Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
Podcast: Talking Images (Episode 5 released June 2nd)
Polls: 1950s (Results), 1935 (Results), 1966 awards (Jun 9th), 2010s (Jun 30th)
Challenges: TSPDT, 1960s, China/Hong Kong/Taiwan
Film of the Week: Údolí vcel, July nominations (Jun 26th)
World Cup S4: Round 2 schedule, Match 2A: Poland vs Mexico (Jun 4th), Match 2B: Tajikistan vs Italy (Jun 14th)

New Official List Discussion

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 8424
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

Re: New Official List Discussion

#4521

Post by sol » April 21st, 2020, 4:06 pm

dirty_score wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 4:01 pm
I voted not replaced, but removed.

But maybe it can be replaced by https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/mini ... ls/mjf314/
I sure hope it doesn't get replaced by that. The most recent film in that list is 26 years old. :(

Flawed and all, I wouldn't support Livejournal being removed unless it got replaced with something. Russian cinema is quite broad and varied. I think it's only appropriate that iCM has more than one Official List for Russia to represent that.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

User avatar
jeroeno
Posts: 3371
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
Location: Valkenswaard, The Netherlands
Contact:

#4522

Post by jeroeno » April 21st, 2020, 4:30 pm

What about removing Doubling the Canon? We have the 1001-2000 list now which is exactly Doubling the Canon and it was a project on the IMDB boards which no longer exists. If any list should get removed it's this one. (off course it wont because the moderators are voting for this list theirselves but following their own logic this should be the #1 list to be removed)

AdamH
Site Admin
Posts: 12317
Joined: May 05, 2011
Contact:

#4523

Post by AdamH » April 21st, 2020, 4:38 pm

Main candidates for removal are surely FilmTotaal, FOK, MovieSense101 and Reddit. I'd even remove the IMDb Top 50s (I mean IMDb removed them a long time ago now so they don't even exist anymore).

At least Doubling the Canon is a long-term project which involves yearly updates. Angel has put a lot of work into it over the years and I think it would be extremely harsh to suddenly remove it. The best solution would probably be to make it a list which excludes TSPDT 1001-2000 and change the name of the list.

The IMDb boards no longer exist but the people who posted on the boards do. Angel continues to run it as before and people continue to vote as before so I don't think the place they vote in makes any difference. It was never an IMDb list, it was a TSPDT-focused list.

User avatar
Teproc
Posts: 593
Joined: Sep 23, 2015
Contact:

#4524

Post by Teproc » April 21st, 2020, 4:43 pm

The Reddit list is legitimate though, it's an active community voting for it every year or so. Whether or not one likes the list is irrelevant. The Dutch lists are more suspect because, as I understand it, the communities voting on those are getting smaller and smaller. DtC is inbred, but at least it's a project that still seems to be going fine (well, I have no idea what the numbers look like) even though it's changed places. IMDb lists are pretty problematic in that they're just search filters, I agree, but they'd need to be replaced by something filling a similar role. I think some Taschen genre lists were discussed at some point?

mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11258
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#4525

Post by mjf314 » April 21st, 2020, 4:54 pm

Teproc wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 4:43 pm
IMDb lists are pretty problematic in that they're just search filters, I agree, but they'd need to be replaced by something filling a similar role. I think some Taschen genre lists were discussed at some point?
Or lists based on iCM data: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hklZz1 ... kmXDA/view
This list uses the formula "favorites^1.3 / (checks+50)". Click the dropdown in I1 to filter by decade.

But the IMDb decade lists are popular, so I'm not sure if it's a good idea to replace them.

