Welcome to the entertainment section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/E

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

November 14

Afraid of "ghosts"

Is the novel Dragon Teeth really written by Crichton himself ? 203.134.198.169 (talk) 09:51, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed your link. --69.159.60.147 (talk) 12:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think it wasn't him? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 10:05, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it makes sense to ask, considering his popularity and the publication almost 10 years after his death. Considering Crichton's popularity, if someone else actually had to do a large part of the writing, that's the sort of thing a publisher might conceal. As late as 4 or 5 years after Robert Ludlum died, novels with only his name on them were still appearing (see Robert Ludlum bibliography), but they contained a note such as "Since his death, the Estate of Robert Ludlum has worked with a carefully selected author and editor to prepare and edit this work for publication". --69.159.60.147 (talk) 12:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article, however, clearly states that it was written by him in 1974, long before his death. Publishing an extant manuscript is different from an estate of a deceased author authorizing some rando to write a book in his name. The question amounts to "was it really written in 1974"? If the sources say it was, that's all we have to go on. This source clearly states that it was published "from a manuscript written in the mid 1970s" --Jayron 32 16:34, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In some cases unpublished or even unfinished works by deceased famous authors get published, either because someone considers the work historically important, or to capitalize on the fame. Margaret Mitchell died in 1949, having only published one novel. Her biographers were aware that she had a number of unpublished manuscripts and made an effort to search for them. Some are probably lost for good, but they were able to locate a novella called Lost Laysen which Mitchell wrote when she was 15-years-old. It was published in 1996, 80 years following the date of writing and 47 years following Mitchell's deaths.

Similarly, Agatha Christie (who died in 1976), left a number of unpublished manuscripts. Those searching for them located a complete manuscript for a lost play called Chimneys (written in 1931). They decided to produce it for the stage, and the play had its world debut in 2003. 72 years following the date of writing, and 27 years following Christie's death.

A more peculiar case is the one with Robert E. Howard. He died in 1936, leaving behind a rather large number of stories which had been rejected for publication, and drafts for unfinished stories. Several authors took to revising the unpublished ones for publication and completing the unfinished ones. Due to backlash from so-called "purists" who felt the newer authors ruined Howard's work, there is an effort in recent decades to publish the unaltered original versions. This has resulted in 3 or 4 versions of the same story being in circulation.

Some music works are also "published" posthumously, even when the creator never intended to publish them. Ludwig van Beethoven composed Allegretto for Piano Trio, WoO. 39 as a personal gift for the daughter of one of his friends, and the work only existed in a single manuscript. Following Beethoven's death, a music historian tracked down the manuscript and published it. Dimadick (talk) 00:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In this context, Paris in the Twentieth Century deserves a mention. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:57, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As does John Kennedy Toole, all of whose works were published posthumously. --Jayron 32 12:59, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Novels published posthumously has them all. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:16, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a lot of them. "All" is probably not really approachable. --Jayron 32 20:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, all of the ones we have articles on, ok? It covers the ones that editors have been scatter-gunning at us, and a great many more besides. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:14, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"all of the ones we have articles on, ok" Assuming the relevant articles are correctly categorized. I often come across articles that have not been categorized at all. Dimadick (talk) 10:23, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes, I know all about Wiki-categorisation issues, but how about you folks just accept my contribution in the spirit in which it was given (helpful, positive, big picture ...), rather than subjecting it to endless nitpickery. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:06, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

how to write about a topic

if i want to write about a topic and i want people to comment how can i do it? ---- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silver baby (talk • contribs) 18:11, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In what context? --Jayron 32 20:05, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is what people use Facebook for, or a blog. As Jayron says, if you can provide more context we might be able to point you to something more suitable.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:47, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 16

Why would Beethoven sound more Nazi than Wagner?

In Pynchon's novel Gravity's Rainbow, a musician says: "a person feels good listening to Rossini. All you feel like listening to Beethoven is going out and invading Poland. Ode to Joy indeed. The man didn't even have a sense of humor."

