I didn't notice that negatively-reviewed films are included. I'm not sure if anyone noticed, because no one mentioned it when we were discussing the list. Maybe the negatively-reviewed films should be removed from the list. I'll post about it on the forum to see what other people think.
Edit: It seems that people are against removing titles from the list, but maybe the list can be sorted by rating, with the ratings listed in the description.
The action list ranked 4th (out of 218 nominated lists) in the previous "lists that should be official" poll, in which 96 people voted, so yes, there was a lot of interest.
How you decide whether a list is a "reference" or a "list of films to watch"? Doesn't it depend on the person? Different people use lists in different ways. The back cover says "250 key action movies," which can be interpreted as a list of films to watch.
At the time the list was adopted, we had only known about the list for 2 months, but since then I think a lot of people have become interested in watching the films on the list. It's on 75 watchlists right now.
I agree that MST3K and IMDb Bottom 100 shouldn't be official, but I don't agree that the reason applies to the action list.
TSPDT is important because it drives the conversation and it spawns 4 or 5 other lists, and heavily influences many others. If somehow we got to those 1000 films without its influence , it wouldn't be important.
Is there an actually metric that shows people are interested in the Action list, taste aside is a reference not a list of films to watch, or are the checks the by product of the list being what HBO showed after Dream On.
At some point we talked about why the MST3K movie shouldn't have a list (and the bottom imdb 250) and the same logic should apply here.
@swoon: Back in 2013, the Guys wanted to adopt an action list, and there was a forum thread to decide which list to adopt. 4 different lists were being considered, and almost everyone agreed that Action A-Z was the best choice and a fairly good representation of the genre. It might not be a perfect list, but it seems to be a list that a lot of action fans would be interested in working on. It's a bit low on martial arts films, but a martial arts list got adopted at the same time, so they complement each other.
I think it's a good idea to have both smaller lists and larger lists (as long as the larger list isn't too large). One would be an introduction to the genre, and the other would be for people who want to explore further. The Time Out Action list (which didn't exist in 2013) might be a good choice for a smaller official action list.
Number of new checks is indirectly a factor, since we try to fill voids, but I don't think it should be a requirement. If TSPDT wasn't official, then adopting it would only give us only 1 new check, but I think it clearly deserves official status.
1. Is it a good list?
2. Is it from an authoritative source?
3. Does the list fill a void (or does it complement an existing list)?
4. Is there a significant amount of interest in the list?
is a good start - but to avoid more lists like that awful Action list it needs to have some language around authoritative and ranked. Lists that are comprehensive weaken the value of each check.
I would also start look at the number of new checks a list provides, while it is nice to get a bunch of golds on new list day, it would be nice to to have a requirement (for a while at least) to have to include a certain % of new films. It will also reduce the hivemind that goes around certain films.
Okay, note to programmers, both of my longer posts have not appeared after hitting "Save comment" the first time. I've had to use the back button and hit "Save comment" a second time.
I thought this would happen on any other site if I take too long to write a message. Or only if I'm using an old browser (I use old Opera most of the time).
There's a similar kind of timeout when trying to rate a movie on IMDb on a page that's been opened too long (I think it's 15 minutes). Gotta refresh first.
I copy my messages before submitting them if I realize the page has been open for a while.
@xianjiro: We take into account several different factors to decide which lists to adopt:
1. Is it a good list?
2. Is it from an authoritative source?
3. Does the list fill a void (or does it complement an existing list)?
4. Is there a significant amount of interest in the list?
Not everyone agrees on what "official list" status should mean, but I think the goal is to have a collection of good authoritative lists for many different areas of cinema, to help people discover films to watch, and to have lists that appeal to all different types of film-watchers.
List quality is judged by both moderators and iCM members, and if possible we try to get opinions from multiple people who are knowledgeable about the country/genre/theme. We sometimes have forum discussions and polls to decide which is the best list for a particular genre or country. List size is also a factor.
Examples of "authoritative" sources would be critic polls, individual critics, books, large polls of non-critics, and popular websites.