User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 24706
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#4526

Post by PeacefulAnarchy » April 21st, 2020, 5:04 pm

Teproc wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 4:43 pm
I think some Taschen genre lists were discussed at some point?
Decade lists, I don't know of any genre lists. They wouldn't replace the imdb lists, though, as they have a rather different appeal.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3987
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#4527

Post by Onderhond » April 21st, 2020, 5:13 pm

sol wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 4:06 pm
Russian cinema is quite broad and varied. I think it's only appropriate that iCM has more than one Official List for Russia to represent that.
Maybe a list that showcases that broadness then? Not just another one with Tarkovsky films and derivatives? :ph43r:

User avatar
zuma
Donator
Posts: 2076
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

#4528

Post by zuma » April 21st, 2020, 5:49 pm

As others have mentioned the Empire Russian list only goes to 2008. So that takes away the appeal a bit.

For me I would rather go with the Empire critics list think over the people’s choice. I don’t know most of the films in either list, but my rule of thumb is go with the critics. Based on some other list I don’t have a lot of faith in what the public has to say.

EDIT: But I don't care a whole lot either way

User avatar
Lilarcor
Donator
Posts: 2894
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
Contact:

#4529

Post by Lilarcor » April 21st, 2020, 8:13 pm

I'll throw this out in the ring: There's a very interesting set of books on Russian cinema called Directory of World Cinema: Russia 1 & 2 in English. First book came out in 2010, second in 2015. Particularly the second book is of interest as an alternative "public list", as it gives synopsis and a critique of films beyond the immediate critical canon. The categories/sections in the book are Adventure film, Blockbusters, Science Fiction, Horror, Sequels & Remakes, Television Series, Cold War Spy Films, Chernukha, 'Animation D'Auteur and Documentary Film.

Now, I am not sure if this book is list-friendly, but here's the filmography in the second book anyway:
SpoilerShow
Image

Image

Image

Image

Table of contents:
Image


There is no filmography section in the first book, so it would take longer to find out which films are on that one.

Example of a typical entry in the book:
SpoilerShow
Image

User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 24706
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#4530

Post by PeacefulAnarchy » April 21st, 2020, 8:19 pm

I don't feel those books make good official lists, the curation feels more "what do you feel like writing a short essay about" than a coherent attempt at coverage.

User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 8565
Joined: Dec 29, 2012
Contact:

#4531

Post by Lonewolf2003 » April 21st, 2020, 9:02 pm

zuma wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 5:49 pm
As others have mentioned the Empire Russian list only goes to 2008. So that takes away the appeal a bit.

For me I would rather go with the Empire critics list think over the people’s choice. I don’t know most of the films in either list, but my rule of thumb is go with the critics. Based on some other list I don’t have a lot of faith in what the public has to say.

EDIT: But I don't care a whole lot either way
We looked at the Empire critics list too, but we like to keep the balance between a critic list and a public chosen one, like Livejournal was (or so we thought) and the readers list is too.

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 7570
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#4532

Post by xianjiro » April 22nd, 2020, 1:59 am

Onderhond wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 5:13 pm
sol wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 4:06 pm
Russian cinema is quite broad and varied. I think it's only appropriate that iCM has more than one Official List for Russia to represent that.
Maybe a list that showcases that broadness then? Not just another one with Tarkovsky films and derivatives? :ph43r:
if I was going to make a joke, I'd suggest replacing both Russian lists with one of Stalinist era propaganda films - like 1000 of them. :P

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

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 8424
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#4533

Post by sol » April 22nd, 2020, 3:42 am

Onderhond wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 5:13 pm
sol wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 4:06 pm
Russian cinema is quite broad and varied. I think it's only appropriate that iCM has more than one Official List for Russia to represent that.
Maybe a list that showcases that broadness then? Not just another one with Tarkovsky films and derivatives? :ph43r:
I don't think you would find many Russian lists without Tarkovsky, Zvyagintsev, Sokurov, etc. in there somewhere. At least with the Empire Readers list there are a large number of films that are either on no Official Lists or only on the Livejournal Official List. The Empire List has limited crossover with the Russian Guild list, which I think is good, and probably the best we can do at the moment for diversity. Personally, I would of course love a list with more Russian/Soviet horror in it, but I think what mjf has found is a suitable replacement for Livejournal.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

dirty_score
Posts: 303
Joined: Oct 10, 2016
Contact:

#4534

Post by dirty_score » April 22nd, 2020, 10:02 am

AdamH wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 4:38 pm
At least Doubling the Canon is a long-term project which involves yearly updates. Angel has put a lot of work into it over the years and I think it would be extremely harsh to suddenly remove it. The best solution would probably be to make it a list which excludes TSPDT 1001-2000 and change the name of the list.
It doesn't have to be official for Angel and everyone in here to keep working on DtC. Does the list only matter if it's official? Can't people work on non-official lists?

