film like La Belle et la Bête? Nothing. In so doing, everything is horror (like everything could be fantasy).
The list is useful. Not everybody is going to like all the movies in a list no matter the size. That goes for practically every single list (official and unofficial).

TZPDT can allow people to explore and find a film that they might like in the broad genre. If they like the film, then they can check out the unofficial lists the film is in and then they can work on any unofficial lists that catches their eye.

Having a bunch of subgenre lists over a broad genre list seems more overkill because if you don't care for a subgenre then you're going to ignore a whole entire list instead of just picking and choosing what films to watch on a broader bigger list. Additionally some subgenres are smaller, so either those lists will be super short or the selection for those lists can lead to worse films having official status. Furthermore, some films don't easily fit into one category. Additionally, there are films that you will spoil the ending or the big twist by putting them in a specific category.

Torgo
Posts: 1283
Joined: Jun 30, 2011
Location: Germany
Contact:

#63

Post by Torgo » May 31st, 2016, 3:24 pm

De Limgralois on May 31 2016, 04:59:05 AM wrote:Can you explain what have in common a serial killer film like Henry portrait of a serial killer, Shaun of the dead, The Birds, Vampyr, a war film like Come and See, a scifi movie like Terminator, a film noir like The Night of the Hunter, a mystery film like Picnic at Hanging Rock, a neo noir like Blue Velvet, a rape film like Irreversible, a surrealism film like Un chien andalou, a fantasy film like La Belle et la Bête? Nothing. In so doing, everything is horror (like everything could be fantasy).
Horror film - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There you go.

User avatar
monty
Posts: 12739
Joined: May 09, 2011
Contact:

#64

Post by monty » May 31st, 2016, 3:26 pm

Torgo on May 31 2016, 09:07:58 AM wrote:Someone who's in his 40s or 50s had about 3 times as much time to catch up with film history without giving up his private life completely. He might be done with the TSPDT Top 1000 already and start looking beyond that without being a 3-films-a-day freak since it just adds up. Age is a massive factor if you ask me.
Then again, you forget about the all-important factor of accessibility. Getting to watch those obscure gems (not to mention fairly mainstream fare) is a helluva lot easier today than it was back in the day. Then one had to put some serious effort into locating rare films as well as films not premiering at one's local cinema. Being passionate about film put more demands on you back then. Nowadays, on the other hand, everything's available on the web, even the most obscure stuff imaginable. Thus, I'd argue that a determined young cinephile/movie nut today can quite easily rack up a significant number of viewings, rapidly surpassing that seen by the older generations.
No, you youngsters have nothing to complain about - it's never been as easy to be a film gourmand as it is now.

User avatar
cinephage
Donator
Posts: 3670
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Contact:

#65

Post by cinephage » May 31st, 2016, 3:43 pm

monty on May 31 2016, 09:26:46 AM wrote:
Torgo on May 31 2016, 09:07:58 AM wrote:Someone who's in his 40s or 50s had about 3 times as much time to catch up with film history without giving up his private life completely. He might be done with the TSPDT Top 1000 already and start looking beyond that without being a 3-films-a-day freak since it just adds up. Age is a massive factor if you ask me.
Then again, you forget about the all-important factor of accessibility. Getting to watch those obscure gems (not to mention fairly mainstream fare) is a helluva lot easier today than it was back in the day. Then one had to put some serious effort into locating rare films as well as films not premiering at one's local cinema. Being passionate about film put more demands on you back then. Nowadays, on the other hand, everything's available on the web, even the most obscure stuff imaginable. Thus, I'd argue that a determined young cinephile/movie nut today can quite easily rack up a significant number of viewings, rapidly surpassing that seen by the older generations.
No, you youngsters have nothing to complain about - it's never been as easy to be a film gourmand as it is now.
Hear ! Hear !!
I wish I had the free time I used to have when I was younger with today's film availability.

