The Movie Forums Top 100 Horror Movies

→ in
Tools    





In fact, those fights revealed to me that Funny Games is listed as horror (which put me in a conundrum HOOO BOY. Always thought I was alone in considering it horror so was prepared to leave it off.....).



I know it will never change. But this way, people can't argue about it until the end which they were going to do anyway. Everyone's choices would be private until the end, and there's no obligation to post each individual one when this thing is done.



Case in point: RT lists Gremlins as horror. Were you aware some people really hate the idea that Gremlins is horror? So right off the bat, I guarantee some people would be mad about that.

YEP. I wouldn't ever list Gremlins as a horror but when I saw it get so much support, I decided my list would be NASTY to make up for the cute.

Just pick a nasty as **** movie instead of Aliens.



How the hell are Aliens and Nightmare Before Christmas not counted as horror movies on Imdb? Honestly that rule should be reevaluated because that's bull****.
Better yet, you could have also used Rotten Tomatoes, who actually have official genre lists. They do lists decided on by the staff, or critics, or even the community. They are far more reliable.
The other movie you are so wanting to vote for, Nightmare Before Christmas, is not tagged as eligible on Rotten Tomatoes.




I think I see the problem now. Your suggestions seem to come from the assumption that the primary issue is people not being able to vote for what they want. That is certainly one of the problems, maybe the biggest one, but it's not actually the only one.

When you allow people to vote for whatever, we have an inverse problem: people threaten to boycott the list! They simply don't participate. This, too, has come up again and again. They think it's stupid that Gremlins (or some horror-action hybrid film) is eligible so they just opt-out. There's not just pushing coming from people who want to vote for more, there's also pushing coming from people who think restricting options is the whole point of a genre list to begin with, and they don't like it sullied with some horror-comedy (or whatever). They don't just vote anyway and then debate after, as you say. That would be fine. They just don't participate at all.



I think The Hitcher is horror and it would be on my list but it's not tagged that way. It's only 1 out of 25 for me so it's a small sacrifice.

I also think voting for Take Shelter is silly regardless of how it's tagged.



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
I know a lot of people turn in their lists last minute, but the lack of lists already in is looking a bit scary (no pun intended).



I know a lot of people turn in their lists last minute, but the lack of lists already in is looking a bit scary (no pun intended).
Eh, it's not too far from the last couple. Genre lists in particular are like this.

We'll just have to frighten more people into it.



I also don't agree with the decision that Nostro made regarding eligibility, but - with the deadline just 9 days away - all this arguing is absolutely pointless. You're way too late, man. Just compile a list of eligible films - double check the actual IMDb site rather than Google - and PM it to Nostro.



I think I see the problem now. Your suggestions seem to come from the assumption that the primary issue is people not being able to vote for what they want. That is certainly one of the problems, maybe the biggest one, but it's not actually the only one.

When you allow people to vote for whatever, we have an inverse problem: people threaten to boycott the list! They simply don't participate. This, too, has come up again and again. They think it's stupid that Gremlins (or some horror-action hybrid film) is eligible so they just opt-out. There's not just pushing coming from people who want to vote for more, there's also pushing coming from people who think restricting options is the whole point of a genre list to begin with, and they don't like it sullied with some horror-comedy (or whatever). They don't just vote anyway and then debate after, as you say. That would be fine. They just don't participate at all.

People would threaten to boycott a list if their things don't get on. I've seen it happen. Boycotted lists may be ineligible too, and I don't doubt some people have refused to post because of this. But using horror-specialized sources to back it up, different story.



I also don't agree with the decision that Nostro made regarding eligibility, but - with the deadline just 9 days away - all this arguing is absolutely pointless. You're way too late, man. Just compile a list of eligible films - double check the actual IMDb site rather than Google - and PM it to Nostro.

I can't be the only user here who's gone through the change in genres with a movie. And users suffering for a serious flaw in logical error is something that must be fixed, or really just improved a bit. I won't cause any more problems regarding this list, but I can promise you a lot of heated debates will arise when new users see so many classics left off. They'll call it a bull list and unreliable. People complain, and I'd rather take the side of those who believe in freedom.



the samoan lawyer's Avatar
Unregistered User
<br />
<br />
<br />
That is NOT good enough. Aliens was eligible. It's completely unfair to me (and everyone participating) if they're going through Imdb's inability to properly genre tag and label things if those things are going to change. If it was eligible then, there is no good reason fo it not to be eligible now. Technically spaking, if I was first making the list when the movie was eligible, it should still be eligible now.

ok



People would threaten to boycott a list if their things don't get on. I've seen it happen. Boycotted lists may be ineligible too, and I don't doubt some people have refused to post because of this. But using horror-specialized sources to back it up, different story.
Sure, different, but not better. Just different people mad about different things.

That's my whole point here: there is no better solution. People have fundamentally different opinions about how these should work, they cannot be resolved, so some choice has to be made to try to please people who don't agree. This distinction--between "here's the better way to do it" and "here's a way I personally would like more"--is what I've been pointing out this whole time.



Sure, different, but not better. Just different people mad about different things.

That's my whole point here: there is no better solution. People have fundamentally different opinions about how these should work, they cannot be resolved, so some choice has to be made to try to please people who don't agree. This distinction--between "here's the better way to do it" and "here's a way I personally would like more"--is what I've been pointing out this whole time.

The distinction I'm making is "the free way of doing it" and "the condensed way of doing it." I don't believe in a list that takes away freedom and I don't want this kind of thing overtaking our other lists here.



The distinction I'm making is "the free way of doing it" and "the condensed way of doing it." I don't believe in a list that takes away freedom and I don't want this kind of thing overtaking our other lists here.
"Takes away freedom" is a little grandiose, isn't it?

The opposite argument is that not letting anything be included means siding with "real" horror. That's a pretty valid argument, too: horror list by real horror fans! Etc. It also puts you on the side of wanting words to having meanings.

If you were just about "freedom," why have any criteria restriction? Freedom's great. Let someone add Gone With the Wind if they want. Why do you hate freedom?



Oh, I hate freedom? I'm only suggesting a criteria because people want one. If I had my whole way I wouldn't care what you put on as long as you don't troll with movies like Titanic. But since there are trolls, there safly do have to be some restrictions. I'm just lowering the severity.



The little face afterwards both winking and grinning suggests I was being facetious to make a point. Look at how facetious he looks: He's a rapscallion, that one. Look out for him.

I'm only suggesting a criteria because people want want. If I had my whole way I wouldn't care what you put on as long as you don't troll with movies like Titanic. But since there are trolls, there safly do have to be some restrictions. I'm just lowering the severity.
Precisely. This is my whole point: nobody hates freedom, or loves it less than you, or whatever. We all agree there have to be rules, there are just some totally honest and reasonable disagreements about their severity.

Literally the only thing I'm trying to convince you of is that the things you're suggesting, while potentially reasonable, would cause as many problems as they fix (including a few you probably haven't anticipated, because that always happens with any choice like this), so let's not pretend the choice that was made is some obvious error or flaw. It's a choice you don't personally like, and that's cool. Doesn't mean it wasn't really well-considered, and it doesn't mean the alternatives are better in total. I doubt there really is a true "better" either way with this many competing interests.



I know a lot of people turn in their lists last minute, but the lack of lists already in is looking a bit scary (no pun intended).
I'm looking for that Coach Boone spirit, man.

We've got several more in I've yet to add to my spreadsheet, then I'll update the votes submitted, with more to come. However it shakes out, whoever joins the game wants to do so and I'm happy with that any which way.