Yes, the BFI European horror list was one of the lists uppermost in my mind when I wrote that, not the 333 film and 999 film lists. (Although the 333 film list is one of the best curated selections).
Other lists nominated up-thread I was thinking of:
The Asia Shock list - concentrates on a part of the globe not well-covered by TSZDT.
The video nasties list - Historically important. In the UK this is probably the most well-known of any list of movies as it was the centrepiece of a moral panic campaign spearheaded by the government, tabloids and pressure groups.
We wonât refuse to put another horror-list in the poll, because we already have a giant list. The lists as they are are eligible. Weâll see in the poll how theyâll do. No need to post âwe donât need more horrorâ. Trying to find lists that have a different scope, length or whatever is constructive though, so keep that up.
Thatâs four nominations, Samlion. Which do you want to let go?
And providing a little text is more than copying it from iCM. The fourth text is the default text when the creator of the list doesnât submit anything.
âParker Tyler (1904-1974), one of the few great American film
critics, was intimate with and enormously respected by many of the
underground and experimental filmmakers of his time. In this book, Tyler
evaluated the Underground in general and the seminal films in
particular, covering the history and scope of the genre with insight and
verve.â
-> âFilms held up as examples of prominent film movements by Empire magazine in their âFilm 101â section. The films are divided into their respective movements:
French Impressionaism, German Expressionism, Soviet Montage, Documentary Film Movement, Poetic Realism, Italian Neorealism, Polish Film School, Free Cinema, Direct Cinema, British New Wave, French New Wave, Japanese New Wave, Cinema Novo, Czech New Wave, New German Cinema, LA Rebellion, The Movie Brats, Australian New Wave, Cinema du Look, New Queer Cinema, Dogme 95, Mumblecoreâ
And I know that Sol already nominated the Oscar documentary nominees, but personally I always imaged the winners list becoming official. I figure it canât hurt to propose both options:
I wonât. I support the forum, obviously, and I support our top 1001 list and Iâd consider supporting some of our other lists, but a list whose criteria is ânot good enough for any other listâ seems inappropriate to me. Itâs a fun and sometimes informative exercise but not something that should be official.
Seconded
I think the userbase making these lists is large and knowledgable enough to allow some lists (with the awareness of a possible echo-chamber effect concerning more wellknown movies), but this one makes little sense if it were official.
I donât know how I feel about you nominating lists youâve curated yourself. Yes, the sources for the lists are independent, but I have no sense, even after looking at the methodology section, of how things are weighted and, particularly, I have no sense that anyone else is interested in these lists. I suppose thatâs something that will come out in the poll, but it would have been more open of you to at least acknowledge that that website is run by you.
Every list starts somewhere, of course, TSPDT didnât have the following it has now when it first started, but I feel ICM official status should come after a list has some kind of external approval unless it is specifically meant to be a reflection of this community, not as a place to promote your otherwise unknown website (or maybe itâs just my own blindspot speaking, feel free to correct me). Itâs a fine line for lists like the above, and Iâll have to reflect on it further on this.
I totally get that â I donât want to be misusing this nomination system. I didnât realize I was edging close to a line until you explained. Iâm revising my post to nominate the Disney Animation Canon list I made a few years ago instead. Thanks!
First of all: 100 films? I only see 56.
Secondly: Just like we discussed above about other distributors and production companies, this list is not eligible.