Then again, would I have become a father if I'd never left my couch as a student ? tehe

Torgo
Posts: 1283
Joined: Jun 30, 2011
Location: Germany
Contact:

#66

Post by Torgo » May 31st, 2016, 3:46 pm

You're absolutely right about the accessibility, monty. I would never talk that down. In a way, I'm of course thankful for having this luxury, in another, it's frightening and overcharging. I won't complain, though.

I just wanted to point out how much engagement is needed to have watched 5000 films as a 30-year-old compared to a 50-year-old. With a higher age, chances are you will have checked off most of the basic things like the (mostly) complete filmographies of Hitchcock and Kubrick and most of the works of the famous bigs like Scorsese, Wilder, Hawks, Coppola, Ford etc (probably also Kurosawa?) and will have had your fair share of Godard, Antonioni, Fellini, Bunuel or Herzog - even with more limited screening options via TV/VHS and where it might have taken some time. Youngsters like me will first have to plow through all of that before they can even start to torrent into the deepest abyss of the obscures. :lol:

I'd feel more comfortable looking over the rim of the tea cup if I already were well-taught enough in, you know, film history. I'm thinking of a hypothetical 50-year-old cinephile with solid, yet reasonable watching habits over the course of his life who'd be experienced enough with cinema. It looks totally understandable to me how someone would be tired of another Top 250 filled with Citizen Kane, The Godfather & 2001 which were all done and discussed to death for decades - and more thrilled with the broad range of a 500<400 list which finally brings something new to the table.

De Limgralois
Posts: 0
Joined: Apr 29, 2016
Contact:

#67

Post by De Limgralois » May 31st, 2016, 5:27 pm

Last edited by De Limgralois on May 31st, 2016, 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 6441
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#68

Post by xianjiro » May 31st, 2016, 7:29 pm

Minkin on May 30 2016, 05:29:00 PM wrote:(clipped - and fixed previous quoting problem)

no human can possibly see 500 films in a year.
EEEKKK!!! :blink: I've always known I was different but I thought I still qualified as human! :huh:

Most simply put, I average two official, feature length checks a day though rarely do they come from the forum list (500>400) since such films are more difficult for me to get at the library. Still, I notice when I watch something that's also on that list and personally enjoy knowing I'm bringing it one check closer to 400. The more people who watch it (and rate in on IMDb) the more meaningful the IMDb score (though clearly I know that isn't anything like a universal truth, but that's another discussion.) :P

Viewing my IMDb stats for last year - I watched, rated, and checked 1,422 items in 2015. IMDb's breakdown of that number includes 165 documentaries (I assume both features and shorts), 22 mini-series, 315 shorts, 9 TV episodes, 13 TV movies, 16 TV series, 14 (video featurettes), and that leaves 868 feature-length films - roughly 2 1/3 movies a day. (Can't say how many are/were official checks, but will venture over 3/4).

Oh, and the vast, vast majority of that (90%?) comes from my library.
Last edited by xianjiro on May 31st, 2016, 7:48 pm, 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: 6441
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#69

Post by xianjiro » May 31st, 2016, 7:40 pm

cinephage on May 31 2016, 08:53:14 AM wrote:The fact that the list can't be easily completed is, in my opinion, a plus. A completed list stops being interesting altogether, whereas a list that offers ever more treasures and hidden gems (or, in the case of TSZDT, popular recommendations) is always appealing to me.
I love how we can look at the same coin and see two different things! :wub: You see the head, I see the tail. Though I'll admit to losing interest in completed lists - though that sense of completion (in a life where there is always laundry to do and dog hair to vacuum up) is wonderfully satisfying.

It's cool that iCM can offer something that satisfies two completely different needs!

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

User avatar
Minkin
Posts: 332
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
Contact:

#70

Post by Minkin » February 4th, 2019, 12:10 pm

Ignoring my more argumentative / grumpier days of 2016 with my above posts (sorry everyone for being so obnoxious. The past several years were a really dark chapter in my life and its by some miracle that I'm still alive).

Could someone perhaps indicate which larger lists (above 250) remain "static" as opposed to those that have the potential to (completely) change (at any point)? Ignoring the whole "lists made unofficial" issue which we won't get into ...

