That second link gives me an error.
I also think the doc mislabeled the film. The original one is iconic in Telugu cinema, and the 2006 version was widely panned. I’m in favour of switching the 2006 version with the 1989 version on the ICM list.
@PeacefulAnarchy what do you think?
I think the screenshot is the 1989 film, the text on the screen says 2006, the spoken descriprion could be about anything, so sure that’s probably the right move.
I just found the clip from that episode. They’re talking about film noir and they refer to it as “Mumbai noir”, so he’s likely thinking of the Hindi version, but the footage is definitely from the Tamil version that Mochizuki is talking about. Unless anyone objects in the next 24-48 hours, I’ll update the list this weekend.
Thank you for your work, Fergenaprido.
After reading your reply, I went back to a PDF I have of the English version and it is basically an archived version of some web version that must have been made around 15 years ago. I hope you are using the same version, or else, there might be even more confusion.
I actually think the differences are rather minor and some of the confusion might clear up, if we include the images. The thing is: In the German book version, whenever an image is embedded, there is a text in smaller font, so they are clearly distinguishable. This is not the case in the online version. So, if an image appears in the “films” section, in the online version, it looks like it is meant to be part of that list. Actually, the films section is always sorted alphabetically. When a film with an image appears, it is out of lexicographical order.
However, at this point, I think it is quite difficult to decipher what is an editorial choice of the different actors who transformed this list over time. Like you said, an original copy might give some insight.
Until then, I propose the following: I will post another list of all images I find in the German book version. As far as I can see, they are exactly the same as the PDF I have.
At the same time, I am building a table that collects all the films and the sections and then cross-reference with the PDF I have. This way, we will have an overview over:
and we will be able to make a decision based on that information.
Like you can see, the Chapters should align pretty well and I already found two films I missed on my first run.
Also, I am attaching a short illustration of how the two version handle images. As you can see, the PDF makes it look like “Fotodeath” is part of that list, while you can also see, that the list is meant to be in lexicographical order. The German book makes this clearer.
Greetings!
Josh
Thanks Joschi.
Good catch on the alphabetical order of the Films sections… I didn’t pick up on that.
Yes, I believe we’re using the same English PDF… that screenshot looks exactly the same as my copy.
I think you need to change the Sharing Settings of that Google Doc, because right now I don’t have access.
You’re right!
I changed it, so you should be able to see it now.
I have about half of it done and should be ready by the weekend. For now I have four categories:
For each version, I list the first instance where this film occurs. There are some films that have multiple images and I try to document those for a later time when we might discuss the ordering of the list.
Greetings!
Josh
Okay, I am done!
So, the film stills are identical in both versions with a few caveats:
The overlap of both versions is significant, but there are some differences. I have the suspicion that some of the lesser available or lost films have been removed in the German version, but I didn’t look into it.
There are 25 films in the first version that were removed. An additional 26 films were added.
I would suggest the following ordering, but I’m open to suggestions:
In the google sheet, I have used that order and you can find the list version on ICM.
Let me know what you think!
Greetings!
Josh
In general I agree. One can always sort a list alphabetically, so a book ordering that provides actual context would be much better. I assume we’re using the German book as a proxy for the English version that we don’t currently have access to? Your ordering sounds reasonable. For other lists with multiple editions we’ve always taken the newest edition as the standard so I’d remove any films that were removed in the new edition.
That spreadsheet looks very nice.
Does anyone know when and if the reddit list will be getting updated. It is normally yearly around march but the last update was 2019
Hello reid916. Last year they opted to do a Decade list instead of an all-time list, which is why there was no update in 2020. I presume they will switch back to an all-time list this year, likely around March.
Any update on this?
No news on reddit.
There is an error in the Criterion Collection list. The wrong film is in there for the Seoul 88 Olympic film.
The wrong film that is currently in there is Seoul 1988: Games of the XXIV Olympiad (1988) - iCheckMovies.com
The right film is Seoul, 1988 (1989) - iCheckMovies.com
You can see it correctly on Criterion’s website: 100 Years of Olympic Films: 1912–2012 (0) | The Criterion Collection
They’re the same film and should be merged on imdb. I’ll put that request in on imdb and when it goes through I’ll merge the titles.
No, they’re not the same film. One is a film, the other is a mini-series. I’ve seen the film. Trust me, they’re not the same. You can find the film on HBO Max right now.
Where can I find the supposed mini series the other one is? With the same director and runtime?
I know where the criterion film is.
Travel back in time to watch the news coverage. For whatever reason, IMDb is putting up the official coverage of the Olympics as a mini-series (Here’s the Seoul Olympics television coverage https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0397194/) and the IOC commissioned film or films up separately (Here’s the film https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15146486/).
Or, wait a minute…I think the mini-series is for the airing of the movie broken up into episodes. That’s gotta be it.
Yeah, the entry that is now listed as a mini series was originally correct as the film. Then someone hijacked it and added incorrect miniseries info to it. The original is the film and the miniseries is an alternate version. Then someone later added that film entry as a separate entry.
Merges aren’t automatic, so if imdb decides they should stay separate I’ll fix the ICM list, but given that, as listed, they’re just different airings of the same content they shouldn’t have different imdb entries.
Then again, here appears to be the news coverage for Beijing also broken up as a mini-series: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1178714/ whose runtime does not equal that of the IOC film The Everlasting Flame https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1491616/.
