How do you organize your collection?

[Hillside Trece]

Originally Posted by Scooter1836

There are several accepted methods of alphabtization (for English). The one that is aceppted the most places numerical titles up front and goes character by character.

I understand. I realize there are really two ways to do "numeric alphabetizing" and that is put them all BEFORE the "A"s of a collection begin, or spell them out to be placed within the alphabetic catalog -- i.e. "300" would go under "T" for "THREE Hundred"...

So for example "2001: A Space Oddesy" is before "The 6th Day"

This is where I get a bit razzled -- I'm wondering if the numeric titles should go into ascending literal order, the opposite of the example you give above...

For example, "1408" and "2012" would go towards the end of a numeric catalog because the numbers are in the THOUSANDS, even though they BEGIN with "1" and "2"...follow?

So, let's say you have a bunch of numeric titles...would the best way to go be:

1408
2012
30 Days of Night
40 Year Old Virgin
88 Minutes

Etc.

OR:

30 Days of Night
40 Year Old Virgin
88 Minutes
1408
2012

Etc. ?

However a title like "(500) Days of Summer" is before 2001 since the initial character is the "(".

Hmmm...that's weird to me...

It wouldn't just go under the "5"s area of the catalog?

Also ignoring articles and apostrophies. Articles ignored even if they are forign. So for example "Das Boot" goes under "B" and "Das" is ignored since it is a german article.

This I was aware of -- ignoring "The" and "A/An" -- but I wouldn't have even thought of your example of "Das Boot" to ignore the "Das"...I suppose that makes sense...

[Hillside Trece]

Originally Posted by Movie Nut

Agreed,

Go with what seems natural for YOU. For instance I group numerical titles in numerical order. I just think it's way easier to find them that way. So 9 comes first, then 12 Monkeys, 28 Days Later, 30 Days of Night, 300, 400 Blows, 500 Days of Summer, 2001 A Space Odyssey, etc. By far the easiest way to find numbered titles.

Okay, so this is closer to what I wanted to know -- you do them by LITERAL ASCENDING order, thus it doesn't matter if something starts with "1," as in "1408," you will put the title in literal ascending position...

That's interesting. It seems most do it the other way -- that is, grouping the "1"s together, the "2"s together (for example, "1408" then "2012" then "30 Days of Night" etc.)...

[crazyBLUE]

Originally Posted by Hillside Trece

Okay, so this is closer to what I wanted to know -- you do them by LITERAL ASCENDING order, thus it doesn't matter if something starts with "1," as in "1408," you will put the title in literal ascending position...

That's interesting. It seems most do it the other way -- that is, grouping the "1"s together, the "2"s together (for example, "1408" then "2012" then "30 Days of Night" etc.)...

Trece.

You have had what ~ 2 different threads asking the same thing about numerical titles already. Lets not turn this into one...

[Agent Bond]

Alphabetical, its just easier that way.

[Hillside Trece]

Originally Posted by crazyBLUE

Trece.

You have had what ~ 2 different threads asking the same thing about numerical titles already. Lets not turn this into one...

I'm not turning it into anything; this is the "how do you organize" thread, correct? I just wanted to know how they chose to do it with numerical titles of theirs.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by crazyBLUE

Trece.

You have had what ~ 2 different threads asking the same thing about numerical titles already. Lets not turn this into one...

We have the same problem with the guy over at HDF. He loves to talk about nothing and has an ego larger than George Lucas.

[Hillside Trece]

Originally Posted by Agent Bond

Alphabetical, its just easier that way.

Hey, Bond...

Do you have any pics of your HT setup in Vegas?

[mitch22]

I sort them by genres and directors pretty much, non alphabetized.

[crazyBLUE]

Originally Posted by Hillside Trece

That's how I do mine too, Mr. Bay!

What do you do with your numerical titles?

As soon as you made this post you did ~ End of discussion

[Hillside Trece]

Originally Posted by crazyBLUE

As soon as you made this post you did ~ End of discussion

I didn't "turn it into" a thread ONLY about numerical titles from that one post -- you're wrong. It was merely a conversation I was trying to spark about it WITHIN this existing thread. No other intentions there.

Indeed...end of discussion.

[TwntyOneTwlv]

My blus are alpha, with numerical titles sitting in front in ascending order (as if on a number line - 3:10 to Yuma, 28 Days Later, 127 Hours, 1408.. etc).

If (when) my collection grows, I may switch over to studio or genre. Genre would be pretty cool, but I don't have nearly enough blus for that right now.

My poor DVDs are all scattered round the house with little care.

[Mr. DuLac]

Here's a couple of questions for some of you. To the people that put sequels together, even if they wouldn't follow (Da Vinci Code/Angels & Demons, Batman Begins/Dark Knight, ect...) you obviously put the movies in order by production year... wondering what some of you do with prequels. Do you put them before the original movie cuz it's a prequel, or after by production year... Here's a few examples:

Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning
Underworld: Rise of the Lycans
The Alien Vs Predator movies
Where will the Thing prequel go?
ect....

[neoz]

By Studio

[coolmilo]

My system is getting very complex, perhaps because I have several locations with limited space.

I have a section with all animated CGI movies such as Bolt and Rio.

I have another section for TV series such as True Blood and Rome.

I have another section for comic book movies (all the DC and Marvel movies) which is my favorite section.

Next, I have another rack containing the rest of my collection in alphabetical order.

I just started a Star Wars section including the Clone Wars movies.

Finally, I have a section that includes the moves still in the shrink wrap. The other side of this shelf contains my foreign movies collection and on the other side of that collection includes calibrations discs.

[GuyOfOwnage]

Film Blu-rays are organized first by genre, with each genre in alphabetical order. Then, within each genre, each subgenre is organized in alphabetical order. Then, of course, each film within each subgenre is organized in alphabetical order. Of course, the genre and subgenre classifications are at my own discretion, so chances are not everyone would agree with how I classify certain films. TV Blu-rays are on a separate shelf, but organized in the same manner.

[blufellas]

Box Sets
Criterions
Digi Books
Pixars
Bonds
the rest Alphabetically

[andyman1970]

Alphabetically for the most part, but I do have them seperated by digibooks/packageing together, then regular cases, Criterion titles, concert discs, and box sets.

[Scooter1836]

But given that it has the same name and so many years later, wouldn't it be classified as a remake?

[Mr. DuLac]

Originally Posted by Scooter1836

But given that it has the same name and so many years later, wouldn't it be classified as a remake?

It could I guess... except it's telling the specific story of the events that happened before the original that are alluded to when MacReady flies to the Norwegian outpost and finds what's left from the chaos. You even see "split-face" in the trailer .

[Scooter1836]

Originally Posted by The Outsider

It could I guess... except it's telling the specific story of the events that happened before the original that are alluded to when MacReady flies to the Norwegian outpost and finds what's left from the chaos. You even see "split-face" in the trailer .

Yeah but the original "The Thing" (1951) did start with them finding the space craft and getting it out of the ice. Although it was set in a US outpost.

So in that way it seems more of a remake to the original than the 1981 version was. I am just suprised they would keep the same name for a prequel.

In the original (1951) they killed it. So we may need to see how this one ends to see if they intended it to be a prequel. If they left it open that it escaped and there are enough survivors to chase it.

Given that it is 30 years hence, it may just be closer to a remake to the 1951 version.