Part of the focus is on filling voids (i.e. adopting lists for categories that don't have lists), but popular categories (e.g. French cinema and sci-fi) can get multiple lists. Some lists are incomplete representations of a certain type of film (e.g. Best Cartoons Ever and the old Italian list), so we thought the new lists would nicely complement those lists.
The "lists that should be official" poll will play a major role in deciding which lists will be adopted, but the moderators will make the final decision, so the lists won't necessarily be adopted in the exact order that they rank in the poll. Number of favorites on iCM is also a factor.
You won't be forced to vote for a limited number of lists. The way the poll works is you assign each list a rating from -1 to 4, so you can give every LGBT list a high rating, if you want. We might run smaller polls to narrow it down to 2 or 3 lists per genre, but it hasn't been decided yet.
Only 2 lists have ever been unadopted (and replaced with another list) due to lack of a good source: The old martial arts list and the old Spanish list. Individual country lists won't be replaced by region lists because people sometimes prefer to work on country lists, and sometimes country lists are better representations of a specific country. For example, we have both a Latin American list and a Brazilian list (and as I mentioned, we might have an Argentine list in the future).
@mjf314: Thanks for your insight, it is appreciated.
Someone asked for input so I tried to provide a different viewpoint. I wasn't trying to say the choices are bad - I was just saying how they appear to me.
However, what confuses me is a lack of understanding of two key things: 1) the site's goals related to 'official list' status and 2) the vetting process used. Is the goal to just have a bunch of 'cool' lists? Or to aggregate information in one way or another? How is a given list's quality evaluated? And ultimately, by whom?
So, for example, when deciding on the next crop of lists, will the decision be made by popular vote, the list's favorite status, moderator selection, or some combination? (Sorry, but I missed the engagement process in the last two go arounds so I'm playing catch up here. I also tend to only favorite lists that I wish to actively work on and wonder how many users are aware that favoriting lists might affect their official status.)
I'm looking over some of the nominations already listed on the link for "Poll" and certainly many or most of the items I included as examples in my prior message are already included. A special wink to your post.
But if I had to choose twenty lists from those already listed, I feel like where do I start? since I've no idea what the goal is? It's like jumping in the car, ready to go, and having no idea what the destination is. Does that help explain my quandry?
Also, rather than see every LGBT or horror list nominated and the vote split, could there be a vetting process? So, for example, those interested in more horror film official lists could look over the suggestions and offer two or three (and some rationale for their inclusion) so that voters could make a more informed decision. To be honest, with two lists including 500-some films, I'd need a pretty good reason to vote for the inclusion of yet another list based on this genre especially when no LGBT-themed list has yet to make the 'official' cut. (Again, my argument for some sort of goal related to diversity/inclusivity/exclusivity and list quality.)
Are lists ever removed from official status? So again, for example, would we consider eliminating a list or group of lists (let's say Polish Film Institute, Golden Foundation, Best Hungarian, etc if these lists were largely duplicated by a hypothetical compendium of 1001 Most Important Films from Eastern European Cinema?
Congratulations, you guys! Knowing most of you and your passion for, tastes in, opinions, and criticism of films, I am glad you all were selected as moderators. I am sure some people would disagree with the choice for one reason or another, but my vote is for you guys, if it counts.
Keep coming up with more awesome lists like these.
@xianjiro: I don't think the gender or nationality of the moderators is the best way to measure diversity. We can still select lists that cover many different types of cinema, and we do try to consider the interests of all iCM users. We're running a poll (currently in the nomination phase) to find out what lists people are interested in, and everyone is welcome to participate (if you're not a member of the forum, you can PM your nominations to PeacefulAnarchy).
We just adopted a large list of Asian films, so I don't agree that the choices are Eurocentric. The Asian list includes ~20 Israeli films, and the 2 official Latin American lists include many Argentine films. There are 2 official African lists (Guide to African Cinema and FESCAPO), but if you know of another good African list, feel free to suggest one. The Arab list (DIFF) also includes a lot of African films from Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia.
