- Messages
- 4,509
- Reaction score
- 8
- Trophy Points
- 48
@"Movieman53000" Your master list in numerical chronological order up until #45000 and then it's all random. Why is that?
Frantic Canadian said:@"Movieman53000" Your master list in numerical chronological order up until #45000 and then it's all random. Why is that?
Movieman53000 said:Frantic Canadian said:@"Movieman53000" Your master list in numerical chronological order up until #45000 and then it's all random. Why is that?
I was getting my missing counts so I sorted it that way. I will put it back to normal if you need me to.
Fixed
I had the 50,000 so you could see just the 50,000 that i was missing in order by number but resorted it to normal. I can sort my list so you see what I'm missing from lowest to highest or any thousand sequence you want just let me know. it will take a minute to open the list & a few minutes to sort it.Frantic Canadian said:Movieman53000 said:Frantic Canadian said:@"Movieman53000" Your master list in numerical chronological order up until #45000 and then it's all random. Why is that?
I was getting my missing counts so I sorted it that way. I will put it back to normal if you need me to.
Fixed
There's some years (2012-2016) that I have marked down as probably complete, meaning that I should have every number released during those years. I was going through 2016 rating-by-rating to verify that I wasn't missing any and I thought it would save me time if I just compared my list to yours. But when I saw that yours wasn't in order for that period I decided to just go through my list and write down any numbers I still needed and continue what I was doing but with a much smaller list to check. It's actually quite time-saving to do it this way as opposed to comparing it against my master list. And I'm glad I did it because I've already come across 7 numbers that didn't have. I must have missed a bulletin one week, I guess. As of right now I've got 29 missing numbers for the 50,000's. I'm about to start page 23 of 32 for the R's, though so I may find some more that I had missed.
Movieman53000 said:I had the 50,000 so you could see just the 50,000 that i was missing in order by number but resorted it to normal. I can sort my list so you see what I'm missing from lowest to highest or any thousand sequence you want just let me know. it will take a minute to open the list & a few minutes to sort it.Frantic Canadian said:Movieman53000 said:Frantic Canadian said:@"Movieman53000" Your master list in numerical chronological order up until #45000 and then it's all random. Why is that?
I was getting my missing counts so I sorted it that way. I will put it back to normal if you need me to.
Fixed
There's some years (2012-2016) that I have marked down as probably complete, meaning that I should have every number released during those years. I was going through 2016 rating-by-rating to verify that I wasn't missing any and I thought it would save me time if I just compared my list to yours. But when I saw that yours wasn't in order for that period I decided to just go through my list and write down any numbers I still needed and continue what I was doing but with a much smaller list to check. It's actually quite time-saving to do it this way as opposed to comparing it against my master list. And I'm glad I did it because I've already come across 7 numbers that didn't have. I must have missed a bulletin one week, I guess. As of right now I've got 29 missing numbers for the 50,000's. I'm about to start page 23 of 32 for the R's, though so I may find some more that I had missed.
I do not know how I could have missed those on filmRatings. I went through each year rating-by-rating twiceFrantic Canadian said:Movieman53000 said:I had the 50,000 so you could see just the 50,000 that i was missing in order by number but resorted it to normal. I can sort my list so you see what I'm missing from lowest to highest or any thousand sequence you want just let me know. it will take a minute to open the list & a few minutes to sort it.Frantic Canadian said:Movieman53000 said:Frantic Canadian said:@"Movieman53000" Your master list in numerical chronological order up until #45000 and then it's all random. Why is that?
I was getting my missing counts so I sorted it that way. I will put it back to normal if you need me to.
Fixed
There's some years (2012-2016) that I have marked down as probably complete, meaning that I should have every number released during those years. I was going through 2016 rating-by-rating to verify that I wasn't missing any and I thought it would save me time if I just compared my list to yours. But when I saw that yours wasn't in order for that period I decided to just go through my list and write down any numbers I still needed and continue what I was doing but with a much smaller list to check. It's actually quite time-saving to do it this way as opposed to comparing it against my master list. And I'm glad I did it because I've already come across 7 numbers that didn't have. I must have missed a bulletin one week, I guess. As of right now I've got 29 missing numbers for the 50,000's. I'm about to start page 23 of 32 for the R's, though so I may find some more that I had missed.
No, it's alright. I did find a couple of Not Rated films in your list that I didn't have though. I currently sit at 23 missing numbers for 50000 - 50999.
Also, you're missing the following two from your list:
50977 Status Update
50989 The Mountain Between Us
That should bring you to 24 missing.
Movieman53000 said:I do not know how I could have missed those on filmRatings. I went through each year rating-by-rating twiceFrantic Canadian said:No, it's alright. I did find a couple of Not Rated films in your list that I didn't have though. I currently sit at 23 missing numbers for 50000 - 50999.
Also, you're missing the following two from your list:
50977 Status Update
50989 The Mountain Between Us
That should bring you to 24 missing.