Why blame Hitler on Beethoven rather than on Wagner? 62.147.24.85 (talk) 13:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's a fool's errand trying to expect everything in that novel to make sense. It's dense, allusive and not to be trusted. That said, there is no reason why the joke wouldn't work with Beethoven as well, since he was German and sounds pretty Teutonic. Incidentally, Woody Allen later made the same joke, but he did use Wagner: “I just can't listen to any more Wagner, you know...I'm starting to get the urge to conquer Poland.” --Viennese Waltz 13:31, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Pynchon himself expands upon the answer to that in the book. Taking a single line from the entire discourse out of context, as you have done, makes it impossible to elucidate what the author meant. The discouse between Gustav and Säure is more nuanced, and it is clear from context that Gustav is not saying that Beethoven sounds Nazi. It is very clear, if you actually read the whole discourse (which one can see quoted here), that he's speaking on the way that the composers reflect the "national personality" of Germany vs. Italy, and not making a statement on Fascism or Naziism in any meaningful way. It is also clear that Pynchon himself is not taking sides or presenting the statement as his statement. He's an author of fiction, and as such, the characters are presenting the statement, as a means to demonstrate something about themselves. It's also quite relevent that Gravity's Rainbow is a bit of absurdist literature and its text is dense and complex; it is frequently ranked up there with Finnegans Wake as among the most difficult to understand texts (the Pulitzer Prize Jury, in selecting Gravity's Rainbow as a candidate for the 1974 Prize, literally called it "unreadable". And that's from people who supposedly found it a good book!), and much of what Pynchon is writing is not to be taken at face value. --Jayron 32 13:35, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Beethoven didn't like Napoleon very well, so it's doubtful he would have liked Hitler. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:53, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Beethoven admired Napoleon and originally dedicated Symphony No. 3 (the Heroic Symphony) to him. He soon got disillusioned with his hero. According to our article:

"Beethoven originally dedicated the third symphony to Napoleon Bonaparte, who he believed embodied the democratic and anti-monarchical ideals of the French Revolution. In autumn of 1804, Beethoven withdrew his dedication of the third symphony to Napoleon, lest it cost the composer's fee paid him by a royal patron; so, Beethoven re-dedicated his third symphony to Prince Joseph Franz Maximilian Lobkowitz – nonetheless, despite such a bread-and-butter consideration, the politically idealistic Beethoven titled the work "Buonaparte". "
Later, about the composer's response to Napoleon having proclaimed himself Emperor of the French (14 May 1804), Beethoven's secretary, Ferdinand Ries said that: "Bonaparte, First Consul, by Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres In writing this symphony, Beethoven had been thinking of Buonaparte, but Buonaparte while he was First Consul. At that time Beethoven had the highest esteem for him, and compared him to the greatest consuls of Ancient Rome. Not only I, but many of Beethoven's closer friends, saw this symphony on his table, beautifully copied in manuscript, with the word "Buonaparte" inscribed at the very top of the title-page and "Ludwig van Beethoven" at the very bottom ... I was the first to tell him the news that Buonaparte had declared himself Emperor, whereupon he broke into a rage and exclaimed, "So he is no more than a common mortal! Now, too, he will tread under foot all the rights of Man, indulge only his ambition; now he will think himself superior to all men, become a tyrant!" Beethoven went to the table, seized the top of the title-page, tore it in half and threw it on the floor. The page had to be recopied, and it was only now that the symphony received the title Sinfonia eroica."
"An extant copy of the score bears two scratched-out, hand-written sub-titles; initially, the Italian phrase Intitolata Bonaparte ("Titled Bonaparte"), secondly, the German phrase Geschriben auf Bonaparte ("Written for Bonaparte"), four lines below the Italian sub-title. Three months after retracting his initial Napoleonic dedication of the symphony, Beethoven informed his music publisher that "The title of the symphony is really Bonaparte". In 1806, the score was published under the Italian title Sinfonia Eroica ... composta per festeggiare il sovvenire di un grande Uomo ("Heroic Symphony, Composed to celebrate the memory of a great man")."

