Interlude: Years
Ok, not that I've gone through 90 of my least favorite movies ever, its time for a little interlude. Not an interlude from lists or movies, but one nonetheless. You can expect random interludes like this throughout the unveiling of T-Biggs, so, umm, I dunno...
Anyway, I have analyzed which years are important cinematically. I've done this in two ways. First, the number of movies that I've seen from a given year, and second, the average ranking of a given year (10 movies minimum). Alright, here we go:
Here's the format. Year (# seen from that year)
23. 1930 (1)
1939 (1)
1945 (1)
1946 (1)
1947 (1)
1956 (1)
1958 (1)
1959 (1)
1963 (1)
1965 (1)
1972 (1)
22. 1956 (2)
1957 (2)
1960 (2)
1962 (2)
1967 (2)
1968 (2)
1973 (2)
1974 (2)
1976 (2)
1979 (2)
1982 (2)
21. 1964 (3)
1971 (3)
20. 1975 (4)
1981 (4)
19. 1977 (5)
1978 (5)
1983 (5)
18. 1980 (7)
17. 1984 (8)
1985 (8)
16. 1986 (10)
15. 1987 (11)
1988 (11)
14. 1989 (20)
1990 (20)
13. 1991 (22)
12. 1992 (24)
11. 2004 (34)
10. 1993 (36)
2002 (36)
9. 2001 (39)
8. 2003 (41)
7. 1995 (49)
6. 1994 (50)
5. 1997 (51)
4. 1996 (53)
3. 1998 (54)
2. 2000 (55)
1. 1999 (64)
Alright, that was actually kinda boring. Let's take a look now at the quality of movie year. So, I'm going to list the year, and then the average ranking of every movie I saw from that year. Remember, 10 movie minimum.
Alright, same format. Rank, movie, avg. ranking.
19. 1997 (460.63)
18. 2000 (452.02)
17. 1995 (449.75)
16. 1996 (441.38)
15. 1999 (440.98)
14. 1994 (439.98)
13. 1993 (438.42)
12. 1998 (406.61)
11. 2002 (405.42)
10. 1992 (391.20)
9. 2001 (369.41)
8. 1991 (348.73)
7. 1990 (341.80)
6. 2003 (340.02)
5. 1987 (330.18)
4. 1989 (290.7)
3. 2004 (273. 22)
2. 1986 (260.5)
1. 1988 (242)
That's right! 1988 is over all the best movie year in my life. Sure, its best movie is "The Last Temptation of Christ", but its worst is "Scrooged". That's a solid lineup. Not a lot of crap. I love dumb stuff like this.
Alright, I'm out.
posted by Lord Alex @ 6:35 PM
4 comments
4 Comments:
Alex,
I have relized through my interaction with normal people, that my own personal anaylsis does not make sense at all. So, even though it makes perfectly logical sense in one's own head, most people don't care to hear about or think about the logic behind the sense. Don't get me wrong, I love to analyze your analysis on several different levels at every second of the day, but the average person does not do this sort of rigorous analysis, nor want to think about comprehending someone else's rigorous analysis. So, keep it up, and keep frightening the less intelligent like I do on a day to day basis.
Dan
Also, if I asked you to design a Mathematica program that outputed any n-sided polygon, could you do it? If so, give me some hints. I have been working on this problem for the last two hours.
Leeder
Success!
I have completed the problem I posed earlier. They always seem so simple once you get the answer.
BOOYA!
Dano
Do you have, like, a spreadsheet or a database you're using for this?
Post a Comment
<< Home