What should the next countdown be?

But if I recall correctly, he did say that he considers Fido, Bubba Ho-Tep, and Army of Darkness as horror, even though he said they are "light on horror." All three of those movies are horror comedies.

This kind of nonsense is exactly why I said doing it any way other than using IMDb as the baseline is too vague and confusing.

Does a film have to be horrifying to be horror? That's not something that can even be applied universally.

Take for instance Arachnophobia, also a horror comedy. I'm not horrified by it, but I guarantee gbgoodies would be.

__________________

Once Bitten is like Stripes, obviously a comedy. The problem is that sometimes people look at their favorite movies and try to give reasons to include them even if they know better. There's 4 movies that I love that would make my top 10, that some will argue as horror, that I don't believe in as horror. Why would I do that if I wasn't trying to do the right thing?

Yup! she would be.

I don't claim to have the best answer, I'm just brain storming in the hope Nosto will be inspired to come up with a solution that works for most MoFos.

I know one thing: if he has to analyze every film submitted on a list to determine if it's horror enough or not, he's going to make a whole lot of work for himself! and end up hating the job.

For that reason alone, if I was the host I would go the easy route and say if it's tagged horror at IMDB it's in. If it's not tagged we can talk about it.

Best solution in my mind, and I think the big one that's not labeled horror is Jaws. I don't think it's horror myself, yet I'd probably vote to allow its inclusion just because I can understand why others do, and that's all it really takes.

2000s. I now we have a millennium list, but it has films from 2010 and even 2011. I want a clean one!

+ It's also a list anyone can participate in.

__________________
Cobpyth's Movie Log ~ 2019

That's messed up, definitely should be done over right some time.

Exactly.

Technically all the lists based on Decades are wrong.


A decade starts with a year ending with a 1.
As in, the first year of the first ever decade, was 0001.


So, the MoFo Top 100 of the 1980s, should have movies from the years 1981-1990, not 1980-1989...... the 1990s list should be 1991-2000, not 1990-1999.

__________________

I already sent @Nostromo87 several cases of beer and a strip-o-gram so that he'd alter the results and place The Devil's Rejects in the top five of the countdown, so I'm sticking with horror.

__________________

Wassup dog

You are wrong. Merriam Webster doesn't define it like that.

1st century is 0-99
2nd century is 100 to 199
3rd century is 200 to 299

the decade would be 0-9, 10-19, 20-29, 30-39, etc.

my two cents on how the next few years should be scheduled:

1st half 2019: horror
2nd half 2019: pre-30's
1st half 2020: 2010s
2nd half 2020: all-time
1st half 2021: non-english (or any genre, idc)
2nd half 2021: 2000s

around the end of the horror list (or whatever genre is chosen) there should be a count of potential voters for a pre-30s list, and if it seems like there's not enough, then i think we should do another genre list. i think it's important to do the 2010s list before a new all-time and obviously we'd have to wait for the decade to be over to do that one. then we can repeat the cycle of redoing the decade lists alternating with different genres

__________________
letterboxd
criticker

Directly from Wiki:
In the AD year numbering system, whether applied to the Julian or Gregorian calendars, AD 1 is preceded by 1 BC. There is no year "0" between them, so a new century begins in a year which has "01" as the final digits (e.g., 1801, 1901, 2001). New millennia likewise are considered to have begun in 1001 and 2001.


And from https://www.timeanddate.com/counters/mil2000.html


In 1999, the world was preparing for the New Year's party of a lifetime. The year number in the Gregorian calendar was about to tick over to 2000, supposedly ushering in not only the 21st century but also the 3rd millennium AD.
However, the party was held one year too early—it should have been on January 1, 2001.

it's not called the "top 100 of the 193rd decade," it's called the "top 100 of the 1930s."

nm u

(okay but what's the standard for blockbusters anyway, does it have to make X amount of adjusted-for-inflation money to be eligible or what)

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

While we wait for nostro's answer about the parameters, I thought I'd throw in this little quote I found from Joe Dante about why Steven Spielberg chose him to direct Gremlins:

"It was a horror comedy, basically, and I think that's probably what led him to think of me to direct it, since I had just done The Howling which is sort of in the same vein."

It's from the DVD commentary for the 2007 Special Edition release of Gremlins.

We need a 2000s list before we need a 2010s list. It's better to let the cinematic decade fully sink in for a while. That way the films from 2019 will also have a fair chance.

Since when has wiki been a reputable source

We could do more than only 2 countdowns per year.

Not all of the countdowns have had long 'watch times'. I had a 5 month watch period for the 1930s...But for more popular genre countdowns many people won't spend a lot of time watching films anyway but will send their list in quickly.