I'll define "static" as remaining with the same core list, but films can be added to it - like the MoC / Criterion / Best Picture nominee / 366 Weird / etc. Where the same films will always be there, but stuff will keep being added at the end.

And I'll define "change" in terms of periodically updated and at least 5% of the list changes at some point. Or just - the list has the potential to change at some point in the future.
------
I ask all of this - because my S/O and I haven't had very much time for watching as much stuff anymore, but we're kinda focusing on stuff that we record on TCM - since we have it for the time being, but certainly won't in (hopefully) a year or so. After that point, we'll finally go only with streaming / the films that we own (which we probably own enough already to last our lifetime at our current watching pace). So, we try to record list-y films that appear on the schedule that we haven't seen. Since we don't have much in way of expectations for the films, and are trying to maximize the benefit of TCM (and since we've already seen about half the films they play each month), we go by lists to pick what to watch most of the time - as they at least indicate some degree of quality against the generic fluff that gets scheduled most days on TCM.

So that's my roundabout way of wanting to know about the status of larger lists.

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 29108
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#71

Post by joachimt » February 4th, 2019, 12:40 pm

As far as I know, this is it:

Movies (might) get added, but nothing will be removed:
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/366+ ... ied+weird/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/acad ... +nominees/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/acad ... +nominees/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/all- ... ox+office/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/cahi ... y+top+10s/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/jona ... ial+films/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/masters+of+cinema/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/nati ... +registry/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/the+ ... ollection/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/tspd ... oir+films/

Completely static:
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/500+ ... lt+movies/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/501+must+see+movies/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/acti ... movie+a-z/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/amos ... rsive+art/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/anth ... al+cinema/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/asia ... eld+guide/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/empire+500/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/film+comedy/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/hall ... countdown/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/harv ... ilms+2012/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/have ... 000+films/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/il+g ... +italiano/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/roge ... at+movies/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/sile ... ent+films/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/the+ ... ever+made/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/the+ ... +classics/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/the+ ... e+you+die/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/the+ ... n+odyssey/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/the+ ... era+films/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/time ... your+life/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/unes ... +heritage/
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
Minkin
Posts: 332
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
Contact:

#72

Post by Minkin » February 4th, 2019, 12:58 pm

Wow, thank you so much joachimt! That's exactly what I had been wanting to know.

I had no idea there were so many static lists. Most of those I thought changed every year - like the 501 / Empire lists. This makes me feel better about working towards some of those for a change. Any of the criticisms I made in previous posts about list length / lists that do change each year - I'm reconciled that working on those lists diligently isn't for me; but on the whole they don't change as much as I may think.

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 29108
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#73

Post by joachimt » February 4th, 2019, 1:02 pm

Lists that change every year are often pretty static as well. 1001MYMSBYD has about 10-20 new movies each year and 10-20 others drop. Most of the list stays the same though. Changes in TSPDT are a bit more, but less than 5% or so. S&S isn't static, but only changes once every 10 years. Etc......
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
Armoreska
Posts: 11197
Joined: Nov 01, 2012
Location: Ukraine
Contact:

#74

Post by Armoreska » February 4th, 2019, 1:28 pm

IDK, some of these lists may still be changed or even become unofficial.
I'd say Empire, Cult, Action, Film comedy, Harvard may be unsafe. Surely hope the Boxx office list is not safe either!
Even UNESCO, who knows what may be released in the future. Although JT may be a powerful enough lobby against making it unofficial in any case haha.
Image
currently working towards a vegan/low waste world + thru such film lists (besides TV): 2010s bests, RW Fassbinder, Luis Bunuel, Yasujiro Ozu, Eric Rohmer, Visual Effects nominees, kid-related stuff, great animes (mini-serie or feature), very 80s movies, 17+ sci-fi lists on watchlist, ENVIRO, remarkable Silent Films and Pre-Code (exploring 1925 atm) and every shorts and docu list I'm aware of and
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1434
and "Gordon" Liu Chia-Hui/Liu Chia-Liang and Yuen Woo-ping and "Sammo" Hung Kam-bo

User avatar
WalterNeff
Donator
Posts: 3045
Joined: Jul 27, 2011
Contact:

#75

Post by WalterNeff » February 4th, 2019, 1:38 pm

If you watch TCM, a couple of users make a list each month of the entire schedule, which I use to determine what I DVR. Here's February: https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/tcm+ ... 19/jlfitz/

User avatar
Minkin
Posts: 332
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
Contact:

#76

Post by Minkin » February 4th, 2019, 2:16 pm

Hah, I use those TCM lists as well - I really appreciate the work they do each month on those.

