ICM Forum's 500<400 : 2022 Edition : Nomination Thread (Closed)

[Torgo]

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/jlfi ... 00/jlfitz/

unrankled

The yearly return of jlfitz, this humble titan of ICM rankings.

[BaalMan]

final
in order of preference
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/baal ... s/baalman/

[Tim2460]

And ... we're abore 60 voters.

[Rufus-T]

Using the same list from last year. Ranked: https://www.imdb.com/list/ls083671991/

[airdolll]

A question I have: when making a group ranked list, could some of the groups consist of one sigle film?
Example:
Group 1: #1
Group 2: #2
Group 3: #3
Group 4: #4-10

[Tim2460]

Why not... But your example is not the best : 1 2 3 movies will get the same point as the ranked 3 + group behind.
Out Java tools can't handle group ranking yet... So it's manual computing... The more complicated it gets... The more possibility of error rising.

[cayh]

My ranked list:
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/dashleft400/cayh/

[GruesomeTwosome]

https://www.imdb.com/list/ls020489598/ (ranked)

FYI, I just manually removed all of the 400+ check films that I still had on my list. Might still add a title or two if I watch anything worthy before the deadline.

[airdolll]

Why not... But your example is not the best : 1 2 3 movies will get the same point as the ranked 3 + group behind.
Out Java tools can't handle group ranking yet... So it's manual computing... The more complicated it gets... The more possibility of error rising.

I don't think I understand it, sorry. Wouldn't it be like:
#1 - 100 pts
#2 - 99 pts
#3 - 98 pts
#4 - 94 pts
...
#10 - 94 pts

?

In any case, I wouldn't want to make it troublesome for you if it's a lot of extra work, so I might just make a group-ranked list with less groups or a partially ranked one

[PeacefulAnarchy]

Why not... But your example is not the best : 1 2 3 movies will get the same point as the ranked 3 + group behind.
Out Java tools can't handle group ranking yet... So it's manual computing... The more complicated it gets... The more possibility of error rising.

I don't think I understand it, sorry. Wouldn't it be like:
#1 - 100 pts
#2 - 99 pts
#3 - 98 pts
#4 - 94 pts
...
#10 - 94 pts

?

In any case, I wouldn't want to make it troublesome for you if it's a lot of extra work, so I might just make a group-ranked list with less groups or a partially ranked one

Yes you can do that, Tim's point is that a group of 1 is not a group, so computationally it makes no difference and writing it that way just risks confusion.
If you want
1
2
3
4-10
Then just say Top3 ranked and 4-10 grouped.

[airdolll]

Why not... But your example is not the best : 1 2 3 movies will get the same point as the ranked 3 + group behind.
Out Java tools can't handle group ranking yet... So it's manual computing... The more complicated it gets... The more possibility of error rising.

I don't think I understand it, sorry. Wouldn't it be like:
#1 - 100 pts
#2 - 99 pts
#3 - 98 pts
#4 - 94 pts
...
#10 - 94 pts

?

In any case, I wouldn't want to make it troublesome for you if it's a lot of extra work, so I might just make a group-ranked list with less groups or a partially ranked one

Yes you can do that, Tim's point is that a group of 1 is not a group, so computationally it makes no difference and writing it that way just risks confusion.
If you want
1
2
3
4-10
Then just say Top3 ranked and 4-10 grouped.

Ah, got it! Thanks a lot.

[Tim2460]

Why not... But your example is not the best : 1 2 3 movies will get the same point as the ranked 3 + group behind.
Out Java tools can't handle group ranking yet... So it's manual computing... The more complicated it gets... The more possibility of error rising.

I don't think I understand it, sorry. Wouldn't it be like:
#1 - 100 pts
#2 - 99 pts
#3 - 98 pts
#4 - 94 pts
...
#10 - 94 pts

?

In any case, I wouldn't want to make it troublesome for you if it's a lot of extra work, so I might just make a group-ranked list with less groups or a partially ranked one

Yes you can do that, Tim's point is that a group of 1 is not a group, so computationally it makes no difference and writing it that way just risks confusion.
If you want
1
2
3
4-10
Then just say Top3 ranked and 4-10 grouped.

