Welcome to the ICM Forum.
Check out our Magazine

If you notice any issues please post in the Q&A thread. Email issue should be fixed. If you encounter this issue, contact PeacefulAnarchy
Podcast: Talking Images (Episode 44 released December 29th: We Need to Talk About How Omicron is Profitting From Covid)
iCinema Magazine: WE ARE LIVE! (We just need more content)
ICMForum Film Festival: Mon Nov 15 - Dec 13
Polls: Comedy (Results), Directors (Jan 10th), UK (Jan 24th), 1920 (Jan 28th), Low IMDb rating (Feb 4th)
Challenges: Germany/Austria/Switzerland/Liechtenstein, Sci-Fi/Fantasy, 1000<400
Managers Cup: SF Schedule, SFA: sol vs sacmersault (Jan 30th)
About: Welcome All New Members, Terms of Use, Q&A

Year-by-Year Polls: 1920

500<400, Favourite 1001 movies, Doubling the Canon, Film World Cup and many other votes
User avatar
Teproc
Posts: 1338
Joined: September 23rd, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

Year-by-Year Polls: 1920

#1

Post by Teproc »

Welcome to the Year-by-Year Poll!

This poll is for the year 1920. Flappers, prohibition and the foundation of the nazi party, fun stuff all around !

These polls are fairly simple. We work our way through film history selecting a different year each time, and you list your top films from the given year. Depending on the number of voters, the poll usually produces a list of around 50-90 films and is a great way of finding recommendations. Lots of people will also list other films outside their top 20 as honorable mentions or runners-up.


The Rules

- You can vote for a minimum of 5 and a maximum of 20 films.

- Feature films, documentaries, short films, TV movies, and TV mini-series are all eligible, but not continuing TV series or individual TV episodes.

- We use IMDb dates for consistency, so a title should be listed on IMDb as 1920.

- Your ballot can be either ranked or unranked, but I will assume it's ranked unless otherwise stated. For ranked ballots it makes it easier if you use a numbered list.

- IMPORTANT: Along with a list of the titles from 1920, please include the corresponding list of bare IMDb urls for the same films. Your ballot will be deemed disqualified if the IMDb urls are not included.


The Scoring

For ranked ballots, the top-ranked title will receive a number of points equal to the number of titles on the ballot, with each succeeding title receiving one fewer point. So the top title on a list of 20 films will receive 20 points, the next 19 points and so on. If the list has only 10 films, the top title will receive 10 points, the next one 9, and so on. If there are 5 films on the list, the top film will receive 5 points, the next one 4, well you get the idea.

For unranked ballots, each title will receive an equal share of the total points that would have been allotted to the ballot if it had been ranked. If there are 20 films on the ballot, this means each one would receive 10.5 points.


Some resources

1920 films with the sorted by most votes on IMDb

1920 films you've rated on IMDb

Wikipedia's 1920 in film article

1920 films you've checked on ICM

1920 films you *haven't* checked on ICM


Previous poll results as ICM lists

2017: 1940 results, 1981 results, 2005 results, 1927 results, 1968 results, 1939 results, 1976 results, 1997 results
2018: 1958 results, 2017 results, 1948 results, 1983 results, 1969 results, 1925 results, 1991 results, 1957 results, 2006 results
2019: 2018 results, 1932 results, 1972 results, 1942 results, 1987 results, 1964 results, 1994 results, 2007 results, 1955 results
2020: 2019 results, 1945 results, 1935 results, 1974 results, 1960 results, 1951 results, 2008 results, 1966 results, 1944 results
2021: 1980 results, 1929 results, 1998 results, 1933 results, 1950 results, 1978 results, 2020 results, 1967 results, 2009 results, 1946 results


The Deadline

This poll will run for about 4 weeks and will plan to close on Friday January 28th midnight Eastern Standard Time. You may revise or add a ballot anytime until the poll is indicated closed in the subject header.

