+2
Righto.
I have to say though that if people are going to do it, then they have to do 100.
Otherwise the whole thing is compromised, as a huge amount of films won't even get a look in.
50 is not enough really, and 20 is awful. I can guess what most of any persons 20 would be. We all could. It's pointless and tells us nothing.
We all know what films are going to be Top 10, even if we don't know the order.
The really interesting stuff comes from the tallying up of less well known, less obvious films that have, none the less, made a person's Top 100 list and are special to those who pick them.
for example I'm sure "Son of Frankenstein" will make some showing on the 100 list of those who have seen it. But it probably won;t be Top 20, or perhaps even Top 50. That will go to the "Frankenstein" and "Bride of".
But we already know those are going to make it...what's interesting is where "Son of" comes in the list. But it won't even have a chance with fans of it, if the list is a short one.
100 or nothing I say...as it gives films a chance, adds variety, introduces scale and representation and ultimately validity to the whole thing, and levels the playing field.