Israel, Argentina, and LGBT cinema will probably have their own official lists at some point in the future, but there are so many unrepresented countries, genres, and themes that it's impossible to cover everything at once. I hadn't heard of the Global Film Initiative, but it looks interesting, so I just nominated it for the poll.
There are many official lists that appeal to casual moviegoers. If you're hoping for lists that include films which are still in theaters, then I'm not sure which lists you have in mind, but we're open to suggestions. The IMDb lists are updated every few days and include new films. The box office list includes new films as well. The TSPDT 21st century list was recently expanded to a top 1000, so it includes a large number of new films, but it's only updated once a year. Award lists are also updated once a year. There are other lists of top-rated films (e.g. Douban and Kinopoisk), but it would be difficult to update those lists regularly, since they're not IMDb lists (the IMDb lists are updated automatically).
First off, not sure that I see much diversity in the selection of mods - at least six appear to be male and best I can tell, all are either European or American.
Second, seems like more of the same or more of the very obscure - Eurocentric, ignores LGBT cinema (but who'd want to watch that when we've got Finnish and Hungarian films to track down). What about Africa? Israel? Argentina? Film Movement or Global Film Initiative?
Third, a quick perusal of the newly adopted lists sorted by year of release suggests a bias for mid to late twentieth century (though Asian Cinema: A Field Guide does an admirable job of including films from the last twenty years).
Fourth, I feel all lists appeal to cinephiles and see little to attract more casual observers - you know, those who go to the movies every weekend and watch what's currently on offer - to the website.
Maybe before the next go around a group can be assembled to discuss what diversity (ethnic, regional, subcultural, period, length, popular appeal, etc) could and should mean going forward. Or is this meant to be a closed community reflecting certain refined tastes?
Add your comment
Comments 1 - 15 of 22
PeacefulAnarchy
The Voting for Lists that people think should be official has begun. http://s15.zetaboards.com/iCheckMovies/topic/8015212/1/You have until the end of August to submit your ballot.
filmcave
Will mods finally put a cap on that overflowing Box Office list? You can sneeze and make 200 million worldwide.mjf314
I didn't notice that negatively-reviewed films are included. I'm not sure if anyone noticed, because no one mentioned it when we were discussing the list. Maybe the negatively-reviewed films should be removed from the list. I'll post about it on the forum to see what other people think.Edit: It seems that people are against removing titles from the list, but maybe the list can be sorted by rating, with the ratings listed in the description.
swoon
The review of the wonderful American Cyborg: Steel Warrior is a one gun (out of five) and concludes with "For drunks, junkies and desperadoes only"It's just a list of reviews (and trivia!), and they aren't all positive.
mjf314
The action list ranked 4th (out of 218 nominated lists) in the previous "lists that should be official" poll, in which 96 people voted, so yes, there was a lot of interest.How you decide whether a list is a "reference" or a "list of films to watch"? Doesn't it depend on the person? Different people use lists in different ways. The back cover says "250 key action movies," which can be interpreted as a list of films to watch.
At the time the list was adopted, we had only known about the list for 2 months, but since then I think a lot of people have become interested in watching the films on the list. It's on 75 watchlists right now.
I agree that MST3K and IMDb Bottom 100 shouldn't be official, but I don't agree that the reason applies to the action list.
swoon
TSPDT is important because it drives the conversation and it spawns 4 or 5 other lists, and heavily influences many others. If somehow we got to those 1000 films without its influence , it wouldn't be important.Is there an actually metric that shows people are interested in the Action list, taste aside is a reference not a list of films to watch, or are the checks the by product of the list being what HBO showed after Dream On.