Apparently Beethoven hated tyrants who violate human rights to serve their own ambitions, and who proclaim their own superiority. Dimadick (talk) 10:38, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FOLLOW-UP: I was after some actual link, such as, "Hitler listened to Beethoven while drawing his military plans" (MADE UP example) or something? I've read GR twice and the more you know or look into annots (such as http://www.1010.co.uk/org/autotate.html that goes beyond Weisenburger's Companion), the more you see how much weird stuff was actually an allusion to something prior, however esoteric or untrue. So why not here?

Of all the possible criticism the fan of Rossini could level at Beethoven, why would Pynchon have him use such a specific thing as "invading Poland"? (I mean, it's not just calling it bombastic or militaristic or only good for soldiers -- it goes all the way to the Godwin point.) Could there be some anecdote (real or debunked) linking Beethoven's music to the Nazis, that the character was referencing? 62.147.25.228 (talk) 11:57, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't. There is Pynchon being Pynchon. You're overanalyzing this... --Jayron 32 12:29, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Could there be some anecdote (real or debunked) linking Beethoven's music to the Nazis"

No idea. Several classical musicians in Nazi custody were send to the Theresienstadt concentration camp, where some of them performed and composed music prior to their executions. There are reports of at least 15 performances of Requiem by Giuseppe Verdi. No idea if they also performed Beethoven works.

The Auschwitz concentration camp had its own orchestra, the Women's Orchestra of Auschwitz, but I don't know what music they performed. There is a report that one of the doctors, Josef Mengele, asked the Orchestra to perform Träumerei by Robert Schumann for him. Dimadick (talk) 19:41, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I hesitate to get involved in this, but the OP has a point: "Much of Beethoven’s music was interpreted by Nazi critics as serving a German national myth marked by a certain belligerency. Arnold Schering suggested that the Fifth Symphony, for example, represented a “fight for existence waged by a Volk that looks for its Führer and finally finds it” An introduction to music research - 4.3 Beethoven and the Nazis from The Open University.

Those with time on their hands might like to read The Third Reich vs. An die Freiheit: Opposing Uses of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony in 20th Century German Society. Alansplodge (talk) 23:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Alansplodge, that led to a smoking gun: Hitler had "Ode to Joy" for his birthday in 1937 and 1942! (The characters arguing in 1945's Germany would have such things in mind, and that's probably why the Rossini fan was so specific -- that is, why Pynchon made him so.) Once you know what to look for, googling is easier:

"Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony was subject to some particularly interesting interpretations in Nazi Germany. Its closing choral section was performed at the 1936 Berlin Olympics, and it was heard in its entirety in a performance by the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra conducted by Wilhelm Furtwängler for Hitler’s birthday in 1937. This was at the specific request of Joseph Goebbels and, as the newspaper Der Angriff noted, the symphony was regarded as a perfect choice because “with its fighting and struggling” the work denoted the Führer’s capacity for “triumph and joyous victory” (Dennis, 1996, p. 162)." from http://www.open.edu/openlearn/history-the-arts/introduction-music-research/content-section-4.4
"In 1938, it was performed as the high point of the Reichsmusiktage, the Nazi music festival, and was later used to celebrate Hitler’s birthday." from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/24/opinion/24zizek.html
"The Ninth in the Third Reich became a victim of this entanglement of ideology and music. It was one of the most performed pieces in Beethoven's oeuvre during the Third Reich and was often played at prominent state events such as the opening ceremonies of the 1936 Olympics. The 1936 Olympic's instrumentalization of the Ninth was typical of the Third Reich's approach to the Ninth. Coming at the climax of a festival of Olympic Youth which blended a series of tableaux representing medieval and modern themes with some 10000 , the finale of "Heroic Struggle and Death Lament" featured mass dance routine of a sacrificial death for the fatherland, in which "Ode to Joy" would signal a rebirth accompanied by searchlights and a ring of fire around the stadium that created a dome of light." from https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3x7mrn/what_did_the_nazis_think_of_ode_to_joy_and_its/

