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 54 released July 1st: The Disappointment That is Leos Carax' Annette)
iCinema Magazine: WE ARE LIVE! (We just need more content)
ICMForum Film Festival 2022: Mon Nov 14 - Dec 12
Polls: 1990s (Results), Germany (May 30th), 2021 (Jun 30th), New Zealand (Jul 3rd), Swan Songs (Jun 30th), 1962 (Jul 30th), Performers (Jul 31st), Unofficial Checks (Jul 31st)
Challenges: Canadian, Unofficial Movies, Personal Toplists
About: Welcome All New Members, Terms of Use, Q&A

Official lists updates

Post Reply
User avatar
Tasselfoot
Posts: 536
Joined: May 6th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4801

Post by Tasselfoot »

Tasselfoot wrote: ↑May 20th, 2022, 3:26 pm Time Out's 100 Best British Films was updated last month. Didn't check until after I just finished the list, but this appears to be the changes:
Play for Today: Penda's Fen is OUT and replaced by Scum (1979)
The Souvenir (2019) added at #49 (below Gallivant)
Listen to Britain is OUT

of course, Penda's Fen is a film I just watched today. and it's now unofficial. Haven't seen Scum, so guess I haven't finished it after all.
Just noticed about this... both Penda's Fen and Scum are films by Alan Clarke. So, they just swapped films from the same director in that slot.

Also, about 1 user hunting for stuff... finishing the British list made me curious about the source, then seeing that it was updated made me curious if other, similar lists might have gotten updates... and that led down a mini rabbit hole of the above finds.
User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 27004
Joined: May 8th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4802

Post by PeacefulAnarchy »

Yeah Timeout does that a lot. When they change their list the try like for like, whether it's director or style or theme etc depending on what the list is about.
User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 4775
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#4803

Post by Ebbywebby »

"Under the Silver Lake" so demands to be official!
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 3087
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Contact:

#4804

Post by kongs_speech »

Ebbywebby wrote: ↑May 23rd, 2022, 4:25 am "Under the Silver Lake" so demands to be official!
It's appropriate for a list called The New Cult Canon, because I know a ton of fellow Under the Silver Lake fans, nearly all of whom discovered it after its very brief theatrical release.
🏳️‍⚧️ (she/her)
Mr. Blonde wrote: Are you gonna bark all day, little doggie, or are you gonna bite?
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
First to check CODA (2021)
User avatar
GruesomeTwosome
Donator
Posts: 3921
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Industrial Wasteland, USA
Contact:

#4805

Post by GruesomeTwosome »

Ebbywebby wrote: ↑May 23rd, 2022, 4:25 am "Under the Silver Lake" so demands to be official!
It should maybe be added to the TSPDT 1,000 Noirs list at some point, too. Though I wouldn’t hold my breath on that…looks like Inherent Vice (2014) is the most recent film on that list.
I’m to remember every man I've seen fall into a plate of spaghetti???

My IMDB profile
ICM
Letterboxd
Dimitris Psachos Springer
Posts: 1022
Joined: August 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

#4806

Post by Dimitris Psachos Springer »

GruesomeTwosome wrote: ↑May 23rd, 2022, 1:26 pm
Ebbywebby wrote: ↑May 23rd, 2022, 4:25 am "Under the Silver Lake" so demands to be official!
It should maybe be added to the TSPDT 1,000 Noirs list at some point, too. Though I wouldn’t hold my breath on that…looks like Inherent Vice (2014) is the most recent film on that list.
...and the last great so far out of the "neo-noir" bunch of the past decade, Silver Lakes holds nothing on PTA's Pynchon marvel (plus, Silver Lake should really be pleased with a "cult" addition, it's not THAT magnificent :turned: )
User avatar
brokenface
Donator
Posts: 14024
Joined: December 29th, 2011, 7:00 am
Contact:

#4807

Post by brokenface »

Masters of Cinema needs an update from their last announcement. Two more Johnnie To:
https://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/am+zin/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/am+zin+2/