The next poll will be 1993 followed by 1937.
Last edited by Teproc on January 13th, 2022, 9:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
beavis
Posts: 3435
Joined: June 20th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

#2

Post by beavis »

1 - Von morgens bis Mitternacht
2 - Erotikon
3 - Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari
4 - Genuine
5 - La Storia di una Donna
Spoiler
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 13250
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#3

Post by St. Gloede »

Only seen 56 full-length films from 1920 and can unfortunately just muster a top 10 with great films. To make up for it the top 4-5 are favourites:

1. Von morgens bis Mitternacht / From Morn to Midnight (1922, Karl Heinz Martin)
2. Prästänkan / The Parson's Widow (1920, Carl Theodor Dreyer)
3. Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam (1920, Carl Boese & Paul Wegener)
4. Blade af Satans bog / Leaves Out of the Book of Satan (1920, Carl Theodor Dreyer)
5. Mästerman (1920, Victor Sjöström)
6. Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari. (1920, Robert Wiene)
7. The Penalty (1920, Wallace Worsley)
8. Just Pals (1920, John Ford) 8.3
9. Klostret i Sendomir (1920, Victor Sjöström)
10. L'homme du large (1920, Marcel L'Herbier)

URLs:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011833/?ref_=adv_li_tt
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011607/?ref_=adv_li_tt
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011237/?ref_=adv_li_tt
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011000/?ref_=adv_li_tt
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0010323/?ref_=adv_li_tt
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011499/?ref_=adv_li_tt
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011565/?ref_=adv_li_tt
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011358/?ref_=adv_li_tt
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011370/?ref_=adv_li_tt
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011302/?ref_=adv_li_tt
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 34899
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#4

Post by joachimt »

Seen only 27 titles, including a lot of shorts (even two porns). So I can only squeeze out a top 8, with 5 shorts (all non-porn-Keaton....).

1. Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari
2. One Week
3. Within Our Gates
4. Way Down East
5. Convict 13
6. Neighbors
7. The Scarecrow
8. The Garage
urls
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
Teproc
Posts: 1338
Joined: September 23rd, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#5

Post by Teproc »

joachimt wrote: January 1st, 2022, 1:02 pm 5 shorts (all non-porn-Keaton....).
Um, is there a secret part of Buster Keaton's filmography I should know about?
User avatar
Traveller
Posts: 2189
Joined: December 31st, 2018, 11:24 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

#6

Post by Traveller »

01. Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari
02. Erotikon
03. Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam
04. Why Change Your Wife?
05. Prästänkan
06. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
07. Anna Boleyn
08. Wunder der Schöpfung
09. The Scarecrow
10. Convict 13

Spoiler
ICM
January Challenge: Image
But at the bottom, the immanent philosopher sees in the entire universe only the deepest longing for absolute annihilation, and it is as if he clearly hears the call that permeates all spheres of heaven: Redemption! Redemption! Death to our life! and the comforting answer: you will all find annihilation and be redeemed!
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 4755
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#7

Post by Torgo »

St. Gloede wrote: January 1st, 2022, 12:48 pm Only seen 56 full-length films from 1920
only
User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 6932
Joined: February 9th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#8

Post by OldAle1 »

Torgo wrote: January 1st, 2022, 4:53 pm
St. Gloede wrote: January 1st, 2022, 12:48 pm Only seen 56 full-length films from 1920
only
:lol:

That's just under 1/10th of all the feature-length films from that year (at least those that IMDb lists).

Glad I don't have a bug about shorts, particularly for the early years - but I'll have a hard time coming up with a list even with them, unless I watch a bunch more stuff this month.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 13250
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#9

Post by St. Gloede »

OldAle1 wrote: January 1st, 2022, 5:11 pm
Torgo wrote: January 1st, 2022, 4:53 pm
St. Gloede wrote: January 1st, 2022, 12:48 pm Only seen 56 full-length films from 1920
only
:lol:

That's just under 1/10th of all the feature-length films from that year (at least those that IMDb lists).

