I have a contradictory relationship with the pop culture/media list. While I love them in a way, I rarely find the numbering to be accurate. Maybe it has nothing to do the veracity of a given list but the idea of there being a hierarchy. Often the list consists of obvious choices at the top and preferential jockeying at the bottom.
Does anyone bat an eye when they see Night of The Living Dead, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Halloween atop a horror list? The filtering of any given list can shake it up. This never quite works for me though. If I make a list called Best of 70s horror, I’d still have trouble assigning numbers. This leads me to consider any list I make to be in no particular order. I am trying to plot a fleeting sensation. I may think the aforementioned three to be classics but that doesn’t mean I want to list them. (More on this in part two)
The trajectory I like to chart is not one I have already traveled. I want new kicks! I understand the idea of giving credit to the classics but when I read lists I am looking for something I missed, a constellation not yet charted. An easy list is just affirmation of what we all “know”.
It is a common assumption of this knowledge which causes all the problems. While I enjoy horror films from all decades, I am hesitant to call myself a fan. Fan is, after all, short for fanatic. This does not denote that you are particular instead the implication is the opposite. I am predisposed to horror so movies in this genre generally mod up.
Genre bias does not make two fans equivalent. It is a necessity of the marketer to consolidate fans into a type. From music to actors to product placement, this typing drives decisions. Often the false equivalency limits a list’s contents to all the usual outposts along the edge of the imagination.