Frantic Canadian said:Well, this sucks. I'm going through the PG-13 rated films for 1984 and there should be 25 but for some reason the third page is showing up blank. There's 10 entries per page and the second page ends with Red Dawn. I've checked the IMDB for films released that year, set them alphabetically from Z-A, and still only managed to come up with three of the missing five. The ones I managed to find are The River, Runaway, and The Woman In Red.
Movieman53000 said:Frantic Canadian said:Well, this sucks. I'm going through the PG-13 rated films for 1984 and there should be 25 but for some reason the third page is showing up blank. There's 10 entries per page and the second page ends with Red Dawn. I've checked the IMDB for films released that year, set them alphabetically from Z-A, and still only managed to come up with three of the missing five. The ones I managed to find are The River, Runaway, and The Woman In Red.
I get the same thing. Yes, there should be 25 perhaps they will be their tomorrow. My big list list I work on does not have a rating column. I deleted it. I'm working adding the Year, Rating & movie Length to the title so I no longer have the rating column. I do not even have the release year column anymore. I no way to check it for you. It may be just a little glitch they may show up tomorrow.
FilmRatings is active since about 20 years ago. That glitch is there for a long time and it may never go away because the website is focusing on ratings of the upcoming films.Movieman53000 said:Frantic Canadian said:Well, this sucks. I'm going through the PG-13 rated films for 1984 and there should be 25 but for some reason the third page is showing up blank. There's 10 entries per page and the second page ends with Red Dawn. I've checked the IMDB for films released that year, set them alphabetically from Z-A, and still only managed to come up with three of the missing five. The ones I managed to find are The River, Runaway, and The Woman In Red.
I get the same thing. Yes, there should be 25 perhaps they will be their tomorrow. My big list list I work on does not have a rating column. I deleted it. I'm working adding the Year, Rating & movie Length to the title so I no longer have the rating column. I do not even have the release year column anymore. I no way to check it for you. It may be just a little glitch they may show up tomorrow.
Frantic Canadian said:My list is pretty basic. I use Wordpad documents. I've got one for every 1000 number sequence, one for the ones that start with 0, and then two for what I call "weird numbers". Those are the ones from the 70's and 80's that should be in the 20,000's but for some reason are only between 1 and 2000. Oh, and I've got one for what I call "problem numbers". That sheet is for numbers that aren't listed even though the MPPDA/MPAA logo is shown, numbers that are too small to be read, numbers where I'm uncertain of certain numbers, and movies that had their rating surrendered but still bear a number. The last ones are only on this list if the numbers aren't listed during the end credits or available online.
The only info I include on my lists are the certificate/approval numbers and the films titles. If the film has any alternate titles I will include it/them in parenthesis until I can verify which title is accurate. I've come across some where the main title the film is listed under isn't even the title the film was released under so I like to keep that info on hand just in case. If the film is foreign I will also include the film's original title in parenthesis. And if it's a case where an older film has received a new certificate/approval number because it was re-released then I will include that info in parenthesis as well. For example, the Alfred Hitchock film Rope was re-released, or re-issued as they list it, in 1984. So my entry for that film would look as follows:
27078 Rope (1984 re-release of 1948 film)
There are some instances also where two films with the same title will be released in the same thousand number sequence. In cases where that happens I just put the studio or distributor in parenthesis for both entries. That way I know which is which and I'm not wondering why I have two entries with the same title in the same sheet. It also helps in case I end up watching one of them. That way I know which one to mark off, or put in bold rather.
Frantic Canadian said:My list is pretty basic. I use Wordpad documents. I've got one for every 1000 number sequence, one for the ones that start with 0, and then two for what I call "weird numbers". Those are the ones from the 70's and 80's that should be in the 20,000's but for some reason are only between 1 and 2000.
MPAA Challenger said:I don’t find it that “weird”.
The ZERO numbers: (the ones that start with a zero), used mainly for foreign movies (mostly British), certain U.S. documentaries, and shorts from certain companies like Paramount (Popeye, Betty Boop, Superman…).
Frantic Canadian said:The only numbers I've ever come across that start with 0 were all assigned to shorts. I've never seen any assigned to foreign films or documentaries.
MPAA Challenger said:Frantic Canadian said:The only numbers I've ever come across that start with 0 were all assigned to shorts. I've never seen any assigned to foreign films or documentaries.
You should re-check the Dutch list. Dozens upon dozens of British films, at least one Italian, and several U.S. documentaries have Zero numbers.
MPAA Challenger said:There's even 2 American animation features that received Zeros:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0031397/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0033727/
Both are from "Fleischer Studios", the same factory that churned out hundreds of Popeyes, Betty Boops, Little Lulus, etc for Paramount., all of them Zero-certified as well. Seriously, I swear this animation studio alone monopolized half the zero certificate list.
MPAA Challenger said:Frantic Canadian said:The only numbers I've ever come across that start with 0 were all assigned to shorts. I've never seen any assigned to foreign films or documentaries.
You should re-check the Dutch list. Dozens upon dozens of British films, at least one Italian, and several U.S. documentaries have Zero numbers.