At some point we talked about why the MST3K movie shouldn't have a list (and the bottom imdb 250) and the same logic should apply here.
mjf314
@swoon: Back in 2013, the Guys wanted to adopt an action list, and there was a forum thread to decide which list to adopt. 4 different lists were being considered, and almost everyone agreed that Action A-Z was the best choice and a fairly good representation of the genre. It might not be a perfect list, but it seems to be a list that a lot of action fans would be interested in working on. It's a bit low on martial arts films, but a martial arts list got adopted at the same time, so they complement each other.I think it's a good idea to have both smaller lists and larger lists (as long as the larger list isn't too large). One would be an introduction to the genre, and the other would be for people who want to explore further. The Time Out Action list (which didn't exist in 2013) might be a good choice for a smaller official action list.
Number of new checks is indirectly a factor, since we try to fill voids, but I don't think it should be a requirement. If TSPDT wasn't official, then adopting it would only give us only 1 new check, but I think it clearly deserves official status.
swoon
is a good start - but to avoid more lists like that awful Action list it needs to have some language around authoritative and ranked. Lists that are comprehensive weaken the value of each check.
I would also start look at the number of new checks a list provides, while it is nice to get a bunch of golds on new list day, it would be nice to to have a requirement (for a while at least) to have to include a certain % of new films. It will also reduce the hivemind that goes around certain films.
Armoreska
@xianjiroI thought this would happen on any other site if I take too long to write a message. Or only if I'm using an old browser (I use old Opera most of the time).
There's a similar kind of timeout when trying to rate a movie on IMDb on a page that's been opened too long (I think it's 15 minutes). Gotta refresh first.
I copy my messages before submitting them if I realize the page has been open for a while.
evildeadthing
"illusive"mjf314
@xianjiro: We take into account several different factors to decide which lists to adopt:1. Is it a good list?
2. Is it from an authoritative source?
3. Does the list fill a void (or does it complement an existing list)?
4. Is there a significant amount of interest in the list?
Not everyone agrees on what "official list" status should mean, but I think the goal is to have a collection of good authoritative lists for many different areas of cinema, to help people discover films to watch, and to have lists that appeal to all different types of film-watchers.
List quality is judged by both moderators and iCM members, and if possible we try to get opinions from multiple people who are knowledgeable about the country/genre/theme. We sometimes have forum discussions and polls to decide which is the best list for a particular genre or country. List size is also a factor.
Examples of "authoritative" sources would be critic polls, individual critics, books, large polls of non-critics, and popular websites.
Part of the focus is on filling voids (i.e. adopting lists for categories that don't have lists), but popular categories (e.g. French cinema and sci-fi) can get multiple lists. Some lists are incomplete representations of a certain type of film (e.g. Best Cartoons Ever and the old Italian list), so we thought the new lists would nicely complement those lists.
The "lists that should be official" poll will play a major role in deciding which lists will be adopted, but the moderators will make the final decision, so the lists won't necessarily be adopted in the exact order that they rank in the poll. Number of favorites on iCM is also a factor.
You won't be forced to vote for a limited number of lists. The way the poll works is you assign each list a rating from -1 to 4, so you can give every LGBT list a high rating, if you want. We might run smaller polls to narrow it down to 2 or 3 lists per genre, but it hasn't been decided yet.
Only 2 lists have ever been unadopted (and replaced with another list) due to lack of a good source: The old martial arts list and the old Spanish list. Individual country lists won't be replaced by region lists because people sometimes prefer to work on country lists, and sometimes country lists are better representations of a specific country. For example, we have both a Latin American list and a Brazilian list (and as I mentioned, we might have an Argentine list in the future).
xianjiro
@mjf314: Thanks for your insight, it is appreciated.Someone asked for input so I tried to provide a different viewpoint. I wasn't trying to say the choices are bad - I was just saying how they appear to me.
However, what confuses me is a lack of understanding of two key things: 1) the site's goals related to 'official list' status and 2) the vetting process used. Is the goal to just have a bunch of 'cool' lists? Or to aggregate information in one way or another? How is a given list's quality evaluated? And ultimately, by whom?
So, for example, when deciding on the next crop of lists, will the decision be made by popular vote, the list's favorite status, moderator selection, or some combination? (Sorry, but I missed the engagement process in the last two go arounds so I'm playing catch up here. I also tend to only favorite lists that I wish to actively work on and wonder how many users are aware that favoriting lists might affect their official status.)