Against zebras, Pynchon wins again... 62.147.27.236 (talk) 04:56, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conversely, the British Government (or at least the BBC) used the opening of Beethoven's Fifth as the signature tune of its efforts to raise resistance movements in occupied Europe, by virtue of a strange coincidence - see 'Music as a ‘psych-weapon. Much publicity was also given to concerts at London's National Gallery by Myra Hess, the programme "featured popular works by Beethoven, Mozart, Bach and Brahms" - see Myra Hess's wartime concerts - much was made in newsreels of British people being free to listen to German music. Alansplodge (talk) 00:16, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mozart was Austrian. And did "Germany" even exist during the lives of the Three B's? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:58, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As a modern state, no, but the concept of Germany as a nation is over a thousand years old. Putative German states include the Kingdom of Germany, which existed in some ephemeral form under the Holy Roman Empire until 1806, while the other German states include the German Confederation of 1815-1866 (usually adjudged in retrospection to be somewhat less-than-statelike) and the North German Confederation from 1867-1871, finally followed by the German Empire from 1871 onwards. Beethoven lived prior to 1806, so he for a time lived in the Kingdom of Germany. Bach lived his whole life under the Kingdom of Germany, while Brahms lived for the last 25 of his life under the German Empire. So every one of them lived under a legal state which was known as Germany, which ignores the very real fact that even if the state didn't exist for some of that time, the nation of Germany as a socio-cultural entity was very real and they all lived there as well. --Jayron 32 12:36, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Austria and Germany were the same country in 1941, see Anschluss. Alansplodge (talk) 22:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, Mozart was not around in 1941. In any case, trying to blame Beethoven for Hitler is like trying to blame Tchaikovsky for Stalin. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:43, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with here. Point a) is that "Beethoven, Mozart, Bach and Brahms" all originated from the area covered by Germany in 1941 and therefore might well have been considered to be the music of the enemy, but weren't (thus implying some moral ascendancy over the Nazis and their petty bans). This is not my argument, but that of the British Ministry of Information (I'm still looking for a source for that, apologies). b) As established above, Beethoven's music was used and abused by the Nazi regime and would made unpleasant connections for those who endured it. Nobody is "trying to blame Beethoven for Hitler". Alansplodge (talk) 11:23, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 18

17 Moments of Spring

Would it be accurate to refer to the Russian miniseries 17 Moments of Spring as being part of the Eurospy genre? 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:5917:3E80:D859:DF69 (talk) 10:59, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Based solely on the information from the links you provided, it seems the answer is "no". —2606:A000:4C0C:E200:C9A:4B44:2E28:1611 (talk) 08:32, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actors' names misspelled in film credits

I just sat down to watch Murder on the Orient Express (1974 film) on TV. I did see it at the movies at the time, but never since then. (I saw the 2017 remake last weekend and thought it would be good to compare notes.)

In the opening credits was the name "Colin Blankey" [sic]. That sounded suspiciously like Colin Blakely, and sure enough, it was the latter actor who played a role. In the closing credits, he was correctly named as Colin Blakely. This led me to wonder whether I'd misread the opening credits. Then I found this from IMdB, which confirmed I'd read it correctly, and it was definitely misspelled.

It also told me that Wendy Hiller's name was correctly spelled in the opening credits, but misspelled as "Wendy Miller" in the closing credits.