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3987
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#4535

Post by Onderhond » April 22nd, 2020, 10:16 am

sol wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:42 am
I don't think you would find many Russian lists without Tarkovsky, Zvyagintsev, Sokurov, etc.
Sure, but that's why I liked Lilarcor's proposition. No idea if the list itself is any good, but at least the setup sounds so much more interesting that the umpteenth critics list.

User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 8565
Joined: Dec 29, 2012
Contact:

#4536

Post by Lonewolf2003 » April 22nd, 2020, 10:50 am

Onderhond wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 10:16 am
sol wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:42 am
I don't think you would find many Russian lists without Tarkovsky, Zvyagintsev, Sokurov, etc.
Sure, but that's why I liked Lilarcor's proposition. No idea if the list itself is any good, but at least the setup sounds so much more interesting that the umpteenth critics list.
But it isn’t a critics list, it’s a readers list. Of course such a public list will also contain the usual suspects, but like sol said that’s unavoidable and the list offers also a diversity with choices you won’t find soon on a critics list.
Last edited by Lonewolf2003 on April 22nd, 2020, 10:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

AdamH
Site Admin
Posts: 12317
Joined: May 05, 2011
Contact:

#4537

Post by AdamH » April 22nd, 2020, 10:51 am

dirty_score wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 10:02 am
AdamH wrote:
April 21st, 2020, 4:38 pm
At least Doubling the Canon is a long-term project which involves yearly updates. Angel has put a lot of work into it over the years and I think it would be extremely harsh to suddenly remove it. The best solution would probably be to make it a list which excludes TSPDT 1001-2000 and change the name of the list.
It doesn't have to be official for Angel and everyone in here to keep working on DtC. Does the list only matter if it's official? Can't people work on non-official lists?
I don't work on the list nor do I choose to work only on official lists. From my perspective, it has nothing to do with "official checks". It's more about the official status being a good way to promote the list to other users. If a list if official, there's much more chance that people will notice it and look at it rather than the thousands of unofficial lists that they'd have to specifically search for to find.

I see no good reason to remove Angel's list after years of it being official. I think there has to be a compelling argument to remove a list. I don't like when these discussions are reduced to "people only care about official checks". I've got no interest in rankings. Doubling the Canon is at least a long-term project with a goal to promote films not in TSPDT (or, in the future, not in TSPDT 1001-2000 too). That alone makes it an interesting and worthwhile list (just like 500<400 is a long-term project to promote films with <400 checks). Those types of lists are interesting IMO. People are quick to try to derail the lists and remove them but, from my point of view, lists like FilmTotaal, FOK etc. offer nothing interesting and would be prime candidates for removal. They're simply a short list of favourites from a community which don't tend to include any films that wouldn't already be on my radar.

Ultimately, I like these projects where people have put in a lot of work over the years and most people will look at these lists and find films they weren't aware of before. They serve a good purpose and being official means people not involved in the projects might actually on the list and find new films. Reduce them to unofficial status and the only people who'll ever look at them are the ones voting in the first place and I think that would be sad. Fok etc, remove the lists and it wouldn't make any difference...the only difference would be if people on those communities still care about the lists or them being official (no idea if they do or not).

