MovieChat Forums > La meglio gioventù (2003) Discussion > Why isn't this in the top 250?

Why isn't this in the top 250?


Help me understand this. This movie has an average score of 8.4 with aprox. 8,400 votes. Now take Sherlock Jr. for instance - that movie has an average score of 8.4 as well, but with significantly fewer votes (aprox. 7,000). Given that, shouldn't this movie be scoring higher overall than Sherlock Jr.? Why is it that this movie is out of the top 250 list, and f.i. Sherlock Jr. is in?

reply

ye its weird, maybe they only update the top 250 every so often?...its sad too because i only found out about this film from the recommendations of the movie 'Veronica Guerin' and it was the only one of those i hadn't seen...glad i saw it...

reply

Maybe they consider it a mini-series.
Dunno.

reply

Only votes from the top 1000 voters count for the top 250. This means that the movie might be rated lower than 8.4 if you count only the top voters' votes.

reply

Wrong. Votes from "regular voters" are considered. No figures are revealed regarding this, but it's many, many more than the Top 1000 voters.

reply

"Sherlock Jr." has an 8.0 rating from the Top 1000 voters (367 votes).

"Best of Youth" has a 7.1 rating from the Top 1000 voters (196 votes).

"Kaze no tani no Naushika" (#250 of the top 250) has a 7.2 rating from the Top 1000 voters (391 votes).

So one might assume a film would have to be rated higher than 7.2 by the T1kVs in order for it to rank...

But...

A film like "Iron Man" that has a 7.3 rating from the T1kVs (702 votes), nearly double the T1kVs votes for "Kaze no tani no Naushika", still won't appear in the Top 250...

And "The Godfather" (#2 of Top 250) has an 8.9 rating (882 votes) that's higher than the "Shawshank Redemption" (#1 of Top 250) rating of 8.5 (884 votes) but is still #2 to Shawshank's #1...

So uhh...

WTF is my take on the Top 250.

reply

They do publish the formula for the top 250, you know? It's at the bottom of the page. I haven't checked if the results reflect the formula, but I would guess they do...

reply


didomusic 2 days ago (Mon Jan 10 2011 19:37:17)
Only votes from the top 1000 voters count for the top 250. This means that the movie might be rated lower than 8.4 if you count only the top voters' votes.



IMDB now states for the Top 250, "only votes from regular voters are considered." When did they switch from the top 1000 to regular?


by - didomusic on Wed Jan 12 2011 20:20:23
They do publish the formula for the top 250, you know? It's at the bottom of the page. I haven't checked if the results reflect the formula, but I would guess they do...


I used that formula.

Best of Youth ends up with 8.2214462956
and
Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind ends up with 8.2181230296

But I don't know how many votes are removed because they're not "regular" and IMDB still maintains that their exact methods will not be disclosed.

So my take is still WTF... but it doesn't matter to me. I love the films I love regardless of their ranking.

reply

That's weird about them switching to regular users, maybe it's to stop voting abuse?

In any case the formula is ok for most movies, I think except for the most popular ones... popular movies have people come from the cinema and throw 10's at everything and half-decent movies can end up near the top.

reply

Yeah. It's good enough and I like the rating type breakdowns for individual movies.

I just can't imagine that more users have ballot stuffed/registered multiple accounts or employed other methods to skew the ratings of a non-blockbuster film like "Best of Youth" than users have skewed the rating of the likes of "Mary and Max"... but oh well.

reply

A movie needs over 25.000 votes to enter in top 250.

reply

I understand the whole ratings thing and I'm often saddened when amazing films such as this are not in the Top 250. I'm saddened that so many people are missing out on this very approachable and brilliant film.

But it all boils down to numbers. Or in this case, lack thereof. It's simple: the more people that watch this movie, the more 8's, 9's, and 10's will be awarded and this film will then rise into the Top 250.

So let's spread the word! I have. It's on my FLF list below.


ROTA Top Foreign Lang. Films: http://www.imdb.com/list/qQvbXmXhhCU/

reply

I think far too many people put too much weight into the top 250. It's a solid list for beginners to delve into film but not the end-all be-all when it comes to movies.

reply

Yeah, I agree with that, and this wasn't really meant as a "this movie is so good it must be in the top 250" sort of thread. I just don't understand the calculations it's based on, and why this isn't represented when, in my logic, it has a higher score than a lot of the movies in the top 250.

reply

Yes, this is exactly true. Nearly 20 years ago, when I started discovering independent films and a lot of old great Hollywood films, the IMDB Top 250 was a great source. I had seen maybe 50 of them at the time. I now am typically at 245 or so of the Top 250, only missing a few new films (A Separation, Moonrise Kingdom and The Untouchables at the moment). It was a great list to start off from, but I voted 3-5 for a reasonable number of films because I just didn't enjoy them.

reply

there is a minimum number of votes required to be in the top 250, this number is current 25000, its gonna be a long time before this gets there, great movie though

reply

the answer must be that imdb is paid a handsome amount to keep some movies in the top 250

reply

Did you read the comment above yours?

He's correct, the minimum number of votes is 25.000

I'll see you at the movies

reply

stupid.. funny you jsut ignore what was said above you..

conspiracy nut

reply