How often do film makers get the names of their actors wrong? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:25, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fairly often, apparently. Here's some instances that people at a Straight Dope message board came up with (many by searching for the word "misspelled" or "misspelt" in the category "goofs" on IMDb). Deor (talk) 19:27, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stunning. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The credits of a film are not particularly reliable sources. Besides errors, omissions, and misspellings, there are times when pseudonyms were used for the crew of the film, or someone else received the credit. In The Evil Dead most of the actors used aliases when credited. Cowboy (1958 film) credited Edmund H. North as the screenwriter, as a cover for the filmmakers. The actual screenwriter of the film was the blacklisted Dalton Trumbo, and his identity was revealed a few years later. Dimadick (talk) 15:44, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deliberately obscuring someone's true identity is not an error. Spelling errors are very common in these days of "progressive" education, but within living memory (= pre-internet and pre-spell checkers) they were considered unacceptable in any kind of professional output, including books, letters, journals, signage, and film credits. That was certainly the standard back in 1974. People used to rigorously check these things for accuracy, despite the fact that everything was typed on a typewriter and each page had to be retyped in its entirety if there was even one error (whiteout was sometimes used, but was inappropriate in many contexts). But obviously, some errors still crept through. I can only sympathise with Colin Blakeley's anguish when he saw his name as "Colin Blankey" in the film, which was a major blockbuster and targeted at the Oscars and BAFTAs from the outset. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:25, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I loved Christopher Wlaken in Annie Hall. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:03, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have a citation for the idea that spelling errors are less common in pre-spell-check media? I know more effort was put into preventing them, but this doesn't line up with my personal observations of old media. (Original anecdotal research : In older books, spelling errors seem more common, but in modern books, word-choice errors seem more common, presumably because they don't trigger red-squiggles?) ApLundell (talk) 16:55, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's a misleading claim, because until relatively recently, closing credits tended to be minimal. Now they seem to be a list of everyone who had any connection to the movie, maybe even including the pizza delivery guy. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:56, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"they were considered unacceptable in any kind of professional output, including books, letters, journals, signage, and film credits. That was certainly the standard back in 1974."

Blame it on our favorite demon, Titivillus: "He has been called the "patron demon of scribes," as Titivillus provides an easy excuse for the errors that are bound to creep into manuscripts as they are copied."

In Greece whenever a newspaper or magazine makes a major error due to typos, they humorously blame it on the "daimon tou typographeiou" (δαίμων του τυπογραφείου): the demon of the type printing machine. Dimadick (talk) 17:35, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pleased to make Titivillus's acquintance. Thanks -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:06, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Exhibition matches in cricket

Cricket pitch says the following: "Artificial pitches are rare in professional cricket, being used only when exhibition matches are played in regions where cricket is not a common sport." Is exhibition matches common in cricket? It strikes me as sounding American (e.g. exhibition games are played in American football, while association football plays friendly matches or friendlies), but I didn't want to change it myself, lest I change the right term to a wrong one. Nyttend (talk) 13:55, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - see, for example, this site. I can't immediately find a reference for this, but I would say there's a difference between a friendly and an exhibition match in cricket - a friendly is mainly for the benefit of the players (in terms of practice, etc), while an exhibition match is mainly for the benefit of the audience (to introduce otherwise-unfamilar spectators to the game). Tevildo (talk) 19:17, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Dictionary of Cricket (p. 27) by M.A. Pervez: "Exhibition match: A match which is not part of any tournament or series, but played solely for the purposes of promoting cricket in the area or raising funds".

See for example Cricket Exhibition at Citi Field Gets a Boost From Sachin Tendulkar (Citi Field is a baseball park in New York). Alansplodge (talk) 01:34, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, one of the MLB parks (not the Yankees). I saw bus shelter ads for that. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:24, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 19

Ventriloquist, and things they can do

It's generally written here and there, that these type of artists can "make anything talk", and they are able to "throw their voice". The ones I have seen are able to make the phenomenon credible because they have a dummy whose moveable jaw they are able to control with a hand with which they seem to be holding it. The movement of dummy's jaw, which is cleverly synchronized with the voice they produce without moving their own lips is what I think produces the illusion of dummy talking plus they are careful enough to make dummy's voice "cartoonish", and as much as possible different (from what the audience is supposed to assume) their own voice. So how come that even the world's greatest ventriloquist can make anything (say an idol) believably seem to talk. And how about throwing one's voice, if that's literally done and not a figure of speech. Jon Ascton (talk) 13:12, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(WP:OR warning) - I dabbled in ventriloquism in my youth, and it is part technique and part performance. One clue is from the name itself, which loosely translates as "belly speaking" (see article for more on the history, etc.). As far as "throwing" your voice is concerned, it is partly misdirection. The sound comes from someplace different from the person's normal speaking voice, and the ventriloquist simply focuses attention to the "object". Also, "belly speaking" is less of a point-source sound than "mouth speaking" and more resonant (sonorant?), making it difficult to identify exactly from where it originates. —2606:A000:4C0C:E200:4DAA:30DE:5ABC:A09C (talk) 03:17, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