2 will be a new check
User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 7210
Joined: June 3rd, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

#4808

Post by Fergenaprido »

brokenface wrote: ↑May 23rd, 2022, 8:08 pm Masters of Cinema needs an update from their last announcement. Two more Johnnie To:
https://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/am+zin/
https://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/am+zin+2/

2 will be a new check
Thanks. Updated.
🧚‍♂️🦫
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 35135
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#4809

Post by joachimt »

kongs_speech wrote: ↑May 20th, 2022, 6:47 pm Can we get a post-DTC update for the All Shorts list?
On my to-do-list. It has been since the list updated. I'll try to get it done......
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 5296
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#4810

Post by Torgo »

Just preparing the cultural pessimists among you that the Top Gun rebootquel entered the IMDb Top 250 at #103 and will appear in Sunday night's list updates, maybe even stay for a while?.
User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 7430
Joined: February 9th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#4811

Post by OldAle1 »

Torgo wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 1:55 pm Just preparing the cultural pessimists among you that the Top Gun rebootquel entered the IMDb Top 250 at #103 and will appear in Sunday night's list updates, maybe even stay for a while?.
Shouldn't 80s nostalgia be on it's way out now? And I say this as someone who was 20 the summer that Top Gun came out, and who is still pretty nostalgic for a lot of the pop culture of that decade. But jeez, it sure seems to have a hold on people, even on a lot of people too young to remember the original material when it was new.
It was the truth, vivid and monstrous, that all the while he had waited the wait was itself his portion..
Dimitris Psachos Springer
Posts: 1022
Joined: August 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

#4812

Post by Dimitris Psachos Springer »

Torgo wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 1:55 pm Just preparing the cultural pessimists among you that the Top Gun rebootquel entered the IMDb Top 250 at #103 and will appear in Sunday night's list updates, maybe even stay for a while?.
This militaristic trash "entertainment" has gone way too far. I sincerely pity anyone who'll rank this more than the mediocre grade it deserves (aka mediocre being tolerable as a personal outcome, but to seriously consider this anything more than a PATHETIC production, focusing merely on the technical aspect, is reason enough to realize most "cinephiles" know shit about films in general)
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 8789
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#4813

Post by Onderhond »

OldAle1 wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 5:12 pm Shouldn't 80s nostalgia be on it's way out now?
I'm praying for it every day.
User avatar
Tasselfoot
Posts: 536
Joined: May 6th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4814

Post by Tasselfoot »

OldAle1 wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 5:12 pm
Torgo wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 1:55 pm Just preparing the cultural pessimists among you that the Top Gun rebootquel entered the IMDb Top 250 at #103 and will appear in Sunday night's list updates, maybe even stay for a while?.
Shouldn't 80s nostalgia be on it's way out now? And I say this as someone who was 20 the summer that Top Gun came out, and who is still pretty nostalgic for a lot of the pop culture of that decade. But jeez, it sure seems to have a hold on people, even on a lot of people too young to remember the original material when it was new.
I was 2 when it came out. But it was my mother's (33 when it came out) favorite, so I saw it countless times as a kid. Also, despite not being old enough to have seen the 80s classics in theater... I still grew up on VHS and cable TV showings of all those films; Star Wars trilogy, Indiana Jones trilogy, Ghostbusters, etc. So it's hitting all the Gen X (my older brothers) and elder Millenials (me), while also still hitting on the Boomers who were adults when the originals aired.

