MOJO.LIST.1 results (Movie List)
Monwhea Jeng
in that there were two web-accessible top movie lists (the American
Film Institute (AFI) and the Internet Movie Database (IMDB) lists), and a
large number of people either directly copied these lists, or at least used
these lists as a base for their entries. (And at least two entrants sent
comments saying that they had directly copied the lists, but apparently
made some errors in copying.) This defect was part of the reason that I
wanted to go ahead and run MOJO.LIST.2 without waiting for the results
of MOJO.LIST.1. (I also feel that the contest has a poor scoring system.
More on that below.)
Congratulations go to Leo Breebaart, who came in first place, and
Clay Blankenship, who came in second, despite, as far as I can tell, not
simply copying a well-known list. 3rd through eight place ended up being a
six-way tie between Stacy Brown, Duane Cahill, Dave Gates, Jim Gillogly,
Barbara Grenier, and Dave Zahn, who all copied the AFI list.
1st: Leo Breebaart 2nd: Clay Blankenship 3rd-8th: names above
1. The Godfather 1. Citizen Kane 1. Citizen Kane
2. The Shawshank Redemp. 2. Casablanca 2. Casablanca
3. Schindler's List 3. Gone with the Wind 3. The Godfather
4. Citizen Kane 4. The Wizard of Oz 4. Gone with the Wind
5. Casablanca 5. Star Wars 5. Lawrence of Arabia
6. The Godfather: Part 2 6. The Sound of Music 6. The Wizard of Oz
7. Star Wars 7. The Godfather 7. The Graduate
8. It's a Wonderful Life 8. Singin' in the Rain 8. On the Waterfront
9. Gone with the Wind 9. Lawrence of Arabia 9. Schindler's List
10. The Matrix 10. The Graduate 10. Singin' in the Rain
Here is the top ten of the IMDB list, which can be found at
http://us.imdb.com/top_250_films
1. Godfather, The (1972) 8.9/10 (39350 votes)
2. Shawshank Redemption, The (1994) 8.8/10 (56037 votes)
3. Schindler's List (1993) 8.7/10 (41612 votes)
4. Citizen Kane (1941) 8.7/10 (24773 votes)
5. Casablanca (1942) 8.7/10 (28053 votes)
6. Godfather: Part II, The (1974) 8.7/10 (20114 votes)
7. Star Wars (1977) 8.7/10 (63465 votes)
8. Shichinin no samurai (1954) 8.6/10 (8838 votes)
9. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) 8.6/10 (27970 votes)
10. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)
8.6/10 (24840 votes)
The AFI list can be found at http://www.AFIonline.org/100movies/
Did non-Americans know about this list? The top ten of the AFI list is given
above (as the 3rd through 8th place tie). Incidentally, there was another
list at AFI, which was their "Public's Choice" list. In some ways this might
have been more appropriate for a Common contest than the official AFI list,
since it reflects what people actually liked, rather than what the experts
liked. But, of course, since no one used this list, it was not more
"appropriate," in the context of this contest. That list was
1. Star Wars
2. The Empire Strikes Back
3. Citizen Kane
4. The Godfather
5. Gone with the Wind
6. Return of the Jedi
7. Casablanca
8. Raiders of the Lost Ark
9. Schindler's List
10. Rebel Without a Cause
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are the results of the vote. Recall that, as explained in the original
rules posting, each time a movie is placed as #n on someone's list, it
receives (13-n) votes. There are 58 movies listed here. The first tie on
the list occurs at 10th place, between "The Graduate" and "It's a Wonderful
Life."