People inside a giant wooden man, making it walk

I seem to recall watching a part of a movie, where all these tribal people are within a giant wooden man, making it walk across a beach or some other open field. Anyone have any idea, what movie that might've been? GoodDay (talk) 18:09, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Wicker Man (2 versions, the first by far the better) has a giant wooden man, but I don't recall it being made to walk. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:05, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In this movie, the big guy was filled up with people inside & they make it slowly walk. It's only a small scene. GoodDay (talk) 21:49, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I remember a shortstory by Clive Barker, named In the Hills, the Cities. In the film you are referring to, aren't there a couple of gays just hanging around in a rented car in some European country , doing "research work for their doctorate degree" ? No, the plot-feature as you describe does not suit the story itself exactly. But still I strongly recommend that you read this masterpiece. May be your film's loosely based upon it. Jon Ascton (talk) 14:36, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Synopsis: Books of Blood#In the Hills, the Cities —2606:A000:4C0C:E200:E958:86E3:541F:E7F1 (talk) 04:11, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, man, as you, I wanted to give link to the title of the what I consider greatest horror story ever written but couldn't since each time I did so it would occur in "red ink". It took time to conclude for yours truly that's happening because the story is not an independent page, and a part an independent page called "Books of Blood". And I didn't know how to link to such within-link.27.255.222.174 (talk) 18:01, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the hills, the cities, seems to be the movie/episode. Assuming this was on TV. GoodDay (talk) 03:42, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Information about Music Videos?

Is there an online source for music video details, similar to what IMDB is for movies? With the same sort of info: director, producers, actors (other than a band's members)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mekratrig (talk • contribs) 19:10, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How about IMVDb (Internet Music Video Database) & MVDbase (Music Video Database) ? —2606:A000:4C0C:E200:4DAA:30DE:5ABC:A09C (talk) 20:22, 19 November 2017 (UTC) ... The latter doesn't seem suitable to your needs, however[reply]

What's the least post-producted Billboard 100 or top 40 music video ever?

The song's recorded in a studio, autotuned and added after filming, even genres amenable to being played live like rock are probably recorded one instrument at a time and alerted a lot after and they probably often do things that don't need special effects with special effects just to save a little effort. Something very impractical like 200,000 extras or outer space I can understand but I'm guessing they often use special effects where other musicians have used the real thing (like Yanni who played concerts in front of the real Taj Mahal and Great Wall instead of a greenscreen). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:16, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe other unstaged (though directed) live performance/concert music videos such as e.g. "Don't You Wanna Stay" ("peaking at number one on the Billboard Hot Country Songs and at number 31 on the Billboard Hot 100"). ---Sluzzelin talk 21:24, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, I actually know that song even though it's country. So I guess they're not all "artist lip syncs while doing something cool or sexy") I wonder if they ever act a story while singing (not lip syncing) to the karaoke version playing on speakers behind the camera? (but that's probably asking too much) Than the director says cut! finally! remove the spider tank!, prepare the cow scene! take 1! Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:08, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Least post-producted" is not quantifiable. I'm not sure what reference, inside or outside of Wikipedia, you envision to have this data. Did you really think, before asking this question, that this is something which either a) had some meaningful way to quantify and b) that someone had done the necessary data collection to be able to devise a list of all known songs for which there would be a single song or video at the #1 position in that list for which we could refer you? --Jayron 32 12:14, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like me to delete this question? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:25, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've never said that. I'd like, since you've asked about my likes, for you to stop asking questions whose answers could not reasonably be found in Wikipedia articles or in external sources. --Jayron 32 19:23, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The video for "The Rock Show" (#2 year-end US Modern Rock hit and tenth in all of Scotland) reportedly cost half a million, but is made of the band spending the (purported) lion's share on cheaper things for non-SAG actors, presumably filmed on a relative garbage camera. Not sure if that counts, since the money still went to making the video aesthetically pleasing, even if it didn't sparkle like it should've (or whatever it would've). Bit of a philosophical quandary, and not a bad tune. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:27, November 23, 2017 (UTC)