Also, all the executies are likely to be Boomers and would have been early adults when they came out as well; so they're skewed towards their own nostalgia.
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 3087
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Contact:

#4815

Post by kongs_speech »

Apparently Maverick is really good, but I watched the original Top Gun this week in preparation and I found it lacking in any particularly special qualities aside from the charisma of Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer. It's an okay movie, but not at all a Tony Scott highlight in terms of quality.
🏳️‍⚧️ (she/her)
Mr. Blonde wrote: Are you gonna bark all day, little doggie, or are you gonna bite?
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
First to check CODA (2021)
User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 7430
Joined: February 9th, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#4816

Post by OldAle1 »

Tasselfoot wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 8:53 pm
OldAle1 wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 5:12 pm
Torgo wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 1:55 pm Just preparing the cultural pessimists among you that the Top Gun rebootquel entered the IMDb Top 250 at #103 and will appear in Sunday night's list updates, maybe even stay for a while?.
Shouldn't 80s nostalgia be on it's way out now? And I say this as someone who was 20 the summer that Top Gun came out, and who is still pretty nostalgic for a lot of the pop culture of that decade. But jeez, it sure seems to have a hold on people, even on a lot of people too young to remember the original material when it was new.
I was 2 when it came out. But it was my mother's (33 when it came out) favorite, so I saw it countless times as a kid. Also, despite not being old enough to have seen the 80s classics in theater... I still grew up on VHS and cable TV showings of all those films; Star Wars trilogy, Indiana Jones trilogy, Ghostbusters, etc. So it's hitting all the Gen X (my older brothers) and elder Millenials (me), while also still hitting on the Boomers who were adults when the originals aired.

Also, all the executies are likely to be Boomers and would have been early adults when they came out as well; so they're skewed towards their own nostalgia.
I guess that makes sense. I guess what's happened is that the traditional 20-25 year "nostalgia cycle" has gotten lengthened, because technology allows us to have everything that was available then on sort of permanent replay; when I was a kid in the 70s, my parents couldn't go back and watch all the stuff they loved from the 50s - it just wasn't there. So while there was a 50s nostalgia boom in the 70s, exemplified by Grease and Happy Days in particular, it didn't last. Younger people didn't care about revisiting a past they didn't know, and older people couldn't really have fun readily comparing the new stuff to the old. Also though sequels and remakes have been around forever, the idea of just keeping franchises going forever didn't really catch on until later - I think James Bond was really the only continuous series, at least with a high profile, that was around from my childhood and continued into my adulthood and till today* Now, there's seemingly no reason for anybody to do anything new or fresh at all, not really, unless one calls using 30-year-old comic book characters like Venom "fresh" compared to 80-year-old ones like Batman. Everybody has access to all the trash from the past, and adults seem more often still stuck on their childish pleasures than they were 40 years ago.

*apart from stuff like Godzilla which I didn't know and couldn't really have seen as a kid in the rural USA at the time.
It was the truth, vivid and monstrous, that all the while he had waited the wait was itself his portion..
User avatar
Tasselfoot
Posts: 536
Joined: May 6th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4817

Post by Tasselfoot »

I'd say that Star Trek is another example of a franchise that continued pretty regularly from the 60s through to modern times, with syndication and then the movies bridging the gap until The Next Generation... but that is mostly in TV and not movies. Similar for Dr Who, although that didn't get out of Britain for a long while.
Dimitris Psachos Springer
Posts: 1022
Joined: August 9th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

#4818

Post by Dimitris Psachos Springer »

Tasselfoot wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 8:53 pm
OldAle1 wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 5:12 pm
Torgo wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 1:55 pm Just preparing the cultural pessimists among you that the Top Gun rebootquel entered the IMDb Top 250 at #103 and will appear in Sunday night's list updates, maybe even stay for a while?.
Shouldn't 80s nostalgia be on it's way out now? And I say this as someone who was 20 the summer that Top Gun came out, and who is still pretty nostalgic for a lot of the pop culture of that decade. But jeez, it sure seems to have a hold on people, even on a lot of people too young to remember the original material when it was new.
I was 2 when it came out. But it was my mother's (33 when it came out) favorite, so I saw it countless times as a kid. Also, despite not being old enough to have seen the 80s classics in theater... I still grew up on VHS and cable TV showings of all those films; Star Wars trilogy, Indiana Jones trilogy, Ghostbusters, etc. So it's hitting all the Gen X (my older brothers) and elder Millenials (me), while also still hitting on the Boomers who were adults when the originals aired.