Citizen Kane 257
The Godfather 212
Casablanca 197
Star Wars 148
Gone with the Wind 135
Schindler's List 106
The Wizard of Oz 86
The Shawshank Redemption 81
Lawrence of Arabia 74
It's a Wonderful Life 48
The Graduate 48
The Godfather: Part II 42
Psycho 36
On the Waterfront 30
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest 30
The Sound of Music 28
Silence of the Lambs 26
Titanic 25
E.T. 23
Singin' in the Rain 23
Raiders of the Lost Ark 20
Shichinin no samurai 20
Ben Hur 16
2001: A Space Odyssey 15
The Empire Strikes Back 14
Dr. Strangelove 13
Raging Bull 13
Some Like It Hot 12
North by Northwest 11
Return of the Jedi 10
The Music Man 10
39 steps 9
Terminator 9
Apocalypse Now 8
The Green Mile 8
High Noon 7
The Third Man 7
Alien 6
Men in Black 6
The Birds 6
The Bridge on the River Kwai 6
The Matrix 6
12 Monkeys 5
Brewsters Millions 5
Gunga Din 5
Heat 5
JFK 5
As good as it gets 4
Blade Runner 4
Cool Hand Luke 4
Sunset Boulevard 4
The Time of Their Lives 4
Jurassic Park 3
Memento 3
Monty Python and the Holy Grail 3
Pulp Fiction 3
Rio Bravo 3
Saving Private Ryan 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And here are some interesting statistics NOT related to the scoring.
This is the distribution of first place answers.
Citizen Kane 14
The Godfather 8
Star Wars 2
Gone with the Wind 1
The Wizard of Oz 1
And this would be the vote result if every answer counted as one vote for that
movie (rather than the "13-n" vote rule).
Citizen Kane 24
The Godfather 22
Casablanca 21
Star Wars 18
Gone with the Wind 16
Schindler's List 16
The Wizard of Oz 11
Lawrence of Arabia 10
The Graduate 8
The Shawshank Redemption 8
It's a Wonderful Life 7
Singin' in the Rain 7
On the Waterfront 6
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest 6
Psycho 6
The Godfather: Part II 6
Dr. Strangelove 4
E.T. 4
Shichinin no samurai 4
Silence of the Lambs 4
The Sound of Music 4
Ben Hur 3
Raiders of the Lost Ark 3
Titanic 3
2001: A Space Odyssey 2
Raging Bull 2
Some Like It Hot 2
The Empire Strikes Back 2
The Matrix 2
12 Monkeys 1
39 steps 1
Alien 1
Apocalypse Now 1
As good as it gets 1
Blade Runner 1
Brewsters Millions 1
Cool Hand Luke 1
Gunga Din 1
Heat 1
High Noon 1
JFK 1
Jurassic Park 1
Memento 1
Men in Black 1
Monty Python and the Holy Grail 1
North by Northwest 1
Pulp Fiction 1
Return of the Jedi 1
Rio Bravo 1
Saving Private Ryan 1
Sunset Boulevard 1
Terminator 1
The Birds 1
The Bridge on the River Kwai 1
The Green Mile 1
The Music Man 1
The Third Man 1
The Time of Their Lives 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are the scores of all the entrants. The numbers in column #1
indicate the number of votes that that person's #1 choice received.
Under #2 are the number of votes that their #2 choice received, and
and so on.
Name #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 Score
---- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -----
1.Leo Breebaart 212 81 106 257 197 42 148 48 135 6 2.62e+7
2.Clay Blankenship 257 197 135 86 148 28 212 23 74 48 2.41e+7
3.Dave Zahn 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Stacy Brown 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Duane Cahill 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Dave Gates 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Jim Gillogly 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Barbara Grenier 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
9.Andrew Krywaniuk 212 257 81 197 106 148 42 20 30 13 9.27e+6
10.Mark Brader 212 81 106 257 197 42 148 20 30 13 7.94e+6
==.Andrew Hartley 212 81 106 257 197 42 148 20 30 13 7.94e+6
12.Phil Carmody 212 81 106 257 197 42 148 20 30 3 6.62e+6
13.David Muir 257 212 148 135 197 36 28 23 25 16 5.77e+6
14.John Drew 257 197 135 74 86 48 148 36 13 23 5.72e+6
15.Matthew Roozee 212 148 81 106 257 30 197 16 26 6 5.09e+6
16.Paul Atkinson 135 25 197 148 20 257 36 106 28 212 4.72e+6
17.StanPietraszewski 212 148 86 13 106 257 197 20 48 3 3.54e+6
18.Joe Marriott 257 197 212 48 74 148 15 86 4 3 3.3e+6
19.Sean Blanchflower 148 14 10 257 197 212 23 135 13 106 7.64e+5
20.Ted Schuerzinger 257 197 135 15 36 7 6 212 4 48 2.96e+5
21.Jacques 212 148 81 106 42 20 26 5 36 14 2.24e+5
22.David Hill 148 257 48 9 197 30 6 5 4 135 1.4e+5
23.Jacqui 257 135 48 148 8 7 36 74 12 3 1.12e+5
24.Andy Jakcsy 257 212 25 23 8 81 26 5 148 3 8.21e+4
25.Bruce Bowler 86 28 10 48 16 148 6 5 4 212 4.9e+3
26.Jarmo Monttinen 257 11 26 9 12 135 6 5 4 3 631
Some Comments About This Contest
--------------------------------
This was a poorly designed contest, because as mentioned earlier,
many people use the web-accessible AFI or IMDB lists. I knew about the AFI
list, which was famous (at least in the U.S.) at the turn of the millenium.