November 21

Enos on talk-variety show

In early March of 1984, Sonny Shroyer appeared on a talk-variety show. He was dressed as his character, Enos Strate. Anybody remember what talk-variety show I'm trying to remember?2604:2000:7113:9D00:E489:B375:36EB:1AC5 (talk) 12:38, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to meet your requirements. It's from Pop! Goes the Country, I think. The show only aired until 1982, but otherwise it's the best I can find. The host there is clearly Tom T. Hall, the final host of the show during it's last 2-3 years. --Jayron 32 12:50, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That seems possible. Thank you so much.2604:2000:7113:9D00:502F:5E37:C:2D78 (talk) 04:48, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 22

song in a yt vid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDR-aQq88zo Hey, can anyone help me found out what's the first song? (not the intro one.) 212.30.205.63 (talk) 00:00, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanksss

Maybe you could tell us what minute and second it starts, so we don't have to sit through the stupid video game commentary. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:12, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorryyy, it starts at 0:30 (but quite low sound) then gets a little louder later on at around 1:00 and it ends at 2:11! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.30.205.63 (talk) 04:54, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 24

Train Simulator

Which routes were included with Rail Simulator/Train Simulator up to and including the 2016 version? 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:1984:C5C9:D8FC:B368 (talk) 02:59, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Name" of a film meme ?

Slow motion (a must!), (usually) she walks/runs and sensually "shaking" her ~~hear~~ hair - as seen by a man, longing for her.

But also - comically - with men: Prince Charming in Shreck, Flanders (moustache) drinking milk, geologist Bert (entering cafeteria, labcoat flying, as seen by Sheldon). Does this film meme have a name? And where has it been used first (in which film)? GEEZER^{nil nisi bene} 13:35, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this a send-up of the most famous scene in 10, starring Bo Derek? --Xuxl (talk) 14:51, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "hear" do you mean "hair"? As for running in slow motion, that was around a long time before "10" came out. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:02, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds to me like something that might have originated with shampoo commercials. I'm sure I've seen one or two in which this happens, but I couldn't find anything on youtube. --Viennese Waltz 15:45, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's similar to http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HotWind. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:52, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think they used to show Liquid Prell plastic bottles hitting the floor and bouncing, in slow motion. That was in the days when most bottles were still glass. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else suggested a "mono-view" of the meadow run trope... GEEZER^{nil nisi bene} 16:44, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The classic (UK) advert using this trope is for Harmony hairspray from 1978. YouTube has several copies available. Tevildo (talk) 09:39, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 25

CSI: Miami: Episode: Driven

1. Why didn't Half-Dumb Delko ask the Male Driver to Describe the Thief's face, who Sold the Stolen Car?

2. Becuz of Delko's half-fault, the Male Driver knew Where the Thief worked, so the Male Driver killed the Thief who Broke into another House?

3. Was the Thief's death seriously Self-Defense Shooting?(98.239.113.209 (talk) 04:54, 25 November 2017 (UTC)).[reply]

NCIS: Season 13: Episode: Viral

1. Has anyone seen NCIS season 13 Episode Viral recently?

2. Did Woodruff hapily Intentionaly (spread Nude Photos)?

3. Did Woodruff hapily Intentionaly pray for (Both Female Victims To Comit Suicide due to the Nude Photos)?

4. After a Female comited Suicide, (did Woodruff Hav Remorse) or (did Woodruff smile)?

5. Did Woodruff smile hapily intentionaly (Pull the Gun Trigger To Kill Adam)?

6. After Dumb Woodruff got Arested, did Woodruff actualy Smile about (Nude Photos, Female’s suicide, Adam’s murder)?(98.239.113.209 (talk) 04:58, 25 November 2017 (UTC)).[reply]