Also, all the executies are likely to be Boomers and would have been early adults when they came out as well; so they're skewed towards their own nostalgia.
All these above can be applied to various age groups and different factors of reception, but the fact remains Tony Scott is a bollocks director and has left a stain "legacy" with that first need aero-crap speed, so it's obvious most folks are blinded by their twisted subjectivity of entertainment concerning the sequel.
Cinema has been endlessly fucked by its blockbuster offspring, I think it's time to realize the majority of those films should be judged in cerebral terms.
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 5296
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#4819

Post by Torgo »

I have the feeling that I'm somehow the blamed messenger again. :ph43r:
Anyway, just for reference: I disliked the supercheesy Top Gun original when I watched it, and by the way couldn't enjoy Days of Thunder either - and that although I'm a fan of Tom Cruise's* screen personas and of the late Tony Scott (RIP).
I also am so, so tired of the fact that blockbusters which are not in any kind sequels, reboots, "franchises" (that word alone ..) et cetera are basically eradicated with the super rare exception of getting a carte blanche because your name ends with -olan. It's tragic, but I can't do much about it, can I. (Other than sticking to the way more original and autonomous TV of nowadays, but that's another story).
Still, I'm highly excited for Maverick because of the phenomenal reviews it's getting and great response from audiences likewise. I frankly don't care what IP/franchise it's rooted in. That's just the framework directors will work in these days to design their PRODUCT. Still can be great. To name a (not perfect) comparison: I was never a huge fan of the original Mad Max films, despite acknowledging their influence. Yet Fury Road blew me away. It wouldn't have been too difficult to set up this highly visual and cinematic adventure in a "new" world outside of the established Mad Max universe, but it's what Miller went for and it definitely was easier to sell. We all can be thankful that it worked.
Regarding 80s: being born in the mid-80s, I'm probably 2-5 years too young to be the prime target of that nostalgia, it wouldn't work on me way anyway. I absolutely don't ask for milking those memories, give me something new. Interestingly, fashion-wise, the 90s dominate our streets for a couple of years now.

*disclaimer: I don't plan on joining Scientology or the army either, let alone glorifying wars or the US military, even if I'm going to enjoy Maverick. That's just one of the perks of being an adult.
Dimitris Psachos Springer wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 6:16 am
Tasselfoot wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 8:53 pm
OldAle1 wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 5:12 pm Shouldn't 80s nostalgia be on it's way out now? And I say this as someone who was 20 the summer that Top Gun came out, and who is still pretty nostalgic for a lot of the pop culture of that decade. But jeez, it sure seems to have a hold on people, even on a lot of people too young to remember the original material when it was new.
I was 2 when it came out. But it was my mother's (33 when it came out) favorite, so I saw it countless times as a kid. Also, despite not being old enough to have seen the 80s classics in theater... I still grew up on VHS and cable TV showings of all those films; Star Wars trilogy, Indiana Jones trilogy, Ghostbusters, etc. So it's hitting all the Gen X (my older brothers) and elder Millenials (me), while also still hitting on the Boomers who were adults when the originals aired.
All these above can be applied to various age groups and different factors of reception, but the fact remains Tony Scott is a bollocks director and has left a stain "legacy" with that first need aero-crap speed, so it's obvious most folks are blinded by their twisted subjectivity of entertainment concerning the sequel.
What the hell is that even supposed to mean? :woot:
Cinema has been endlessly fucked by its blockbuster offspring, I think it's time to realize the majority of those films should be judged in cerebral terms.
Great idea, and in turn we start rating Cannes films by their visual spectacle and how well they fare for an average popcorn audience of a 1000-seated multiplex in the States. :shrug:

You sometimes write like you discovered the existence of the entertainment industry through the internet and are still in shock. The truly shocking fact would be THIS, though. :ph43r:
Last edited by Torgo on May 29th, 2022, 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 5296
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#4820