But I thought (incorrectly) that it was a too old to make much of a difference.
I didn't know about the IMDB list. I wanted an easy topic for my first List
Contest (especially with the intimidatingly complicated scoring system), but
not quite that easy.
I find it somewhat surprising that the winner was not a tie between
people using one of the lists.
Also, I note that all the official lists above put "Star Wars"
ahead of "The Empire Strikes Back." I thought it was universally agreed
that "The Empire Strikes Back" was the best of the trilogy. (Of course,
"Star Wars" is better for a Common-style contest.)
Incidentally, if anyone has any comments about the scoring system,
and how to improve it, I'd be happy to hear them. Now that I've seen it
in action, in this contest, and MOJO.LIST.2, I definitely see some defects,
but I'm not sure how to improve them. I was trying to get the scoring
system to strike a balance between the rewards for giving good answers,
and for putting them in the right place. I'm not sure how well this
worked out. The voting formula is overly complicated, and I suspect that
if I do this again, I will use 1, rather than (13-n) -- that is, have
each listing of a movie give it one vote, regardless of where it appears
on this list. I used (13-n) because I assumed that everyone would have
"Citizen Kane," "The Godfather," and "Star Wars" somewhere in their list,
and I didn't want these to all automatically tie in the vote. But, as shown
above, even given the convergence of answers in this contest, none of these
answers was unanimously picked. And I'd like to make the rules as simple
as possible (while still maintaining the appropriate incentives).
Anyway, if anyone has ideas for better scoring system, I'd
certainly be receptive. If I run another Common List Contest, the
scoring system will definitely be different in some way.
Rulings
-------
There were no difficulties in scoring. All the answers submitted
were clearly correct, and no one sent in duplicate answers. I didn't really
expect problems in this regard, but I included rules for alternate answers,
just in case. Only a couple of people bothered to include alternate
answers.
There was, however, one difficult decision. I received two entries
from persons who I will call A and B. I had already strongly suspected, on
the basis of certain recent postings by A and B, that they were really the
same person. Furthermore, their entries had a number of similarities that
indicated that they were either the same person, or had collaborated in their
entries -- the similarities were not just in having almost-identical
lists, but also in identical formatting, punctuation, capitalization, etc. . .
The evidence was all circumstantial, of course, but there was a lot of strong
circumstantial evidence. I wrote A/B about my concerns, but he/she/they
hasn't/haven't returned my e-mail. Anyway, to make a long story short, I feel
that A and B are probably the same person, or at the very least have worked
together closely in their entries, so have removed their entries to both
Common List Contests 1 and 2.
If I'm wrong, I apologize to both A and B for making them waste
time on a contest where their entries were unscored. (If either A or B wish,
I would be willing to post the circumstantial evidence I have, and let other
people in the newsgroup judge whether it was reasonable to conclude that they
were the same person. But this seems undignified for all of us. And some of
this evidence involves the names of A and B in inextricable ways.) If I'm
correct, I hope that A=B will be willing to forget the whole thing, and submit
just one entry in the future. It would, of course, be easy for any entrant
to sumbit multiple anonymous or alibied entries, and with only a modicum of
precaution, this would be completely undetectable on my end. So my hope is
that this was simply a little prank on the part of A or B or A=B, and that
they won't try to repeat this. And again, if I'm wrong, I apologize
to both A and B, but removal of these entries seems like the best solution,
given the information I have available.
And on that low note, MOJO.LIST.1 ends. But I will post the results
to MOJO.LIST.2 in a few seconds, so hang on.