Glad I don't have a bug about shorts, particularly for the early years - but I'll have a hard time coming up with a list even with them, unless I watch a bunch more stuff this month.
Woah, I did not know it was that big a part of the overall pot. I'm pretty sure PUNQ has seen 300+ though. :whistling:

Worst thing is, I considered adding in shorts for this year, but had only seen three. :facepalm:
User avatar
hurluberlu
Donator
Posts: 3004
Joined: January 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#12

Post by hurluberlu »

1 . Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari ( Robert Wiene )
2 . One Week ( Edward F. Cline, Buster Keaton )
3 . Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam ( Paul Wegener, Carl Boese )
4 . L'homme du large ( Marcel L'Herbier )
5 . Way Down East ( D.W. Griffith )
6 . The Scarecrow ( Edward F. Cline, Buster Keaton )
links
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
DudeLanez
Posts: 632
Joined: August 25th, 2020, 12:22 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#13

Post by DudeLanez »

1. Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari (Wiene)
2. Way Down East (Griffith)
3. Das wandernde Bild (Lang)
4. Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam (Wegener/Boese)
5. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (Robertson)
Spoiler
Challenges in January
Image -> 60/74
Image -> 100/102 ✓
Preis der deutschen Filmkritik 46/58 -> 45/58 ✓
User avatar
Leopardi
Donator
Posts: 1824
Joined: February 4th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

#15

Post by Leopardi »

1. Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari [AKA The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari]
2. One Week
3. The Scarecrow
4. Prästänkan [AKA The Parson's Widow]
5. Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam [AKA The Golem]
6. Haunted Spooks
7. Way Down East
8. Number, Please?
9. The Penalty
10. Neighbors
11. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
12. Blade af Satans bog [AKA Leaves From Satan's Book]
13. Down on the Farm
14. The Circus
15. Genuine
16. High and Dizzy
17. The Last of the Mohicans
18. Get Out and Get Under
19. His Royal Slyness
20. The Garage
Spoiler
User avatar
timshelboy
Posts: 103
Joined: February 9th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#16

Post by timshelboy »

Image

1 WAY DOWN EAST
2 THE SPIDERS 2: THE DIAMOND SHIP
3 THE SCARECROW
4 SUMURUN
5 ONE WEEK

Links
1 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011841/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0
2 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011723/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_5
3 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011656/?ref_=fn_tt_tt_4
4 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011742/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
5 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011541/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2

:cheers: to all for the recommendations so could watch enough movies I liked in order to play.

Am out of my depth in silent cinema so won't risk predictions....but very interested in results. :D
User avatar
Dolwphin
Posts: 4896
Joined: July 10th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

#19

Post by Dolwphin »

I have only watched four feature length films. (Correct usage of the word only) :whistling:

1. Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari (Wiene) 3/5
2. L' homme du large (L'Herbier)
3. Von morgens bis Mitternacht (Martin)
4. One Week (Keaton)
5. Neighbors (Keaton)
Spoiler
Top 100 | Top 250

Member of the Experimental Mafia | What's My Line? #1 Fan

Image
User avatar
Minkin
Posts: 657
Joined: January 13th, 2015, 7:00 am
Location: astarikar 4
Contact:

#20

Post by Minkin »

About 5-6 years ago I made a "top ten" for each year on my blog, and then I update it each year. So these are what I chose, even though I haven't watched any of them in quite a long time. I want to watch The Round-Up, but don't have access to it for now and probably won't before the deadline for this poll.