Post by Torgo »

Yo Gordon I've seen that
beasterne
Posts: 1225
Joined: May 22nd, 2013, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4821

Post by beasterne »

Torgo wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 4:11 pmThe truly shocking fact would be THIS, though. :ph43r:
Now THIS is a twist I didn’t see coming! I am actually laughing at this, incredible.
User avatar
Panunzio
Posts: 364
Joined: October 19th, 2013, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4822

Post by Panunzio »

Fergenaprido wrote: ↑May 22nd, 2022, 5:37 pm
cayh wrote: ↑May 22nd, 2022, 12:59 pm It looks like the guy behind The New Cult Canon list started the series again back in November: https://thereveal.substack.com/p/the-ne ... eader2&s=r
New entries so far:
The Counselor (2013)
Speed Racer (2008)
Under the Silver Lake (2018)
Trouble Every Day (2001)
Mother! (2017)
Noted. Thanks cayh. I've brought it up with the other mods.
I take it this is still being discussed by the mods? I'd love to see these added. If it's the same author, the series does seem to have a lot of consistency, even if there has been a shift in the publishing website. Scott Tobias' New Cult Canon has a good ring to it.
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 3087
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Contact:

#4823

Post by kongs_speech »

Panunzio wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 10:53 pm
Fergenaprido wrote: ↑May 22nd, 2022, 5:37 pm
cayh wrote: ↑May 22nd, 2022, 12:59 pm It looks like the guy behind The New Cult Canon list started the series again back in November: https://thereveal.substack.com/p/the-ne ... eader2&s=r
New entries so far:
The Counselor (2013)
Speed Racer (2008)
Under the Silver Lake (2018)
Trouble Every Day (2001)
Mother! (2017)
Noted. Thanks cayh. I've brought it up with the other mods.
I take it this is still being discussed by the mods? I'd love to see these added. If it's the same author, the series does seem to have a lot of consistency, even if there has been a shift in the publishing website. Scott Tobias' New Cult Canon has a good ring to it.
I'd love to see these added and I see no good reason why they shouldn't, but I don't want it as badly as I want the gosh-darn DTC list bug fixed.
🏳️‍⚧️ (she/her)
Mr. Blonde wrote: Are you gonna bark all day, little doggie, or are you gonna bite?
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
First to check CODA (2021)
User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 27004
Joined: May 8th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4824

Post by PeacefulAnarchy »

Panunzio wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 10:53 pm
Fergenaprido wrote: ↑May 22nd, 2022, 5:37 pm
cayh wrote: ↑May 22nd, 2022, 12:59 pm It looks like the guy behind The New Cult Canon list started the series again back in November: https://thereveal.substack.com/p/the-ne ... eader2&s=r
New entries so far:
The Counselor (2013)
Speed Racer (2008)
Under the Silver Lake (2018)
Trouble Every Day (2001)
Mother! (2017)
Noted. Thanks cayh. I've brought it up with the other mods.
I take it this is still being discussed by the mods? I'd love to see these added. If it's the same author, the series does seem to have a lot of consistency, even if there has been a shift in the publishing website. Scott Tobias' New Cult Canon has a good ring to it.
Yes, and yes changing the list name is part of the discussion.
User avatar
Tasselfoot
Posts: 536
Joined: May 6th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4825

Post by Tasselfoot »

This is more a lack of update... is there anything that can (or should?) be done about the Most Checked list? The most recent film on the list is 2012, and there's no way for a more recent film to get added due to fewer voters now vs the collective ever.

Last on the list is at roughly 54,000 checks
Wolf of Wall St (2013) is closest from the past decade, at 46,000, in 311th. After that, it's Interstellar (2014) at 39,500 in 384th place.
edit: I didn't fully dive into more recent films... but, I have to assume that Infinity War and Endgame are the most (or just about) checked films from 2018 and 2019, respectively... and they're at 15,800 and 12,400, to further put the disparity in perspective.

