The Lists Project
- clutch44
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 10:33 pm
- Location: Camarillo, CA
Tedcogs, are you still around and if your personal situation with the move and all is too much to take on the list, then maybe you should hand it off to someone else. I don't suggest this in a mean spirited way, just as a way to unburden you in a time where family should be and is your main priority. I'm off work and will compile the list prior to returning to work on Aug 12 if you prefer. Let me know.
- Penny Dreadful
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:32 am
- Penny Dreadful
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:32 am
- Rufus T. Firefly
- Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:24 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
I suggest that given tedcogs's personal situation that everyone re-sends their lists to someone else. He's indicated previously that he has other priorities and it has been a long time since the cut-off date, so I don't think it would be rude to take it out of his hands without waiting for his response. One less thing he has to be burdened with.
I think I was the first person to volunteer to do the compiling for the 60s list, and I have the time to enable me to turn the list around within a couple of days, so I don't mind doing it if people want to PM me their lists.
I think I was the first person to volunteer to do the compiling for the 60s list, and I have the time to enable me to turn the list around within a couple of days, so I don't mind doing it if people want to PM me their lists.
- clutch44
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 10:33 pm
- Location: Camarillo, CA
Great, I remember Archie being the first to volunteer and think he should get the shot. The main thing is for some definite timeframes for submission and turnaround. Could I suggest that lists be sent in by Aug. 10 and published by Aug. 15. If Archie cared to continue with the 70's list afterwards, great if not I'll volunteer to do it as long as the lists are sent in by Sept. 1. I don't mean to be pushy on this, just enjoy the work that has been done on this and want to see it continue. Thoughts?
- Gregory
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm
I'm traveling abroad until around the end of next month and have only intermittent computer access, so I`d hoped that we`d continue the past custom of leaving a month or two of time between the completion of one list and the deadline for the next. I don`t mean to be selfish, but I have enjoyed participating in this project so far. Also, because I´m away from my computer where my 1960s list is saved, I won`t be able to re-send it to Archie. Tedcogs, if you see this, I`d very much appreciate it if you could PM my 1960s list back to me.
- duane hall
- Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:18 am
- Rufus T. Firefly
- Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:24 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Okay, I have received 7 lists so far. I will go with Clutch44's idea of a deadline of August 10 and will aim to publish by Aug 15, so that gives everyone 10 days. Late entries up to the publication date will be accepted, though obviously the earlier you get them in the better (for me).
As to future lists, I will see how onerous compiling the lists is before I put my hand up.
As to future lists, I will see how onerous compiling the lists is before I put my hand up.
- kieslowski_67
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 5:39 pm
- Location: Gaithersburg, Maryland
I am sending you the list this weekend.Archie Leach wrote:Okay, I have received 7 lists so far. I will go with Clutch44's idea of a deadline of August 10 and will aim to publish by Aug 15, so that gives everyone 10 days. Late entries up to the publication date will be accepted, though obviously the earlier you get them in the better (for me).
As to future lists, I will see how onerous compiling the lists is before I put my hand up.
- lord_clyde
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:22 am
- Location: Ogden, UT
- Rufus T. Firefly
- Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:24 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
OK, I have received lists from Langlois68, Solaris72, Hrossa, kieslowski, kieslowski_67, backstreetsbackalright, delmont, Brian Oblivious, jorencain, lord_clyde, ola t, Penny Dreadful, zedz, clutch44, Gregory, Michael, duane hall, Kambei, yoshimori and I'm also no longer waiting for Godot (sorry, couldn't stop myself).
If anyone else is intending to submit a list, you have until Sunday night Sydney time, which for those of you on the wrong side of the equator is about 2.5 days from now.
If anyone else is intending to submit a list, you have until Sunday night Sydney time, which for those of you on the wrong side of the equator is about 2.5 days from now.
- backstreetsbackalright
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:49 pm
- Location: 313
- ola t
- They call us neo-cinephiles
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 4:51 am
- Location: Malmo, Sweden
Archie just PM'd me that he wants to disqualify one of my entries because it was made for (and originally shown on) television. My impression was that anything that is a film in any reasonable sense would be eligible, no matter what length, genre, form of distribution, etc. What do other members think?
It's pretty common for television films to be shown theatrically outside their country of origin -- there are several examples by Fassbinder and Bergman, for instance. It seems very arbitrary to disqualify something that lots of people may have seen on the big screen just because its world premiere was on a small screen.
It's pretty common for television films to be shown theatrically outside their country of origin -- there are several examples by Fassbinder and Bergman, for instance. It seems very arbitrary to disqualify something that lots of people may have seen on the big screen just because its world premiere was on a small screen.
- Michael
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:09 pm
Same here. Three titles were disqualified: Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer, A Charlie Brown Christmas and How the Grinch Stole Christmas! I was heartbroken to replace those titles with the new ones since those holiday classics were an enormous part of my childhood. So if Ron Howard's shitty Grinch is eligible while Chuck Jones' classic with Boris Karloff isn't, that doesn't make sense to me.Archie just PM'd me that he wants to disqualify one of my entries because it was made for (and originally shown on) television. My impression was that anything that is a film in any reasonable sense would be eligible, no matter what length, genre, form of distribution, etc. What do other members think?
It's pretty common for television films to be shown theatrically outside their country of origin -- there are several examples by Fassbinder and Bergman, for instance. It seems very arbitrary to disqualify something that lots of people may have seen on the big screen just because its world premiere was on a small screen.
And I couldn't even imagine removing Fassinder's made for TV film Martha from my already composed '70s list. So what should I do ?! I thought movies of all kinds were counted.
- Rufus T. Firefly
- Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:24 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
I was under the impression that there was a rule against it. Looking anew at the "official" rules there is no such rule. I think it requires discussion because I had the impression that the lists were aimed at cinema. Where would one draw the line if we allowed material originally made for and first shown on TV to be included? I recall a cinema here showing episodes of Star Trek, Alfred Hitchcock Presents and Lost in Space on the big screen. Should they be included?ola t wrote:Archie just PM'd me that he wants to disqualify one of my entries because it was made for (and originally shown on) television. My impression was that anything that is a film in any reasonable sense would be eligible, no matter what length, genre, form of distribution, etc. What do other members think?
It's pretty common for television films to be shown theatrically outside their country of origin -- there are several examples by Fassbinder and Bergman, for instance. It seems very arbitrary to disqualify something that lots of people may have seen on the big screen just because its world premiere was on a small screen.
I'm happy to go with the herd, or with an adjudication by Matt, or whatever.
It's probably a moot point however, given that none of the titles in question would make the top 100 anyway. For what it's worth, the titles I have questioned of various persons are:
Culloden
A Charlie Brown Christmas
How the Grinch Stole Christmas
It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown
Rudolph The Red-Nosed Reindeer
- Matt
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm
We never really had to deal with this question before since television was not really a factor in the earlier lists. We've been pretty liberal with qualifications, though, so I think it's fair game. Let's draw the line at commercials, though, but I think music videos will be fair game when the '80s list rolls around.
- lord_clyde
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:22 am
- Location: Ogden, UT
- backstreetsbackalright
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:49 pm
- Location: 313
I abhor it, only because it means it makes for a more difficult narrowing-down project for me. But objectively speaking, it's definitely the right thing to do. Maybe we should start a thread on music videos, to get our brain juices flowing...lord_clyde wrote:Music videos you say? I like that ruling.
A question: What about television series? Mini-series? What's the thinking on those?