Thx PA : you explained it better than me

[Captain_Zimmermann]

Ranked: https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/hidd ... immermann/

[Tim2460]

Updated @ 65

NB	Voter	Mode	URL	Count
001	mathiasa	Ranked	mathiasa (463)	448
002	rokp	Ranked	rokp (64)	61
003	beavis	Unanked	beavis (Unanked)	500
004	sol	Ranked	sol (500)	500
005	TraverseTown	Ranked	TraverseTown (640)	640
006	72aicm	Ranked 250	72aicm (Ranked 250)	444
007	toromash	Ranked	toromash (193)	193
008	frbrown	Ranked	frbrown (446)	446
009	Mysterious Dude	Ranked	Mysterious Dude (220)	220
010	Traveller	Ranked	Traveller (200)	200
011	RolandKirkSunglasses	Ranked	RolandKirkSunglasses (125)	125
012	shugs	Ranked	shugs (54)	54
013	Lilarcor	Ranked	Lilarcor (485)	485
014	zzzorf	Ranked	zzzorf (500)	500
015	St. Gloede	Ranked	St. Gloede (714)	714
016	Gorro	Ranked	Gorro (500)	500
017	Perception de Ambiguity	Ranked	Perception de Ambiguity (8404)	8404
018	peeptoad	Ranked 6	peeptoad (Ranked 6)	205
019	cinewest	Ranked	cinewest (199)	199
020	DudeLanez	Unanked	DudeLanez (Unanked)	182
021	murnaunosferatu	Ranked	murnaunosferatu (140)	140
022	blocho	Unranked	blocho (Unranked)	165
023	gunnar	Group Ranked	gunnar (Group Ranked)	364
024	Arkantos	Ranked	Arkantos (21)	21
025	GruesomeTwosome	Ranked	GruesomeTwosome (136)	136
026	sortile9io	Ranked	sortile9io (246)	246
027	Gordon_Gekko	Ranked	Gordon_Gekko (236)	236
028	filmbantha	Ranked	filmbantha (546)	546
029	Torgo	Ranked	Torgo (224)	224
030	dirty_score	Ranked	dirty_score (195)	195
031	klaus78	Ranked	klaus78 (275)	275
032	Gershwin	Ranked	Gershwin (201)	201
033	cinephage	Ranked	cinephage (297)	297
034	zuma	Ranked	zuma (200)	200
035	beasterne	Ranked	beasterne (108)	108
036	Onderhond	Ranked	Onderhond (513)	513
037	Teproc	Ranked 100	Teproc (Ranked 100)	183
038	AdamH	Ranked	AdamH (197)	197
039	joachimt	Ranked	joachimt (452)	452
040	Wonderful Rainbow	Ranked	Wonderful Rainbow (145)	145
041	russa03	Ranked	russa03 (202)	202
042	pitchorneirda	Group Ranked	pitchorneirda (Group Ranked)	142
043	Lonewolf2003	Ranked 150	Lonewolf2003 (Ranked 150)	277
044	mightysparks	Ranked	mightysparks (177)	177
045	mjf314	Ranked	mjf314 (174)	174
046	Caracortada	Ranked	Caracortada (126)	126
047	rnilsson19	Ranked	rnilsson19 (455)	455
048	itsirc	Unranked	itsirc (Unranked)	61
049	Angel Glez	Ranked 378	Angel Glez (Ranked 378)	549
050	flavo5000	unranked	flavo5000 (unranked)	246
051	Mifune	Ranked	Mifune (120)	120
052	vortexsurfer	Ranked	vortexsurfer (250)	250
053	Apu	Ranked	Apu (182)	182
054	jeff_v	Ranked	jeff_v (288)	288
055	Melvelet	Ranked	Melvelet (238)	238
056	paul281f	Ranked 60	paul281f (Ranked 60)	202
057	Lammetje	Ranked	Lammetje (52)	52
058	ororama	Ranked	ororama (264)	264
059	Marazmatique	Ranked	Marazmatique (92)	92
060	jlfitz	unranked	jlfitz (unranked)	500
061	1SO	Ranked	1SO (199)	199
062	BaalMan	Ranked	BaalMan (201)	201
063	Rufus-T	Ranked	Rufus-T (100)	100
064	cayh	Ranked	cayh (228)	228
065	Captain_Zimmermann	Ranked	Captain_Zimmermann (68)	68

[Smoover]

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/icm+ ... 0/smoover/
Top 129 Ranked

[3eyes]

arrgh, I started editing the last one and when I tried to delete the ones that no longer qualified it deleted the whole list. I may or may not manage a new edition. Stay tuned. (I don't suppose the last one I posted is still accessible here?)

[gunnar]

arrgh, I started editing the last one and when I tried to delete the ones that no longer qualified it deleted the whole list. I may or may not manage a new edition. Stay tuned. (I don't suppose the last one I posted is still accessible here?)

Your IMDb list from 2019 still seems to be available: https://www.imdb.com/list/ls063864488/. You could edit that one or import it to ICM and then edit it if that would help.

[Tim2460]

Again I'll be able to handle the above 400 few films if you left some... No worry

[amechsner]

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/icm+ ... amechsner/
ranked

[gromit82]

Here's my ballot:
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/icm+ ... /gromit82/

Top 40 ranked, the rest unranked.

[Tim2460]

Last Week to post your list. I'll start PM-ing the ones that forgot soon ,)

[hurluberlu]

My list
Ranked

[AdamH]

I think that's 69 lists now? 55 more needed to equal last year but there's always a lot of late lists.