This list is obviously a draw for new users, but it bugs me that it doesn't (and can't) include any more recent popular films. Which leaves the box office lists as their core place to become official.

A cool list idea could be "Most Popular Film of the Year" or similar. Which could be most checked, or some other site-data -based criteria that would continue to get updated and include new films that would appeal to new / casual users. It would need to lag 1-2 years behind, so as to not punish films released late in a calendar year.
User avatar
Gordon_Gekko
Posts: 421
Joined: March 9th, 2019, 9:49 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

#4826

Post by Gordon_Gekko »

Torgo wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 4:43 pm Yo Gordon I've seen that
Pssst. :whistling:
beasterne
Posts: 1225
Joined: May 22nd, 2013, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4827

Post by beasterne »

Tasselfoot wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 12:59 pm This is more a lack of update... is there anything that can (or should?) be done about the Most Checked list? The most recent film on the list is 2012, and there's no way for a more recent film to get added due to fewer voters now vs the collective ever.

Last on the list is at roughly 54,000 checks
Wolf of Wall St (2013) is closest from the past decade, at 46,000, in 311th. After that, it's Interstellar (2014) at 39,500 in 384th place.
edit: I didn't fully dive into more recent films... but, I have to assume that Infinity War and Endgame are the most (or just about) checked films from 2018 and 2019, respectively... and they're at 15,800 and 12,400, to further put the disparity in perspective.

This list is obviously a draw for new users, but it bugs me that it doesn't (and can't) include any more recent popular films. Which leaves the box office lists as their core place to become official.

A cool list idea could be "Most Popular Film of the Year" or similar. Which could be most checked, or some other site-data -based criteria that would continue to get updated and include new films that would appeal to new / casual users. It would need to lag 1-2 years behind, so as to not punish films released late in a calendar year.
I like this idea! I think it warrants discussion. Just like you, it's bugged me for a while that the most recent film on this list is from 2012, which is a full decade ago now.
User avatar
kongs_speech
Posts: 3087
Joined: April 4th, 2020, 10:32 pm
Contact:

#4828

Post by kongs_speech »

Sounds like a neat idea.

But maybe the site wouldn't be dying at this rate if it worked properly and looked like a website from the modern era.
Last edited by kongs_speech on May 30th, 2022, 10:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
🏳️‍⚧️ (she/her)
Mr. Blonde wrote: Are you gonna bark all day, little doggie, or are you gonna bite?
Quartoxuma wrote: A deeply human, life-affirming disgusting check whore.
First to check CODA (2021)
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 10481
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#4829

Post by xianjiro »

I support Tasselfoot's suggestion. It seems a better possibility than say, removing long inactive accounts from the vote calculation. I also like the idea though I'm not sure I'd support making a new official list every year -- that will get unwieldly since we have limited ways to sort the official lists (those tabs), but if we could create a new tab ... I also support the list running a year behind.
User avatar
gunnar
Posts: 821
Joined: June 6th, 2021, 3:38 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

#4830

Post by gunnar »

Maybe it could be something like a 21st Century Most Checked by Year where it includes the top 10 for 2001, 2002, etc. and the list grows by 10 films each year. Limiting it to the 21st Century keeps it at a manageable size. If you wanted to do a 20th Century list as well, that could be interesting.
User avatar
Tasselfoot
Posts: 536
Joined: May 6th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4831

Post by Tasselfoot »

xianjiro wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 8:03 pm I support Tasselfoot's suggestion. It seems a better possibility than say, removing long inactive accounts from the vote calculation. I also like the idea though I'm not sure I'd support making a new official list every year -- that will get unwieldly since we have limited ways to sort the official lists (those tabs), but if we could create a new tab ... I also support the list running a year behind.
I wasn't thinking a new list each year. I was thinking 1 list that contained the x "top" films from the site for each year, starting at some yyyy arbitrary year. Whether that's in the 1920s or 2000. It wouldn't have to be 1 film per year, it could be like the Cahiers du Cinema list, or between.