Unranked:

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam
Number, Please?
The Scarecrow
One Week
Neighbors
The Garage
Convict 13
The Mark of Zorro
Terror Island
Spoiler
Cinema Safari (Currently working on Inyo County, CA + Zimbabwe upgrade. Help recommend me movies to watch) Letterboxd
User avatar
rnilsson19
Posts: 714
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 7:00 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

#21

Post by rnilsson19 »

1. Le ménage moderne de Madame Butterfly
2. Tropical Nights (Robert C. Bruce)
3. Coves and Caves (Claude Friese-Greene)
4. Nude Woman by Waterfall (Claude Friese-Greene)
5. The Ouija Board (Max Fleischer)
6. Pour don Carlos (Musidora, Jacques Lasseyne)
7. Hollandse tulpen en klompen
8. Klostret i Sendomir (Victor Sjöström)
9. Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari (Robert Wiene)
10. L'homme du large (Marcel L'Herbier)
11. Das große Licht (Hanna Henning)
12. Die Würghand (Cornelius Hintner)
13. Stavitel chrámu (Karl Degl, Antonín Novotný)
14. Way Down East (D.W. Griffith)
User avatar
matthewscott8
Donator
Posts: 2683
Joined: May 13th, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#22

Post by matthewscott8 »

I have only seen two films from this year, they were both actually pretty good, The Penalty and the Monastery of Sendomir. The Penalty I should probably rewatch because it probably should be in my faves list. However I am very skeptical about the merits of watching lots of movies from this era, when cinema was still a novelty and people easily pleased. I do however acknowledge that later in the decade some really interesting stuff started getting made, and silence became a kind of restraint that freed the imagination of a handful of artists. Just to be clear this is not a ballot.
User avatar
matthewscott8
Donator
Posts: 2683
Joined: May 13th, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#23

Post by matthewscott8 »

St. Gloede wrote: January 1st, 2022, 5:48 pm
OldAle1 wrote: January 1st, 2022, 5:11 pm
Torgo wrote: January 1st, 2022, 4:53 pm

only
:lol:

That's just under 1/10th of all the feature-length films from that year (at least those that IMDb lists).

Glad I don't have a bug about shorts, particularly for the early years - but I'll have a hard time coming up with a list even with them, unless I watch a bunch more stuff this month.
Woah, I did not know it was that big a part of the overall pot. I'm pretty sure PUNQ has seen 300+ though. :whistling:

Worst thing is, I considered adding in shorts for this year, but had only seen three. :facepalm:
I don't think I'm ever going to work out what makes PUNQ tick, I really have no idea what someone can get out of watching all these 20s movies, and like, hardly anything else. People talk about Onderhond's taste as on an extreme end of a spectrum, PUNQ is way out by Pluto.
blocho
Donator
Posts: 5576
Joined: July 20th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#24

Post by blocho »

I don't believe that's true. PUNQ has also seen many, many movies from the 1930s and 1940s. And based on his challenge submissions, he also sees new releases. I think only he can explain what makes him "tick" but if I had to guess I would say he simply has an unlimited interest and appetite for the moving image.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 13250
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#25

Post by St. Gloede »

I think it is a kind of completism that gives him a very thorough image of the world or at least artistic output of the time. If I recall correctly he started by watching everything available to him from the early years and then slowly worked himself closer to the present. This will obviously get more and more difficult as the output gets greater though.

I'm very disappointed he has not voted yet and can't jump in here.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 13250
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#26

Post by St. Gloede »

matthewscott8 wrote: January 11th, 2022, 7:15 pm However I am very skeptical about the merits of watching lots of movies from this era, when cinema was still a novelty and people easily pleased. I do however acknowledge that later in the decade some really interesting stuff started getting made, and silence became a kind of restraint that freed the imagination of a handful of artists. Just to be clear this is not a ballot.
I'm not sure if I can agree with this assessment. Cinema was already over 30 in 1920, and in the previous decades we saw a large amount of artistic work of merit praised and held up to this day (granted, the large majority of these were shorts). By the time 1920 rolled in features had already become normalised and we had great directors who had already made a name for themselves with some fairly incredible efforts. I think it is rather hard to look at dramatic epics like Victor Sjöström's The Outlaw and His Wife or Mauritz Stiller's Herr Arnes Penger and say that people are just easily pleased. That critique could just as easily be thrown at audiences in any decade.