I'm looking over some of the nominations already listed on the link for "Poll" and certainly many or most of the items I included as examples in my prior message are already included. A special wink to your post.
But if I had to choose twenty lists from those already listed, I feel like where do I start? since I've no idea what the goal is? It's like jumping in the car, ready to go, and having no idea what the destination is. Does that help explain my quandry?
Also, rather than see every LGBT or horror list nominated and the vote split, could there be a vetting process? So, for example, those interested in more horror film official lists could look over the suggestions and offer two or three (and some rationale for their inclusion) so that voters could make a more informed decision. To be honest, with two lists including 500-some films, I'd need a pretty good reason to vote for the inclusion of yet another list based on this genre especially when no LGBT-themed list has yet to make the 'official' cut. (Again, my argument for some sort of goal related to diversity/inclusivity/exclusivity and list quality.)
Are lists ever removed from official status? So again, for example, would we consider eliminating a list or group of lists (let's say Polish Film Institute, Golden Foundation, Best Hungarian, etc if these lists were largely duplicated by a hypothetical compendium of 1001 Most Important Films from Eastern European Cinema?
Rohit
Congratulations, you guys! Knowing most of you and your passion for, tastes in, opinions, and criticism of films, I am glad you all were selected as moderators. I am sure some people would disagree with the choice for one reason or another, but my vote is for you guys, if it counts.Keep coming up with more awesome lists like these.
mjf314
@xianjiro: I don't think the gender or nationality of the moderators is the best way to measure diversity. We can still select lists that cover many different types of cinema, and we do try to consider the interests of all iCM users. We're running a poll (currently in the nomination phase) to find out what lists people are interested in, and everyone is welcome to participate (if you're not a member of the forum, you can PM your nominations to PeacefulAnarchy).We just adopted a large list of Asian films, so I don't agree that the choices are Eurocentric. The Asian list includes ~20 Israeli films, and the 2 official Latin American lists include many Argentine films. There are 2 official African lists (Guide to African Cinema and FESCAPO), but if you know of another good African list, feel free to suggest one. The Arab list (DIFF) also includes a lot of African films from Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia.
Israel, Argentina, and LGBT cinema will probably have their own official lists at some point in the future, but there are so many unrepresented countries, genres, and themes that it's impossible to cover everything at once. I hadn't heard of the Global Film Initiative, but it looks interesting, so I just nominated it for the poll.
There are many official lists that appeal to casual moviegoers. If you're hoping for lists that include films which are still in theaters, then I'm not sure which lists you have in mind, but we're open to suggestions. The IMDb lists are updated every few days and include new films. The box office list includes new films as well. The TSPDT 21st century list was recently expanded to a top 1000, so it includes a large number of new films, but it's only updated once a year. Award lists are also updated once a year. There are other lists of top-rated films (e.g. Douban and Kinopoisk), but it would be difficult to update those lists regularly, since they're not IMDb lists (the IMDb lists are updated automatically).
xianjiro
meh.First off, not sure that I see much diversity in the selection of mods - at least six appear to be male and best I can tell, all are either European or American.
Second, seems like more of the same or more of the very obscure - Eurocentric, ignores LGBT cinema (but who'd want to watch that when we've got Finnish and Hungarian films to track down). What about Africa? Israel? Argentina? Film Movement or Global Film Initiative?
Third, a quick perusal of the newly adopted lists sorted by year of release suggests a bias for mid to late twentieth century (though Asian Cinema: A Field Guide does an admirable job of including films from the last twenty years).
Fourth, I feel all lists appeal to cinephiles and see little to attract more casual observers - you know, those who go to the movies every weekend and watch what's currently on offer - to the website.
Maybe before the next go around a group can be assembled to discuss what diversity (ethnic, regional, subcultural, period, length, popular appeal, etc) could and should mean going forward. Or is this meant to be a closed community reflecting certain refined tastes?
Showing items 1 – 15 of 22