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3987
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#4538

Post by Onderhond » April 22nd, 2020, 11:01 am

Lonewolf2003 wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 10:50 am
Onderhond wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 10:16 am
sol wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:42 am
I don't think you would find many Russian lists without Tarkovsky, Zvyagintsev, Sokurov, etc.
Sure, but that's why I liked Lilarcor's proposition. No idea if the list itself is any good, but at least the setup sounds so much more interesting that the umpteenth critics list.
But it isn’t a critics list, it’s a readers list. Of course such a public list will also contain the usual suspects, but like sol said that’s unavoidable and the list offers also a diversity with choices you won’t find soon on a critics list.
True, but the cool thing about the setup of the book is that it promises a selection of different viewpoints. Commercial, arthouse, genre ... that is broad representation imo.

User avatar
fori
Posts: 1330
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
Contact:

#4539

Post by fori » April 22nd, 2020, 12:07 pm

The compelling argument for removing the list from official status is that it has a selection process that lacks rigour, it is representative of no real theme/subject/really anything worthy of note, and is not selected by any institution/critic/survey/anything of note. The initial concept of the list is redundant with the full and properly rank 1001-2000, which actually collates something more meaningful. It’s ironic that AdamH objects to people only caring about official checks, because the official status is one of the primary drivers of the list itself now. What percentage of current participants would submit a list if official status was removed? How can anyone argue for the legitimacy of this project and then reject the IMDb Indian list for example? That list represents a 250 film consensus of hundreds of thousands of people, whereas DtC is a 1200 film consensus of a few dozen. Finally, the resulting list: though it highlights a lot of interesting films, it is prone to extreme repetition, and you can obviously see the preferences of individual contributors weighing heavily on parts of the list. What is the actual rationale for having it official? I can’t see any good case for it. I have the addition grievance that I am personally barred from participating, because I can’t give numerical scores.

I do think the 500>400 should be extended though. This can cover a lot of the same bases, while being a much more reasonable candidate for official status.

User avatar
Teproc
Posts: 593
Joined: Sep 23, 2015
Contact:

#4540

Post by Teproc » April 22nd, 2020, 12:23 pm

What makes 500<400 more reasonable than DtC? Isn't everything you said about the latter true of the former?
Last edited by Teproc on April 22nd, 2020, 12:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AdamH
Site Admin
Posts: 12317
Joined: May 05, 2011
Contact:

#4541

Post by AdamH » April 22nd, 2020, 12:26 pm

I don't really "object" to people only caring about official checks. To be honest, I don't really think there is anyone who *only* cares about official checks anyway. I used to work primarily on official lists and then I grew tired of it. I get it, people care about which lists are official and want to focus on those lists but everyone also has films they watch regardless of the lists they are on. I care, to some extent, about which lists are official because I think the lists being official promotes them to a wider audience and it's good to see a list you care about be worked on by more people. We're an iCM forum so I don't think it's easy to have a position of objecting to official checks. Each to their own.

I do think Doubling the Canon is up for debate but, overall, I support it being official. There are arguments for and against it. I wouldn't put it as one of the top lists I'm most keen to see remain official. I find the whole voting process confusing but I haven't actually actively participated in it before (largely because I always found the process off-putting). I think the argument in favour of it is that it is/was aiming to promote films not in TSPDT. I think the purpose of the list is valid and interesting. Whether or not the results are valid or should be official is another debate. I think it should be adapted now to suit the fact that there is a TSPDT 1001-2000 and I also think that the list is too long at 1200 films and that's very off-putting to someone looking to work on the list and its detrimental to the list in general. I still think, however, it is an interesting project and has a good purpose but I'd adapt it a little if I had any input in it (which I, rightly, do not). I'm not sure what you mean by you being barred from participating.

500<400 serves a specific purpose related to iCM and I love the idea of the project. I also think far more people vote in it that DtC.

The only IMDb list I'd have as official is the Top 250 as it's such a popular list worldwide and it's also what introduced me to foreign and black and white films. The decade and genre lists no longer exist. I don't think country lists from IMDb are likely to turn out good and I'd rather have critics lists for countries.