EDIT: or something like 1 list per decade, at something like 10 films per year. but, really, I was thinking 1 list.

Happy to move this to a new dedicated thread to discuss as well.
User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 7210
Joined: June 3rd, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

#4832

Post by Fergenaprido »

Tasselfoot wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 9:24 pm
xianjiro wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 8:03 pm I support Tasselfoot's suggestion. It seems a better possibility than say, removing long inactive accounts from the vote calculation. I also like the idea though I'm not sure I'd support making a new official list every year -- that will get unwieldly since we have limited ways to sort the official lists (those tabs), but if we could create a new tab ... I also support the list running a year behind.
I wasn't thinking a new list each year. I was thinking 1 list that contained the x "top" films from the site for each year, starting at some yyyy arbitrary year. Whether that's in the 1920s or 2000. It wouldn't have to be 1 film per year, it could be like the Cahiers du Cinema list, or between.

EDIT: or something like 1 list per decade, at something like 10 films per year. but, really, I was thinking 1 list.

Happy to move this to a new dedicated thread to discuss as well.
What you're suggesting would be completely different from the current Most checked list, so.I don't see how that would warrant being a replacement.

One possibility could be "Most checked within the last year/2 years/5 years", which would perhaps keep more in the spirit of the original list, while still remaining timely and relevant, and would see more turnover than the current list. Films like Pulp Fiction or The Godfather that are perennially popular would probably stick around on that list, while recent popular films would be added, rise up, then slowly fall down (not unlike the imdb Top 250 in that regard). I don't know how easy it is to code that list so it would automatically update each week/month/quarter, though.
🧚‍♂️🦫
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 10481
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#4833

Post by xianjiro »

gunnar wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 8:36 pm Maybe it could be something like a 21st Century Most Checked by Year where it includes the top 10 for 2001, 2002, etc. and the list grows by 10 films each year. Limiting it to the 21st Century keeps it at a manageable size. If you wanted to do a 20th Century list as well, that could be interesting.
I'd absolutely support a single list that grows.
Fergenaprido wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 10:41 pm One possibility could be "Most checked within the last year/2 years/5 years", which would perhaps keep more in the spirit of the original list, while still remaining timely and relevant, and would see more turnover than the current list.
This also makes sense to me and probably is more what I was thinking of after reading Tasselfoot's original post.

Guess that raises the questions: Would users prefer an ever-accumulating list or a list of most checks received that would be static. Would the list be ever-changing? (In other words, could the Top X movies from Year Y or Decade Z change as more people watch movies from that era? Or would an ever-updating list of the most checked during the last (time period) be better?

The other thing, how would this differ from the iCM decade lists that have been talked about? Was that going to be based on favorites or checks alone?

While I think both ideas (ever-accumulating list and most checked in the past X year(s)) deserve consideration, I'd prefer something that hits at the problem identified in Tasselfoot's suggestion: a list that captures the movies receiving the most checks in the recent near-term. Could the list be structured so that it captures a different group of films than those making mega-bucks on the box office list? Are there movies that are getting watched but aren't making the big bucks?

Another question: since iCM's userbase is smaller, would data from something like Letterboxd (or Rotten Tomatoes or IMDb) be an option worth considering? (Though I get those might not be as easy to comb for data as iCM).

Last, after we've developed this idea or ideas a bit, seems like a perfect topic for a poll.
Apu
Posts: 153
Joined: June 24th, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4834

Post by Apu »

On Time Out's 1000 Films to Change Your Life-list, one film should really be added to the icm list:

The Journey (1959) is featured in the index on page 273. But if you then look at page 51 (where the film is supposed to be mentioned/discussed), that particular section/article of the book is really about Peter Watkins and many of his films, including Resan (1987) which literally translates as The Journey. This is quite clearly an editorial error.