[AdamH]

Last Week to post your list. I'll start PM-ing the ones that forgot soon ,)

Have you submitted a list yet?

[matthewscott8]

400 picks for 500<400. Ranked.

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/2022 ... iandujaoo/

[matthewscott8]

I think that's 69 lists now? 55 more needed to equal last year but there's always a lot of late lists.

Can make sense to wait to vote with this one due to films having more chance of going over 400 the earlier the ballot.

[clemmetarey]

Thanks for the message Adam, I would have missed it otherwise

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/clem ... emmetarey/

[AdamH]

I think that's 69 lists now? 55 more needed to equal last year but there's always a lot of late lists.

Can make sense to wait to vote with this one due to films having more chance of going over 400 the earlier the ballot.

Perhaps but the films get automatically removed anyway so no need to worry about.

[matthewscott8]

Btw is a ruling needed on Fanny and Alexander? I generated my list simply by sieving my favourites list mechanically (with a few manual adjustments near the end of the list, as can happen when you note the exclusions of a fairly arbitrary cutoff line), and now note that I have the TV / long version of F&A at #2. It seems to fit within the rules, but I wondered how many other people have taken this route, as presumably it's very well regarded, but not already in the 500 < 400.

[Torgo]

Just pick another title, there are enough to choose from. You yourself should be ashamed the most to give your precious #2 spot to a film more renowned than the rest of the list combined.
I mean we all know it's only eligible because of some clunky IMDb process, every Fanny edition will have been watched by 1000+ people.

[OldAle1]

Just pick another title, there are enough to choose from. You yourself should be ashamed the most to give your precious #2 spot to a film more renowned than the rest of the list combined.
I mean we all know it's only eligible because of some clunky IMDb process, every Fanny edition will have been watched by 1000+ people.

Yeah, weird ratings/numbers caused by films being listed twice really shouldn't be a reason to vote for something so famous. Also there's the fact that IMDb is so completely arbitrary when it comes to counting mini-series/film version of those mini-series separately - or not. And then icm follow up this erratic behavior of course.

[Harco]

Thanks, Adam, for the reminder!

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/harc ... 400/harco/

Ranked in three groups:

001-005: 5*.
006-030: 4*.
031-155: 3*.

[matthewscott8]

Just pick another title, there are enough to choose from. You yourself should be ashamed the most to give your precious #2 spot to a film more renowned than the rest of the list combined.
I mean we all know it's only eligible because of some clunky IMDb process, every Fanny edition will have been watched by 1000+ people.

Yeah, weird ratings/numbers caused by films being listed twice really shouldn't be a reason to vote for something so famous. Also there's the fact that IMDb is so completely arbitrary when it comes to counting mini-series/film version of those mini-series separately - or not. And then icm follow up this erratic behavior of course.

This one doesn't feel so arbitrary, as it has an entire two hours more footage. Also I am not super convinced that people have in fact seen it in this long form. In other ICM polls it has been given a separate entry I believe.

[Torgo]

Oh I'm fully convinced. The new entry even had less than 20 checks in 2018. You wouldn't have believed that either, right?

It just emerged way past ICM's prime. You can assume it would have gained (more than) a mere 100 checks more in the 8 years since the site's birth, had it been featured correctly on the Criterion list from the beginning.

[monclivie]

Ranked:
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/my+d ... monclivie/

[Tim2460]

Last Week to post your list. I'll start PM-ing the ones that forgot soon ,)

Have you submitted a list yet?

Hmmm I don't think I haver submitted an list for 400<500... Maybe I will!
Anyway thanks for the mass pm!

[Torgo]

Last Week to post your list. I'll start PM-ing the ones that forgot soon ,)

Have you submitted a list yet?

Hmmm I don't think I haver submitted an list for 400<500... Maybe I will!

wtf. What a sick twist to the whole story that is.

[AdamH]

Last Week to post your list. I'll start PM-ing the ones that forgot soon ,)

Have you submitted a list yet?

Hmmm I don't think I haver submitted an list for 400<500... Maybe I will!
Anyway thanks for the mass pm!

Wow. The person posting about the lists and talking about messaging everyone hasn't posted a list themselves? What on earth is going on?

[AHALE80]

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/400d ... 0/ahale80/

not ranked, thanks.

[gunnar]

Group Ranked
Group 1 #1-2
Group 2 #3-20
Group 3 #21-39
Group 4 #40-75
Group 5 #76-109
Group 6 #110-321
Group 7 #322-364

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/unde ... /kaculler/

I think a half-life of 75 makes sense if it is something that would be considered.

I added a few films to my list so here are the new groups:

Group Ranked
Group 1 #1-2
Group 2 #3-21
Group 3 #22-40
Group 4 #41-77
Group 5 #78-112
Group 6 #113-328
Group 7 #329-371

https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/unde ... /kaculler/