And, once again, I don't know how people can argue against lists like 500<400 but support lists like FilmTotaal.

mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11258
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#4542

Post by mjf314 » April 22nd, 2020, 12:52 pm

fori wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 12:07 pm
The initial concept of the list is redundant with the full and properly rank 1001-2000, which actually collates something more meaningful.
I disagree. What makes DtC interesting is that it's created by a completely different methodology, by a completely different group of voters. Each methodology has advantages and disadvantages, and changing the methodology allows you to unearth hidden gems that you wouldn't have unearthed otherwise.

I don't think the official status is the only reason that people care about DtC. The list has 205 favorites, which is more than a lot of other official lists. It seems to be a list that many people are interested in, and keeping it official helps to draw attention to it.
fori wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 12:07 pm
How can anyone argue for the legitimacy of this project and then reject the IMDb Indian list for example?
I would be willing to consider adopting it, but I'm not sure about the other mods. I'm interested in hearing opinions from people who are knowledgeable about Indian cinema. Is it a good list? And is it a good representation of which films are popular in India?

User avatar
fori
Posts: 1330
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
Contact:

#4543

Post by fori » April 22nd, 2020, 2:38 pm

The methodology may be different but what is it really producing? People used to complain about the FOK list before it got reverted to an older version because of how large the influence of individual internet denizens was on its content. How is DtC any different? It’s almost certainly worse in that regard. And is “having hidden gems” a good rationale for official status? I can promise you that personal lists I have created have plenty of hidden gems far more obscure than the vast bulk of DtC (and some that are better in quality in my opinion). There are many lists out there with hidden gems, but that has nothing to do with whether they are non-arbitrarily compiled lists exploring a significant area of film. And while it has a lot of favourites from users, I think that’s largely from people who are pleased to see their obscure favourites on there. There are 200 favourites, but there aren’t even 150 users that have completed 1/3 of the list.

On the Indian list, from what I’ve heard, the answer to the last question there is yes.
Last edited by fori on April 22nd, 2020, 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
fori
Posts: 1330
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
Contact:

#4544

Post by fori » April 22nd, 2020, 2:56 pm

Teproc wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 12:23 pm
What makes 500<400 more reasonable than DtC? Isn't everything you said about the latter true of the former?
No. 500<400 is basically a list in honour of this forum and its symbiotic relationship with the site, and is clearly identified as such on the site. I’m fully onboard with one such list. The voting process is also better for 500<400, because DtC uses the averaging of user ratings (which I generally think is pretty sus outside of something like IMDb, with thousands upon thousands of rating per each film). Many films in DtC - maybe even many at the top - only have 8 user ratings, likely across users who rate films in very different ways. What meaningful info could we possibly glean from the resulting range of scores? Furthermore, if I was to come in with a strong bias that I personally felt (say if I hated French movies, and gave every French movie in contention no more than 2/10), I could heavily reshape a lot of fringe cases and thus the nature of the list as a whole. With the 500<400, it gives a pretty rounded picture that isn’t as heavily subject to such biases.

mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11258
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#4545

Post by mjf314 » April 22nd, 2020, 3:03 pm

fori wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 2:38 pm
The methodology may be different but what is it really producing? People used to complain about the FOK list before it got reverted to an older version because of how large the influence of individual internet denizens was on its content. How is DtC any different? It’s almost certainly worse in that regard. And is “having hidden gems” a good rationale for official status? I can promise you that personal lists I have created have plenty of hidden gems far more obscure than the vast bulk of DtC (and some that are better in quality in my opinion). There are many lists out there with hidden gems, but that has nothing to do with whether they are non-arbitrarily compiled lists exploring a significant area of film. And while it has a lot of favourites from users, I think that’s largely from people who are pleased to see their obscure favourites on there. There are 200 favourites, but there aren’t even 150 users that have completed 1/3 of the list.
79 people participated in DtC, and films needed at least 8 votes to make the list. That doesn't seem so bad to me.

Recent versions of FilmTotaal had about 10 participants, so it was reverted to the 2009 version, with 74 participants. I do think 10 is too few. I'm not sure how many participants FOK has.