I thereby propose to add Resan (1987) to the list but also to keep The Journey (1959) since that film - technically speaking, and along with director and cast credits - is also included in the book (albeit at the index). There are other more questionable titles included on the icm list such as Losey's Blind Date (just to name one title) so I see no real reason not to add Resan (1987) - a film that is discussed more in detail in the book than Blind Date and a few others - and consequently make Watkins' Resan an official entry.
User avatar
Dolwphin
Posts: 4936
Joined: July 10th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

#4835

Post by Dolwphin »

Thoughts and prayers for all devoted completionists out there.
Top 100 | Canon

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

ImageImage
User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 7210
Joined: June 3rd, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

#4836

Post by Fergenaprido »

Apu wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2022, 7:24 pm On Time Out's 1000 Films to Change Your Life-list, one film should really be added to the icm list:

The Journey (1959) is featured in the index on page 273. But if you then look at page 51 (where the film is supposed to be mentioned/discussed), that particular section/article of the book is really about Peter Watkins and many of his films, including Resan (1987) which literally translates as The Journey. This is quite clearly an editorial error.

I thereby propose to add Resan (1987) to the list but also to keep The Journey (1959) since that film - technically speaking, and along with director and cast credits - is also included in the book (albeit at the index). There are other more questionable titles included on the icm list such as Losey's Blind Date (just to name one title) so I see no real reason not to add Resan (1987) - a film that is discussed more in detail in the book than Blind Date and a few others - and consequently make Watkins' Resan an official entry.
Hi Apu,

I don't have a copy of the book on hand, and I'm not sure if any of the other mods do at the moment. Could you take pictures/screenshots of the pages you mentioned (273 & 51) and share them here? Your request seems reasonable, but it would be good to have this information on hand in case this issue comes up again.

If you want to share the pages of the other titles you think are questionable, we can review those too.

Thanks!
🧚‍♂️🦫
User avatar
flavo5000
Posts: 6009
Joined: July 10th, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Arkansas, USA
Contact:

#4837

Post by flavo5000 »

Fergenaprido wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2022, 7:30 pm
Apu wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2022, 7:24 pm On Time Out's 1000 Films to Change Your Life-list, one film should really be added to the icm list:

The Journey (1959) is featured in the index on page 273. But if you then look at page 51 (where the film is supposed to be mentioned/discussed), that particular section/article of the book is really about Peter Watkins and many of his films, including Resan (1987) which literally translates as The Journey. This is quite clearly an editorial error.

I thereby propose to add Resan (1987) to the list but also to keep The Journey (1959) since that film - technically speaking, and along with director and cast credits - is also included in the book (albeit at the index). There are other more questionable titles included on the icm list such as Losey's Blind Date (just to name one title) so I see no real reason not to add Resan (1987) - a film that is discussed more in detail in the book than Blind Date and a few others - and consequently make Watkins' Resan an official entry.
Hi Apu,

I don't have a copy of the book on hand, and I'm not sure if any of the other mods do at the moment. Could you take pictures/screenshots of the pages you mentioned (273 & 51) and share them here? Your request seems reasonable, but it would be good to have this information on hand in case this issue comes up again.

If you want to share the pages of the other titles you think are questionable, we can review those too.

Thanks!
I have the book. I can take a look at it in a little while.
Apu
Posts: 153
Joined: June 24th, 2015, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4838

Post by Apu »

Sure, here are screenshots from said pages:

Page 51:

Image

Page 273:

Image
User avatar
Torgo
Posts: 5296
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

#4839

Post by Torgo »

Apu's right. Brilliant observation! :ICM:
One could debate whether the factually not discussed 1959's Journey really should stay part of our list then, but clearly 1987 has to.
Dolwphin wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2022, 5:56 pm Thoughts and prayers for all devoted completionists out there.
:lol:
blocho
Donator
Posts: 6151
Joined: July 20th, 2014, 6:00 am
Contact:

#4840

Post by blocho »

Eve Montand! tehe

Image
Post Reply