Momo
Matthew Roozee
"Monwhea Jeng"
> Here is the top ten of the IMDB list, which can be found at
> http://us.imdb.com/top_250_films
>
> 1. Godfather, The (1972) 8.9/10 (39350 votes)
> 2. Shawshank Redemption, The (1994) 8.8/10 (56037 votes)
> 3. Schindler's List (1993) 8.7/10 (41612 votes)
> 4. Citizen Kane (1941) 8.7/10 (24773 votes)
> 5. Casablanca (1942) 8.7/10 (28053 votes)
> 6. Godfather: Part II, The (1974) 8.7/10 (20114 votes)
> 7. Star Wars (1977) 8.7/10 (63465 votes)
> 8. Shichinin no samurai (1954) 8.6/10 (8838 votes)
> 9. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) 8.6/10 (27970 votes)
> 10. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
(1964)
> 8.6/10 (24840 votes)
Its interesting that if the 6 voters that used the IMDB top 10 are removed,
the top 10 list changes to:
Citizen Kane 203
Casablance 149
The Godfather 140
Gone With The Wind 135*
Star Wars 112
The Wizard of Oz 86
Lawrence of Arabia 74
It's a Wonderful Life 48
The Graduate 48
Schindler's List 46
(a very good list, I might add)
Those who drop out of the top 10?
The Shawshank Redemption 15
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest 6
Godfather Part II 0
Dr. Strangelove -5
Shichinin no samurai -10 (perhaps the worst movie ever made!)
What gives?
- Matthew Roozee
"I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist
indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the international Communist
conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."
Mark Brader
> Its interesting that if the 6 voters that used the IMDB top 10 are removed...
There weren't. Even though I thought the IMDB top 10 list was the obvious
one to use, only two of us did so; the one that 6 people used the AFI list,
which is confined to movies that are (in the AFI's opinion) American.
--
Mark Brader "Those who do not know USENET
Toronto are doomed to repeat each other."
m...@vex.net -- Erik Fair (after George Santayana)
Andrew Krywaniuk
Monwhea Jeng wrote:
> Congratulations go to Leo Breebaart, who came in first place, and
> Clay Blankenship, who came in second, despite, as far as I can tell, not
> simply copying a well-known list. 3rd through eight place ended up being a
> six-way tie between Stacy Brown, Duane Cahill, Dave Gates, Jim Gillogly,
> Barbara Grenier, and Dave Zahn, who all copied the AFI list.
Actually, if you look at Leo Breebaart's results, it is quite clearly a tweaked
version of the IMDB list. That is the strategy I used as well, although Leo
obviously did it better.
Name #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 Score
---- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -----
1.Leo Breebaart 212 81 106 257 197 42 148 48 135 6 2.62e+7
2.Clay Blankenship 257 197 135 86 148 28 212 23 74 48 2.41e+7
3.Dave Zahn 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Stacy Brown 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Duane Cahill 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Dave Gates 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Jim Gillogly 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
=.Barbara Grenier 257 197 212 135 74 86 48 30 106 23 2.24e+7
9.Andrew Krywaniuk 212 257 81 197 106 148 42 20 30 13 9.27e+6
10.Mark Brader 212 81 106 257 197 42 148 20 30 13 7.94e+6
==.Andrew Hartley 212 81 106 257 197 42 148 20 30 13 7.94e+6
12.Phil Carmody 212 81 106 257 197 42 148 20 30 3 6.62e+6
The ties for 3rd are the AFI list. The ties for 10th are the IMDB list. 12th is an
IMDB list with 1 answer changed. My 9th place entry was the IMDB list with a few of
the titles reordered. Clay's 2nd place entry appears to be a reordering of the AFI
list with "The Sound of Music" substituted for "Schindler's List" (a game losing
decision as it turns out). Leo's winning strategy was to take the IMDB list and
replace the last 3 titles; it appears that the inclusion of "Gone with the Wind"
basically won the game for him.
Andrew
----------------------------------------
Upon closer inspection, I saw that the line
dividing black from white was in fact a shade
of grey. As I drew nearer still, the grey area
grew larger. And then I was enlightened.