The FOK and FilmTotaal lists were adopted to thank those communities for helping to test iCM, so I don't think Marijn would be willing to unadopt them.

AdamH
Site Admin
Posts: 12317
Joined: May 05, 2011
Contact:

#4546

Post by AdamH » April 22nd, 2020, 3:04 pm

I've already said my thoughts but I think Angel deserves respect for compiling Doubling the Canon. It has a high number of favourites on iCM, it has participation from iCM users (and is open to all to vote in) and it is a project with a good idea (highlighting films not in TSPDT). I don't think it's a list that causes many issues by being official and I'm not sure what there is to gain by strongly arguing for removing it when it's mainly hosted on here now. Just don't see the need to try to get it removed. I'd rather support Angel and offer suggestions for improvements (which he is free to ignore) than say it shouldn't be official.

Absolutely don't see the point in more IMDb lists being added and you seem to just be playing devil's advocate with this list. I wouldn't want IMDb lists for any countries, not just India. Far better sources out there for country lists.

User avatar
fori
Posts: 1330
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
Contact:

#4547

Post by fori » April 22nd, 2020, 3:20 pm

For sure I respect it, it’s an interesting project and it’s gone on for impressively long. But what is the goal of the official lists? Is it to prop up such projects? Because that is really all that is going on here. It’s easily the most unserious official list. I think it needs to go, but at least it could be edited to explain how random the project is, and how little rigour the selection entails. Previously Joachimt objected to the idea of even identifying ICM Forum as the source of DtC in the list name, which to me seems ridiculous. I’m not particularly concerned with whether the Indian IMDb list becomes official, it just exposes how flimsy the rationale behind DtC is. I’d likely support it becoming official, but not with any deep conviction. The Indian movie buff community is very large, and the IMDb list is far more relevant in that context than the genre lists are anywhere.

@mjf314
Also worth pointing out that final FOK list was a top 100, so it actually had a lower ratio of films to contributors than DtC currently does.

mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11258
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#4548

Post by mjf314 » April 22nd, 2020, 3:37 pm

AdamH wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:04 pm
Absolutely don't see the point in more IMDb lists being added and you seem to just be playing devil's advocate with this list. I wouldn't want IMDb lists for any countries, not just India. Far better sources out there for country lists.
Do you know of a good recent Indian list? The official list is old (1995), so it would be nice to have a newer list.

The Indian IMDb list is an actual list on IMDb (there's a link to it on the top 250 page), so it's not just filtered search results.

User avatar
WalterNeff
Donator
Posts: 3185
Joined: Jul 27, 2011
Contact:

#4549

Post by WalterNeff » April 22nd, 2020, 3:48 pm

fori wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:20 pm
But what is the goal of the official lists?
Would be interesting to hear Marijn's take on what the thinking was originally behind what made a list Official. I always viewed it as Official Lists were such that checks on those lists contributed to award levels and overall rankings. After all, you can't have rankings and awards without Official Lists.

There seemed to be a less serious way of making new lists Official when I first joined iCM, unlike the Priesthood of Curation that some seem to think we are now.

User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 8424
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#4550

Post by sol » April 22nd, 2020, 3:52 pm

fori wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:20 pm
Previously Joachimt objected to the idea of even identifying ICM Forum as the source of DtC in the list name, which to me seems ridiculous.
But we are not the sole source of the Doubling the Canon project. It a project carried equally between our forum and SCFZ, plus Angel receives a large number of emailed ballots each year - particularly from former IMDb users who never joined another forum after the message boards were disbanded. It would be inaccurate to claim that the DtC is an iCM Forum project.

For what it's worth, I love the fact that DTC is an Offical List and I would be sad if it was unadopted. Several other user-generated lists are Official.
Former IMDb message boards user // iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | My top 750 films // Long live the new flesh!
Image Image Image

dirty_score
Posts: 303
Joined: Oct 10, 2016
Contact:

#4551

Post by dirty_score » April 22nd, 2020, 4:08 pm

mjf314 wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:03 pm
Recent versions of FilmTotaal had about 10 participants, so it was reverted to the 2009 version, with 74 participants. I do think 10 is too few. I'm not sure how many participants FOK has.

