>what! that's exactly what is taking place when the
>archive/canon is from specific eras and groups of people. it
>excludes the voices of the multitude. this is what happened in
>literature from the 1920s to 1980s. the "othered" voices had
>to write against the canon, specifically because the list of
>the "best of" stuck to a particular voice or style

This year, there were around 850 people from all over the world who voted in the poll (way up from like 200 people last time). I don't know what the racial/generational breakdowns are, but I would assume that this is the most inclusive & diverse voting body they've had.

The other thing you need to consider: the bigger and more diverse they make the voting body, the *less* diverse the list will be - while more a greater number of (presumably newer & more diverse) movies will get votes, those votes will essentially be diluted and split amongst a wide field, and the established classics with wide appeal/respect will still hit the most ballots.

(EDIT: To put this in perspective, out of 846 ballots, Citizen Kane got 157 votes. In other words, over 81.5% of people DIDN'T vote for it, and it came in 2nd. The more people vote, the less fluid the list will be.)

The other thing, as people have been pointing out, the list *is* getting younger. It's moving slow as shit, but it's definitely still moving. This year there is a greater percentage of movies from the 70s or newer, and a lower percentage of movies from between the 20s, 30s, and 40s. Even the #1 movie is almost 2 decades younger than the previous #1.

>>I certainly don't think younger people should simply nod in
>>agreement with what the greats are. But if we want to talk
>>truthful, how many great movies have been in made in a
>20-year
>>old's lifetime that seriously rivals great films that
>predate
>>them?
>
>actually quite a few.

I agree that there are newer movies that are supremely well-made, but I don't have any problem with making them earn their spot on the list. The reason The Godfather movies are still popular after 40 years is because they hold up. They're as good today as they were 40 years ago. They're proven they're classics. Let the newer movies prove they hold up and that they're worthy.

>i was exaggerating, but i meant it more along the lines of
>what Crank is saying about film as it exist today, than how is
>works in totality. but yes there is elements of Crank that are
>great. It works as violent action satire of contemporary
>culture and movies, as Robocop did with the laissez fair
>capitalism of the 80s. but that's another conversation.

What would you take off the list in favor of Crank?