Leo Breebaart
> Monwhea Jeng wrote:
>
> > Congratulations go to Leo Breebaart, who came in first place, and
> > Clay Blankenship, who came in second, despite, as far as I can tell, not
> > simply copying a well-known list. [...]
>
> Actually, if you look at Leo Breebaart's results, it is quite clearly
> a tweaked version of the IMDB list.
Oh gods, yes, definitely. I parsed Monwhea's "despite not copying"
clause as referring back to both Clay and myself, not just Clay,
otherwise I would have spoken up and pointed that out myself.
> Leo's winning strategy was to take the IMDB list and replace the last
> 3 titles; it appears that the inclusion of "Gone with the Wind"
> basically won the game for him.
Ayep. I first came up with and wrote down my own list of ten movies,
then I went and compared it to the IMDB list. I kept the ones that were
on both lists, then whittled the entire set down to 10 by simply
removing those remaining singletons that struck me as less likely
(_Shichinin no samurai_? -- I don't think so...), and finally reordered
everything according to the IMDB order.
And voila! First time I've ever placed first on a rec.games.trivia quiz.
I'm so proud. <snif> Mama, if you're watching -- I dedicate my victory
to you. <snif>. I also want to thank all the little people who made this
possible. And my agent, my hairdresser, my ISP, my feng-shui consultant,
and you guys, my audience. You really love me...
--
Leo Breebaart <l...@lspace.org>
Leo Breebaart
> Andrew Krywaniuk <andrew.k...@alcatel.com> writes:
>
> > Monwhea Jeng wrote:
> >
> > > Congratulations go to Leo Breebaart, who came in first place, and
> > > Clay Blankenship, who came in second, despite, as far as I can tell, not
> > > simply copying a well-known list. [...]
> >
> > Actually, if you look at Leo Breebaart's results, it is quite clearly
> > a tweaked version of the IMDB list.
>
> Oh gods, yes, definitely. I parsed Monwhea's "despite not copying"
> clause as referring back to both Clay and myself, not just Clay,
Argh. That should of course be: "as referring back to just Clay, not to
both Clay and myself".
--
Leo Breebaart <l...@lspace.org>
Momo Jeng
> Monwhea Jeng wrote:
>
> > Congratulations go to Leo Breebaart, who came in first place, and
> > Clay Blankenship, who came in second, despite, as far as I can tell, not
> > simply copying a well-known list. 3rd through eight place ended up being a
> > six-way tie between Stacy Brown, Duane Cahill, Dave Gates, Jim Gillogly,
> > Barbara Grenier, and Dave Zahn, who all copied the AFI list.
>
> Actually, if you look at Leo Breebaart's results, it is quite clearly a tweaked
> version of the IMDB list. That is the strategy I used as well, although Leo
> obviously did it better.
Agreed. What I meant by "not simply copying" was that they hadn't just
taken the IMDB or AFI lists, and copied them over, entry for entry.
They clearly used these a list as a starting point, and then made
modifications that improved their score. As did a number of other
people. (Although from comments attatched to their entries, I gather
than one or two entrants intended their entries to be direct copies,
but made changes by accident, rather than as part of a strategy.)
Incidentally, many more people commented along with their entries that
they had used IMDB, than commented that they had used AFI. But it
looks like most people who used AFI copied it directly, while most who
used IMDB wanted to fiddle with the list a little. I'm not quite sure
why this is. It seems to me that it would have made more sense the
other way around, since the IMDB list is based on a popular vote,
while AFI is a more "professional" vote.
Momo
Jacqui
> Incidentally, many more people commented along with their entries that
> they had used IMDB, than commented that they had used AFI. But it
> looks like most people who used AFI copied it directly, while most who
> used IMDB wanted to fiddle with the list a little. I'm not quite sure
> why this is. It seems to me that it would have made more sense the
> other way around, since the IMDB list is based on a popular vote,
> while AFI is a more "professional" vote.
Some of us might object to accepting an incredibly biased list as
"professional".
Jac (who actually relied on thinking about the films and asking friends for
their opinions - clearly not a winning strategy but then I wasn't that
fussed about it anyway)
Momo Jeng
> Momo Jeng wrote
> > Incidentally, many more people commented along with their entries that
> > they had used IMDB, than commented that they had used AFI. But it
> > looks like most people who used AFI copied it directly, while most who
> > used IMDB wanted to fiddle with the list a little. I'm not quite sure
> > why this is. It seems to me that it would have made more sense the
> > other way around, since the IMDB list is based on a popular vote,
> > while AFI is a more "professional" vote.