I usually go through the daily TCM schedule for the month, and lookup films we haven't seen, and write them down; then check over the ICM list to see if I missed anything / if there's any watchlist films playing. Then remove films that are available for streaming. And even then, we still only record about 5-6 films each month, since our DVR is always hovering around 90%! So, I try to make those 5-6 count.

Its a really silly situation, especially as our kevyip (unwatched DVDs) keeps growing faster than we watch them (we received the Criterion Olympics set for Yule, so that's another large backlog). We're really looking forward to not having cable anymore at this point, just to be free from the DVR hell + finally being able to focus on the stuff that we own (kinda need a new home video system as well). But we have TCM for now, so we're maximizing it whilst we can.

@Armoreska - those lists have been mentioned as possible removals? I'd imagine they'd be replaced with something else, but I was under the impression that they were all fairly solid lists that had quite a bit of support. Minus the Box Office list, where anything else is an improvement. :P

User avatar
Armoreska
Posts: 11197
Joined: Nov 01, 2012
Location: Ukraine
Contact:

#77

Post by Armoreska » February 4th, 2019, 3:33 pm

Minkin wrote:
February 4th, 2019, 2:16 pm
@Armoreska - those lists have been mentioned as possible removals? I'd imagine they'd be replaced with something else, but I was under the impression that they were all fairly solid lists that had quite a bit of support. Minus the Box Office list, where anything else is an improvement. :P
The ones I've mentioned are just my opinion of what could possibly be substituted for some other list in the future (from the short list that Joachim posted). Except for the Cult list - that's based on some comment I remember reading somewhere that's it's not a solid source.
Image
currently working towards a vegan/low waste world + thru such film lists (besides TV): 2010s bests, RW Fassbinder, Luis Bunuel, Yasujiro Ozu, Eric Rohmer, Visual Effects nominees, kid-related stuff, great animes (mini-serie or feature), very 80s movies, 17+ sci-fi lists on watchlist, ENVIRO, remarkable Silent Films and Pre-Code (exploring 1925 atm) and every shorts and docu list I'm aware of and
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1434
and "Gordon" Liu Chia-Hui/Liu Chia-Liang and Yuen Woo-ping and "Sammo" Hung Kam-bo

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 29108
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#78

Post by joachimt » February 4th, 2019, 3:34 pm

Nobody mentioned anything as possible removals. Armoreska's point is just that you can never be sure. Indeed, Unesco could do an update one day. Who knows? We might find a better action list and replace the old one. Who knows? What I listed is the answer that comes closest to reality, but you can never be sure.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 22892
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#79

Post by PeacefulAnarchy » February 4th, 2019, 6:51 pm

The worst list of those is undoubtedly the Comedy list, and if a viable replacement that had the scope of that list (i.e not just a top 100) came around I would lobby for its replacement, but I don't think that's particularly likely in the short/medium term. We've never discussed replacing any of those though and I don't see them as particularly likely candidates for replacement.
The Box office list has been discussed, but if it were replaced it would still be by a big box office list that covers the same ground. At the moment I'm not seeing a way it gets replaced given the context of previous discussions, at least until BOM changes something in their formatting.

User avatar
albajos
Posts: 5701
Joined: May 24, 2016
Location: Norway
Contact:

#80

Post by albajos » February 4th, 2019, 7:01 pm

As the prices rise it will be easier and easier to get into that list. But raising the limit from 200 Million would just give us a list of movies from the current decade, so it's a lose-lose situation.

The Worldwide list is based on inflation, if they make a similar list on BOM for the US we should at least consider it.

Post Reply