The FOK and FilmTotaal lists were adopted to thank those communities for helping to test iCM, so I don't think Marijn would be willing to unadopt them.
I'm also against unadopting them because I worked on them after I finished :imdb: one, they are good starters. But why haven't you reverted FOK! this year as well, instead of awaiting for next year, when clearly will be less users ?
mjf314 wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:37 pm
Do you know of a good recent Indian list? The official list is old (1995), so it would be nice to have a newer list.
I know India isn't just Bollywood but:

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/100+ ... ide/timec/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/time ... es/mjf314/
AdamH wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 10:51 am
It's more about the official status being a good way to promote the list to other users. If a list if official, there's much more chance that people will notice it and look at it rather than the thousands of unofficial lists that they'd have to specifically search for to find.
Look, I don't know about others but everytime I check a movie I always take the time to see all the lists in which the film is in. By doing so, I've discovered a lot of good lists (that won't be official) and a lot of good gems (not official checks). Sure, movies and lists get exposition by being official but to me it's just an excuse to keep this or that list.

If people were only educated to do so, instead of surfing in official lists (and the chance to filter unnecessary lists) ICM would become more enjoyable.

User avatar
Minkin
Posts: 516
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
Location: Ventura County, CA
Contact:

#4552

Post by Minkin » April 22nd, 2020, 6:38 pm

I think we should give far more weight and appreciation to the broad film knowledge of people here at our very forum! We shouldn't be selling this community short.

You'll be hard-pressed to find many film professors who have seen anything approaching the number of films that ICM members have. Hell, most critics fall into that category too. Some of you watch three films a day for years - that just doesn't exist elsewhere. Besides most critics and professors aren't accessing torrents or the rarities that we find.

All is to say that we really have something special here - and our collective film knowledge is probably better than anywhere in the world.

So why can't we curate more film lists then? If we need a list, say Pre-Code, make it a DtC like project and get our film professionals out to start searching and working on such a project!

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 31501
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#4553

Post by joachimt » April 22nd, 2020, 6:55 pm

dirty_score wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 4:08 pm
But why haven't you reverted FOK! this year as well, instead of awaiting for next year, when clearly will be less users ?
Because someone actually started a new edition for this couple of months ago. Last time I checked it didn't finish though. I'll see if I can find it again.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 7570
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#4554

Post by xianjiro » April 22nd, 2020, 7:46 pm

Teproc wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 12:23 pm
What makes 500<400 more reasonable than DtC? Isn't everything you said about the latter true of the former?
well, and there is an underlying 'issue' in the 500<400 methodology - there is no mechanism to down vote films that one feels shouldn't be included. Not having seen a film is equal to exclusion because it's not worthy. Though I guess for someone like me who makes a very long 500<400 ballot, including something at the very bottom is only adding a point at most to the overall score, so maybe that is sorta kinda maybe like a bit of a down vote.

And for the record 79 people submitted ballots for DtC 2019. It's interesting how important the 40 additional voters in the 500<400 2019 are. I guess 40 is the difference between 'good' and 'bad'?

It's all well and good to have favorite lists and projects, but do we really need to keep disparaging the work of others in this way? I'm not a fan of TSZDT and think 1000 horror titles is overkill, but I'm not using every moment to launch a campaign against Mighty and the list - on the contrary, it's great that she's put so much work and effort into a passion project and it pays off for those with an interest in that genre. So, if you don't like a list, move on. Enough with the broken record and btw, official mod hat :cowbow: on now: I've no interest in removing DtC from official status at this point and none of the arguments sway me to even want to open that discussion 'officially'.
Last edited by xianjiro on April 22nd, 2020, 8:08 pm, edited 2 times 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: 7570
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#4555

Post by xianjiro » April 22nd, 2020, 7:56 pm

WalterNeff wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:48 pm
fori wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 3:20 pm
But what is the goal of the official lists?
Would be interesting to hear Marijn's take on what the thinking was originally behind what made a list Official. I always viewed it as Official Lists were such that checks on those lists contributed to award levels and overall rankings. After all, you can't have rankings and awards without Official Lists.