>
> Some of us might object to accepting an incredibly biased list as
> "professional".
Are you contending that professionals aren't biased? Or that the popular vote
on IMDB is not?
Momo
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote
> > Momo Jeng wrote
> > > Incidentally, many more people commented along with their entries that
> > > they had used IMDB, than commented that they had used AFI. But it
> > > looks like most people who used AFI copied it directly, while most who
> > > used IMDB wanted to fiddle with the list a little. I'm not quite sure
> > > why this is. It seems to me that it would have made more sense the
> > > other way around, since the IMDB list is based on a popular vote,
> > > while AFI is a more "professional" vote.
> >
> > Some of us might object to accepting an incredibly biased list as
> > "professional".
>
> Are you contending that professionals aren't biased? Or that the popular
vote
> on IMDB is not?
Neither, merely that the American Film Institute list(s) are almost 100%
American, voted for solely by Americans AFAICS. The "funniest films" list
the AFI recently released was regarded as a bit of a joke by the rest of the
world, where it wasn't deemed insulting.
Jac
Mark Brader
>>>> ... It seems to me that it would have made more sense the
>>>> other way around, since the IMDB list is based on a popular vote,
>>>> while AFI is a more "professional" vote.
>>>
>>> Some of us might object to accepting an incredibly biased list as
>>> "professional".
>>
>
> [No], merely that the American Film Institute list(s) are almost 100%
> American, voted for solely by Americans AFAICS.
The AFI claims that they *are* 100% American. Of course, there are
various ways to determine the "nationality" of a film.
--
Mark Brader | "There are no nations! There is only humanity.
Toronto | And if we don't come to understand that right
m...@vex.net | soon, there will be no nations, because there
| will be no humanity." --Isaac Asimov
Momo Jeng
Since the AMERICAN Film Institute said that they were making a list of
the top 100 AMERICAN movies, it's hardly surprising that the list is
"almost" 100% American. I realize that many Americans are overly
U.S.-centric, but it hardly seems insulting for Americans to make an
explicitly American list. If a French historian made a list of great
French leaders, would you complain that no Americans made the list?
I could understand if your complaint was that AFI was co-opting
foreign films and labelling them as American, or if AFI didn't
explicitly state that they were making lists of American films and
just thought that all great films were American. But to find Americans
making lists of American products as "insulting" strikes me as rather
silly.
Momo
Jacqui
> Since the AMERICAN Film Institute said that they were making a list of
> the top 100 AMERICAN movies,
Precisely why I wouldn't treat it as any use in a list competition like
this. Only if all the competitors were American also would it be something
even vaguely worth considering. The IMDB does at least include all films.
> I could understand if your complaint was that AFI was co-opting
> foreign films and labelling them as American, or if AFI didn't
> explicitly state that they were making lists of American films and
> just thought that all great films were American. But to find Americans
> making lists of American products as "insulting" strikes me as rather
> silly.
I didn't say it was insulting. I can point you at a few newspaper articles
that did though.
Jac
Jim Gillogly
>
> Momo Jeng wrote
> > Since the AMERICAN Film Institute said that they were making a list of
> > the top 100 AMERICAN movies,
>
> Precisely why I wouldn't treat it as any use in a list competition like
> this. Only if all the competitors were American also would it be something
> even vaguely worth considering. The IMDB does at least include all films.
While I agree that it isn't representative of films as a
whole, and doesn't reflect my own tastes (for example,
it included Citizen Kane, which wouldn't make my list,
but astonishingly not The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai
Across the Eighth Dimension, nor (presumably because of
its antipodean origin) Barry McKenzie Holds His Own),
it was recently and loudly in the news. This makes it
a better target list than IMDB in a contest that relies
on things that are at the top of peoples' brains. The
proof is in the pudding: it was good for 3rd place, which
means it wasn't a terrible idea.
Or did you want the result to be the combined list of
movies rec.puzzlers thought were worth watching?