I will agree that the craft became refined over the coming decade and that we see some of the spectacular big budget silent productions as well as some of the most exciting cinematic experimentation with the cinematic form in the late 20s, and looking at the silent form as a slightly different strain, even in the early 30s - with many sadly ignored films. 1920 was certainly a little simpler than 1929, and with less films still available as well. Even so, Germany was in a really exciting place cinematically with The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and From Morn to Midnight in particular bringing German Expressionist sensibilities to the screen and then you had Lubitsch, Der Golem and so much more, Sweden was at the top of the game with two of the eras biggest auteur both putting out films, Carl Theodor Dreyer made two of his best works as well. I don't think Griffiths much, but Way Down East is clearly one of his best regarded as well. I'll agree that there are less key films than from many later years, but I will disagree that film was not taken seriously, and there's a large set of films well worth exploring. I really wouldn't ignore this period and would recommend at least watching the extended canon.
User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 6932
Joined: February 9th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#27

Post by OldAle1 »

Interesting, diverging conversation. There are plenty of people here whose viewing habits/priorities seem weird to me, but when I consider how I seem to people "outside" it doesn't seem so strange - at least everybody here is on some level united by being fairly obsessed with movies and with wanting to watch a much wider variety of them than "normal" people. My brother is kind of into movies but what he really has a problem with is the very concept of discussing them - or anything - with strangers online. To him the sole purpose of interacting with people online is dating, and he considers everything else idiotic to the point of not wanting to even hear about it. So you know, we're all fucking weirdos to him and to many others. And in some ways I like Punq's and Ondherhond's particular foci - I don't really have any myself, at least nothing overriding, which leads me to spending way more time trying to decide what to watch, rather than watching, which is fucking irritating.

As to 1920 or "early cinema", well, I'm definitely with Gloede here. And I have to mention Feuillade, to my mind the greatest of all silent-only directors, whose work alone makes the 1910s an exciting decade, and out of whom comes essentially all of film noir and the thriller and spy genres.
User avatar
Teproc
Posts: 1338
Joined: September 23rd, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#28

Post by Teproc »

PUNQ's thing, while not something I'd ever consider doing myself, is something I completely get. Getting a full, complete picture of what cinema was at a specific time seems like a very worthy endeavour to me.

I'm not that well-educated in silent cinema myself unfortunately, but there's a Twitter user/blogger called Movies Silently -she works as a film archivist I believe) who has done quite a bit to enlighten me on how diverse and sophisticated cinema really was as early as the 1900s, and even moreso a decade later.
User avatar
matthewscott8
Donator
Posts: 2683
Joined: May 13th, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#29

Post by matthewscott8 »

Teproc wrote: January 11th, 2022, 11:33 pm PUNQ's thing, while not something I'd ever consider doing myself, is something I completely get. Getting a full, complete picture of what cinema was at a specific time seems like a very worthy endeavour to me.

I'm not that well-educated in silent cinema myself unfortunately, but there's a Twitter user/blogger called Movies Silently -she works as a film archivist I believe) who has done quite a bit to enlighten me on how diverse and sophisticated cinema really was as early as the 1900s, and even moreso a decade later.
I'm not questioning at all wanting to get a full picture of cinema at a specific time. That's exactly what I'm doing with the year 2009 and looking to branch out around it (started 2008 recently and may do 2010 at sone point). I even started a major film project back in the day called the holy film quest back in the say, encouraging "knights of the grail" to pick a couple of years each and go questing.

