In front of a survey on "The Fifteen best films in History" (with opinions of users of FilmAffinity and IMDB) two basic observations can be made. The first is simple: appeal to a simple comparison. From survey it is deduced that Godfar (I and II) are best films in history; And that third best is twelve merciless men. To mention remaining twelve would be tiring, so go first question. Are two godfars really best movies in history? Better than, to cite some, Stroheim greed, that Murnau Nosferatu, Ordet of Dreyer, Ford Desert centaurs or M of Lang? Would each and every one of respondents subscribe to same preference individually and argued? And, by slightly curling curl, are godparents better than psychosis (fourteenth position) of Hitchcock or modern times (thirteenth) of Chaplin?
It can be answered rightly that result of a survey is a statistical bundle and refore individual interpellation is out of place. And here comes second approximation. A survey on film (or on painting or literature, both da; What is best novel in history?)) lacks valid answers, unless y resort to a structure similar to that proposed by Andrew Sarris for directors (quality Strata, formed by Several names, of decreasing importance). But a survey has primary commercial goal of confrontation and dissent. He who examines results seeks to contrast — and reject — reference he is offered. The surveys on best ... aim to exploit impulse to rejection of observer, according to model of confrontation in force in Spain: "This (or se) does not have (n) no idea".
The secondary objective is not conscious, but it is presented as a clear and inevitable effect. The surveys, especially if y refer to products of great consumption and with history (like cinema), reflect mainly age and experience of those who respond; His happy memory and his life time. A contemporary reader, questioned about what is best novel in history, will hardly think of Matw Bandello or Apuleyo. There is a selection preinstalled in viewer (and in reader) determined by his knowledge of what is intended and by guidelines established by consensus between Spectator and a critique that tends to replace analysis by personal taste and Nincompoop mythology (see Star Wars).
The surveys, while not serving to structure reasonable quality standards, are useful for detecting dominant consensus between spectator and critique; Limited, yes, by memory. You will have to pass a generation before asked ones forget The Godfar (very respectable, by way) and instead construct, even statistically, a response that is both classic for memory of who answers and consistent with trend Dominant of his time.
You can follow country opinion on Facebook, Twitter or subscribe here to Newsletter.