BTW, I saw State and Main this week and laughed my ass
off -- perhaps partly a catharsis from the horrific events
of Tuesday. Big surprise, since Mamet doesn't usually make
it for me. The movie worked for me on a lot of levels.
--
Jim Gillogly
Sterday, 24 Halimath S.R. 2001, 23:15
12.19.8.10.3, 8 Akbal 1 Chen, Fifth Lord of Night
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote:
> > Momo Jeng wrote
> > > Since the AMERICAN Film Institute said that they were making a list of
> > > the top 100 AMERICAN movies,
> >
> > Precisely why I wouldn't treat it as any use in a list competition like
> > this. Only if all the competitors were American also would it be
something
> > even vaguely worth considering. The IMDB does at least include all
films.
>
> While I agree that it isn't representative of films as a
> whole, and doesn't reflect my own tastes (for example,
> it included Citizen Kane, which wouldn't make my list,
> but astonishingly not The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai
> Across the Eighth Dimension, nor (presumably because of
> its antipodean origin) Barry McKenzie Holds His Own),
> it was recently and loudly in the news. This makes it
> a better target list than IMDB in a contest that relies
> on things that are at the top of peoples' brains.
But, you see, not having an American brain, it's nowhere near the top of
mine. I could have looked at the BFI lists of yesteryear - I didn't,
realising that they are both skewed and out of date, and preferring to treat
the competition as an intellectual exercise, not a copytyping one.
The
> proof is in the pudding: it was good for 3rd place, which
> means it wasn't a terrible idea.
Sure, in the same way that being top of the record charts doesn't make
Atomic Kitten (or whoever) a terrible band. They're capable of being
terrible without success too.
> Or did you want the result to be the combined list of
> movies rec.puzzlers thought were worth watching?
Am not a rec.puzzler, am a rec.games.trivialist ;)
Jac
Momo Jeng
> Momo Jeng wrote
> > Since the AMERICAN Film Institute said that they were making a list of
> > the top 100 AMERICAN movies,
>
> Precisely why I wouldn't treat it as any use in a list competition like
> this. Only if all the competitors were American also would it be something
> even vaguely worth considering. The IMDB does at least include all films.
Whoa, let's back up a little bit. My original post said that I would
have (incorrectly) thought that the IMDB list was a better choice for
this contest than the AFI, because the IMDB is based on a popular
vote, while AFI is based on a professional vote. You responded by
saying that AFI wasn't professional, because it only judges American
movies, a complaint which struck me as rather silly. If your complaint
is actually that the AFI is not a good choice in a list competition,
then it's completely opposite to your original post (as my post had
argued that I would have avoided the AFI because it was
"professional").
At any rate, your claim that the AFI is not of "any use in a list
competetion like this" is demonstrably false, since the AFI beat the
IMDB. As I said, I originally thought that the IMDB was a better
choice, but I was clearly completely wrong, regardless of my feelings
about "professionalism", American-bias, popular vs. expert vote, etc.
. . If for some bizarre reason a list of New Zealand independent films
does well in the contest, then that's the best choice.
> > I could understand if your complaint was that AFI was co-opting
> > foreign films and labelling them as American, or if AFI didn't
> > explicitly state that they were making lists of American films and
> > just thought that all great films were American. But to find Americans
> > making lists of American products as "insulting" strikes me as rather
> > silly.
>
> I didn't say it was insulting. I can point you at a few newspaper articles
> that did though.
You said it was unprofessional. And at any rate, those writing the
newspaper articles are either silly, or didn't bother to check what
the AFI does. Don't get me wrong. Americans are horribly
self-obsessed, and unaware of the very existence of foreign countries.
But there's no reason to find the AFI unprofessional or insulting.
Personally, I find it insulting that the French only celebrate
Bastille Day, and not the Fourth of July.
Momo
Momo Jeng
Except that in these contests, ideas are successful or terrible based
solely on how they do on the "record charts" (i.e. how popular they
are).
> > Or did you want the result to be the combined list of
> > movies rec.puzzlers thought were worth watching?
>
> Am not a rec.puzzler, am a rec.games.trivialist ;)
>
> Jac
Ah, hidden biases everywhere . . . :)
BTW, I hope I am not being insulting. This is usenet, so it's hard to
communicate subtleties, but no offense is intended in any of my posts.
Momo