That instinct I completely understand. The bit that is mystifying to me is why choose that era. I know PUNQ has said before that he doesn't find recent cinema interesting. I am being slightly provocative maybe in the hope of seeing other views and finding a way to like movies from this era again (specifically early 20s). I do feel a bit like it's a MST3K exercise to go through the enitre output from that era.
User avatar
Teproc
Posts: 1338
Joined: September 23rd, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#30

Post by Teproc »

I guess I don't see why the silent/early talkie era is inherently less (or more) interesting than any other. Some people are really into 19th century Russian literature, some are really into the great Dutch masters from the 16th and 17th century, some are into 70s-80s punk rock, none of that seems particularly strange to me.
User avatar
matthewscott8
Donator
Posts: 2683
Joined: May 13th, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#31

Post by matthewscott8 »

Teproc wrote: January 12th, 2022, 10:53 am I guess I don't see why the silent/early talkie era is inherently less (or more) interesting than any other. Some people are really into 19th century Russian literature, some are really into the great Dutch masters from the 16th and 17th century, some are into 70s-80s punk rock, none of that seems particularly strange to me.
It's not really the era that interests me here, an interesting person can take a pebble out of a stream and talk for hours about it, doesn't mean the pebble is interesting. I'd just like to find out why PUNQ in particular likes this stuff. I've literally been into all those things you've mentioned fyi.
User avatar
matthewscott8
Donator
Posts: 2683
Joined: May 13th, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#32

Post by matthewscott8 »

OldAle1 wrote: January 11th, 2022, 9:01 pm To him the sole purpose of interacting with people online is dating, and he considers everything else idiotic to the point of not wanting to even hear about it. So you know, we're all fucking weirdos to him and to many others.
It's interesting to me because that's the sort of attitude I would have heard a lot 20 years ago when I said I was talking to people on the IMDb forums about movies. I think that just demonstrates how liberalized my environment in Bristol has become since then. With people I know every behaviour is acceptable as long as it's not impinging on others.
User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 6592
Joined: June 3rd, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

#33

Post by Fergenaprido »

You can see PUNQs mini reviews for almost all of his films on Criticker. Based on his reviews, I wouldn't say PUNQ actually likes this stuff, he's just working chronologically... no special treatment for the 1920s/silent cinema/etc. He's up to 1950 now, I believe, and continuously filling in the gaps as new finds pop up. Over the last few years I think his pace has been about 3 years per year.

As to cinematic output, I think it actually decreases after the 1930s (especially in the USA) and doesn't pick up again until the 1960s when international cinema really started to blossom. Of course, a lot of what was released in the 1920s and 1930s is not readily available or even lost.

P.S. Teproc, there's no daylight saving time in the Northern Hemisphere right now. ;)
🧚‍♂️🦫
User avatar
sol
Donator
Posts: 13450
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#35

Post by sol »

|iCM | IMDb | Letterboxd | Gold Derby
Image
Long live the new flesh!
User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 2880
Joined: October 31st, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#36

Post by Lakigigar »

OldAle1 wrote: January 1st, 2022, 5:11 pm
Torgo wrote: January 1st, 2022, 4:53 pm
St. Gloede wrote: January 1st, 2022, 12:48 pm Only seen 56 full-length films from 1920
only
:lol:

That's just under 1/10th of all the feature-length films from that year (at least those that IMDb lists).

Glad I don't have a bug about shorts, particularly for the early years - but I'll have a hard time coming up with a list even with them, unless I watch a bunch more stuff this month.
Just out of interest, when you mean 1/10th of all feature length films from that year that IMDb lists, does that include lost films? Is that included in the total pot or excluded? And if so, what is the estimated percentage of lost films?
User avatar
Teproc
Posts: 1338
Joined: September 23rd, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#37

Post by Teproc »

Fergenaprido wrote: January 13th, 2022, 1:27 am P.S. Teproc, there's no daylight saving time in the Northern Hemisphere right now. ;)
Fixed, thanks.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 13250
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#38

Post by St. Gloede »

Lakigigar wrote: January 13th, 2022, 8:12 am
OldAle1 wrote: January 1st, 2022, 5:11 pm
Torgo wrote: January 1st, 2022, 4:53 pm

only
:lol:

That's just under 1/10th of all the feature-length films from that year (at least those that IMDb lists).