There seemed to be a less serious way of making new lists Official when I first joined iCM, unlike the Priesthood of Curation that some seem to think we are now.
Blessings on the Day of the Pre-Code Feast my son!

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: 7570
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#4556

Post by xianjiro » April 22nd, 2020, 8:07 pm

Minkin wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 6:38 pm
So why can't we curate more film lists then? If we need a list, say Pre-Code, make it a DtC like project and get our film professionals out to start searching and working on such a project!
We are looking at ways to include lists derived from iCM user data - I'd say it's "under development" but haven't actually seen any preliminary lists yet. I too think lists derived from the iCM userbase as well as this forum have value and can potentially contribute to iCM's overall fabulousness.

I personally like the IMDb Indian Top 250 for much the same reasons I like other popular lists. Sure, it has issues, one of which is the relatively low score of films at the bottom. But not having access to Indian Box Office data (yet?), I'm unwilling to say how reflective of the Indian marketplace it is. I do believe it's reflective of IMDb's userbase though and I've worked on it for some time now. I'm especially interested in it's inclusion of classic favorites and those new releases that zoom up the chart but don't necessarily stay for years and years.

But I'm one voice among many and honestly, I value the group's opinion more than my own in such matters.

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

mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11258
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#4557

Post by mjf314 » April 22nd, 2020, 8:08 pm

xianjiro wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 7:46 pm
well, and there is an underlying 'issue' in the 500<400 methodology - there is no mechanism to down vote films that one feels shouldn't be included. Not having seen a film is equal to exclusion because it's not worthy.
This is in some ways a good thing. But like I said earlier, it's good to have different lists with different methodologies.

If a film is loved by many and hated by many, I think it makes sense to promote it, because after all, it's a film that people are likely to love.

Another advantage of no downvoting is that it encourages people to promote their favorites, because promoting a film can only help its chances of making the list.

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 7570
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#4558

Post by xianjiro » April 22nd, 2020, 8:19 pm

mjf314 wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 8:08 pm
xianjiro wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 7:46 pm
well, and there is an underlying 'issue' in the 500<400 methodology - there is no mechanism to down vote films that one feels shouldn't be included. Not having seen a film is equal to exclusion because it's not worthy.
This is in some ways a good thing.

If a film is loved by many and hated by many, I think it makes sense to promote it, because after all, it's a film that people are likely to love.

Another advantage of no downvoting is that people it encourages people to promote their favorites, because promoting a film can only help its chances of making the list.
see? one user's 'issue' is another's 'strength' - and that's kinda cool in my book :lol:

speaking of number of votes to make a list - didn't a movie with three votes make the 500<400 last year? I seem to remember noticing that but I can't find a copy of the results file and don't really want to go through the results thread. Even if it wasn't three, but larger, I wouldn't use that number against the list. It's still a good, useful list - just as it is. :poshclap: to all who contribute!

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

mjf314
Moderator
Posts: 11258
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#4559

Post by mjf314 » April 22nd, 2020, 8:25 pm

xianjiro wrote:
April 22nd, 2020, 8:19 pm
speaking of number of votes to make a list - didn't a movie with three votes make the 500<400 last year? I seem to remember noticing that but I can't find a copy of the results file and don't really want to go through the results thread. Even if it wasn't three, but larger, I wouldn't use that number against the list. It's still a good, useful list - just as it is. :poshclap: to all who contribute!
Yes, two 3-vote films made the list (but they all ranked the films highly).

User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 7570
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#4560

Post by xianjiro » April 22nd, 2020, 8:57 pm

speaking of DtC voting - it's time to cue up title 593 ... let's see what it will be. I'm planning on voting on over 600 of the nominees this year

:run:

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

Post Reply