Glad I don't have a bug about shorts, particularly for the early years - but I'll have a hard time coming up with a list even with them, unless I watch a bunch more stuff this month.
Just out of interest, when you mean 1/10th of all feature length films from that year that IMDb lists, does that include lost films? Is that included in the total pot or excluded? And if so, what is the estimated percentage of lost films?
Not sure about 1920 specifically, but here's a few sources from Wikipedia:
Martin Scorsese's Film Foundation claims that "half of all American films made before 1950 and over 90% of films made before 1929 are lost forever."

Deutsche Kinemathek estimates that 80–90% of silent films are gone;[5] the film archive's own list contains over 3,500 lost films.

A study by the Library of Congress states that 75% of all silent films are now lost.
Most lost films are likely not on IMDb though, I have even come across several films from the period over the years that were not lost but still did not have an IMDb entry at the time.
User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 2880
Joined: October 31st, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#39

Post by Lakigigar »

St. Gloede wrote: January 13th, 2022, 10:31 am
Lakigigar wrote: January 13th, 2022, 8:12 am
OldAle1 wrote: January 1st, 2022, 5:11 pm

:lol:

That's just under 1/10th of all the feature-length films from that year (at least those that IMDb lists).

Glad I don't have a bug about shorts, particularly for the early years - but I'll have a hard time coming up with a list even with them, unless I watch a bunch more stuff this month.
Just out of interest, when you mean 1/10th of all feature length films from that year that IMDb lists, does that include lost films? Is that included in the total pot or excluded? And if so, what is the estimated percentage of lost films?
Not sure about 1920 specifically, but here's a few sources from Wikipedia:
Martin Scorsese's Film Foundation claims that "half of all American films made before 1950 and over 90% of films made before 1929 are lost forever."

Deutsche Kinemathek estimates that 80–90% of silent films are gone;[5] the film archive's own list contains over 3,500 lost films.

A study by the Library of Congress states that 75% of all silent films are now lost.
Most lost films are likely not on IMDb though, I have even come across several films from the period over the years that were not lost but still did not have an IMDb entry at the time.
And they probably won't be rediscovered.... most films (99,9%) probably already are rediscovered if they were to be rediscovered? I can't understand why people were that wasteful. Huge gaps of film history are just missing... Who knows that some considered by critics a "film masterpiece" for you guys just is missing or lost.
User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 6932
Joined: February 9th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#40

Post by OldAle1 »

Lakigigar wrote: January 13th, 2022, 9:36 pm

And they probably won't be rediscovered.... most films (99,9%) probably already are rediscovered if they were to be rediscovered? I can't understand why people were that wasteful. Huge gaps of film history are just missing... Who knows that some considered by critics a "film masterpiece" for you guys just is missing or lost.
Probably not, but you never know. There are fairly significant discoveries pretty often, like the one memorialized in Dawson City: Frozen TIme. You have to remember that most films - features that were meant to be distributed anyway - existed in multiple prints. Sure, the original negative may be gone, maybe there weren't any copies of that - but even in the early silent era there were hundreds of positive prints made of some films, so the chances that they are all gone isn't usually 100% - they made their way out to various places and some got lost at the time, never sent back to studios, etc.

As to why people didn't save them - well, it was a disposable art form, just as almost everything is considered disposable at some point. I used to collect comics - in the early days of American comics print runs were typically in the hundred thousands, with some over a million, and yet there are very few comics from the 30s and 40s that exist today with more than 200 known copies, so a destruction rate of 99.9% or more, typically. Books, phonograph records - all media - the machines that played the media - posters - paintings - bicycles and cars and...everything. Scrapped, 99% of it. That's been our human society forever so the fact that so many movies are gone shouldn't be that surprising, especially when you consider how flammable all the early film stock was.
Post Reply