Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2014 July 19

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 19

Relatives

Are the actor Frankie Faison and former pro football player/actor Earl Faison related? They originate from the same town in Virginia and are pretty close in age.71.72.245.218 (talk) 06:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Also, I have wondered about whether Frankie Faison is related to Donald Faison from 'Scrubs', even though he comes from New York, not Newport News like Frankie.!Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 07:23, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Faison is a common enough name (I have unrelated friends that have that last name) so it would not be unusual for multiple famous people to have it and not be related. --Jayron32 19:37, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

And which others were there ?

Last night I watched the Movie 'Next' ( 2007 ) , with Nicholas Cage for the second time, and as it ended, I noticed the credits rolled the opposite way to how they normally do so at the end of a feature film. Whereas of course TV Shows and Movies flash names on a screen, take them off and add a batch of new names, Cinema releases tend to roll credits, where the names in order go upwards, and the first names read disappear at the top of the screen and the newer ones come from below. Now with this Movie, it was the other way round - probably as a gimmick due to it being about a man who could see the future, so as he saw first what happens later, things occur to him in a kind of backwards order. Now I had previously seen this film at least four years earlier and had forgotten about that, although I have in the time since that first viewing seen other unusual ways of showing the credits. Now recently I did see another film that did the same as 'Next', it was reasonably recent, and I saw it in just the past couple of months, but cannot recall it. Can anyone else recall what it was, and whether there are other movies in which the credits roll backwards or are done in a more unusual way, such as, for the British show 'Some Mothers do 'ave 'em', starring Michael Crawford, its closing credits roll as if on a horizontal tape, from right to left. Now as I think about it, because Arabic and Hebrew are written from right to left, would this also affect the way they show credits in movies made in their languages ? As for the other movie I did see recently that did roll its credits the other way as 'Next' did, I cannot remember anything about it, except I believe it was most likely made in the past 15 years, but I cannot even be sure of that. Thanks. Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 07:20, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

TVTropes says Repo Man and Se7en had their ending credits scroll down. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:43, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

And the sideways scrolling credits aren't unique to that one TV program, I've seen other British TV shows that do that, too, usually down in the footer area, so they can show the rest of the show above it without words scrolling over it. I think Posh Nosh is another example. I've also seen normal vertical scrolling done with a split screen, for the same reason. Then there are those shows that try to match the actor's names with their picture, either still or moving. Counterweight (The Outer Limits) was one such example. I wish they would all do this, as I frequently can't match the actor's name with the face otherwise (when they list the character's name along with the actor's name, that might help, but I don't always recall the character's name). StuRat (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, I have seen both Repo Man and Se7en, and cannot remember that, but only because it has been a while since, so one or either of those might well have been the one, unless there is another. I liked Se7en, but Repo Man was a disappointment - a kind of confused mish mash of mixed up nonsense and a real waste of a talented actor like Harry Dean Stanton. It would be really good if they always showed faces of actors with their names, so we no longer have that idea of the less known actors not getting the recognition they deserve. 'Me, Myself and Irene' did a great job of making an effort to show every performer, including all the extras, and a show like British sitcom It Ain't Half Hot Mum (1974–81). always showed most of the actors with their faces and name in the opening credits. What I cannot abide are those closing credits where the names just flash past, either in rolling or on screen then off then the next group of names on screen and so on, like they normally do in TV Shows. What is the point if You cannot read the names ? A lot of people spend a good deal of effort making these shows for the producers, so let them be properly recognised. Thank You both for Your comments, and if anyone else can remember other movies that have strange credits or other such things, feel free. Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 14:25, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

THX 1138 has credits at the front of the film which go down instead of up. Lucas (on the DVD commentary I think) said he did this because the whole film takes place underground and he wanted to give a feeling of descending during the credits. Staecker (talk) 23:21, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

And Lucas' Star Wars series have no opening credits at all, except for the studios' logos, the film title, and the scrolling story intro. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:44, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Which is why he shot the film in the UK and Tunisia, to avoid U.S. film industry rules regarding credits. IIRC, he was ejected from the Directors Guild of America for doing so... --Jayron32 19:35, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Huh? Many mainstream Hollywood films have no opening credits. Apocalypse Now, for example. See cold open. --Viennese Waltz 08:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Opening credits (and reference 1 there) says that Lucas resigned (as opposed to being ejected) due to being fined for not showing the director's name (distinct from full opening credits) during the opening title sequence of Empire Strikes Back, after having received special dispensation to do the same for the first Star Wars. The DGA site (click "Screen Credits") says that "For feature films, the Director’s screen credit must be accorded on a separate card, which shall be the last title card appearing prior to principal photography." but also (click "Overview") "It is important to the DGA to support the creative vision of the Director and the DGA will consider waivers of some, but not other, screen and advertising credit requirements on a case-by-case basis." I assume those films you are thinking of either have a brief director's title card, or received a waver from the DGA. -- 160.129.138.186 (talk) 22:39, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

The original poster also asked about other forms of unusual credits. Some movies have used elaborate humorous animated credit sequences: the one in The Pink Panther (1963) became so well known that it was reprised in the sequels and eventually spawned an animated TV show. Other examples from around the same time include Around the World in 80 Days (1956) and Those Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines (1965). Note that this was before the era when every minor cast member and employee was credited; these credits would correspond only to the opening credits on most movies. Another interesting credit treatment was Sneakers (1992), where the opening credits appear as anagrams and then their solutions, starting with A Turnip Cures Elvis, which of course solves to one of the names of this company. Another unusual case was Apocalypse Now, where the original 70 mm release version had no onscreen credits at all; they were handed out to moviegoers on paper, like at a play. (The only superimposed text in the whole movie is a one-line copyright notice; the title appears only as graffiti visible in the final part of the movie.)

A lesser form of unusual credit is that some movies move what is usually the opening credit sequence (main cast, producers, writers, etc.)—and sometimes also the title—to the end, immediately before the usual closing credits (full cast, minor crew members, typically a crawl). Also, some movies interpolate jokes and things into the closing credit sequence. As a minor example, in Fargo one actor's name was replaced by a variation on the symbol that the singer Prince used for a time as his name. --50.100.189.160 (talk) 04:26, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

The former, the Star Wars series as I mentioned above; and 2001: A Space Odyssey, whose only opening credits were the studio logo, the film title, and Kubrick's name several times. The latter, the Airplane and Naked Gun movies had a few joke credits, such as: Best Boy - [whoever]; Worst Boy - Adolf Hitler. And Warren Spahn - "He's not in the film, but he's still our all-time favorite left-hand pitcher." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes indeed, and thank You all very Much. I remember the Prince symbol in Fargo, and do recall those joke credits from certain films. In addition, as I have just remembered, at the start of Man on the Moon with Jim Carrey portraying the late Andy Kaufman, the closing credits begin near the front as a joke on " Andy's " part, as if the Movie was only a minute long, but I cannot recall if these same credits come in again at the end - I don't think they do, but somewhere in the film they do run the names of the main stars. I have found that movie amusing also in the sense that Danny de Vito portrays George Shapiro, Mr. Kaufman's manager, but of course Mr. de Vito was himself in Taxi with Kaufman, but is not shown in the recreations of Taxi's scenes or set. I did see Apocalypse Now recently, with a then relatively little known ( that is, post American Grafitti but pre Star Wars), Harrison Ford at the beginning, and I believe I can recall the credits as this version of the film seemed to have been digitally remastered and credits showing this were shown at the end. I was surprised also to see " Larry " Laurence Fishburne, as he must has been very young, since principal photography was in 1976, and delayed due to a storm, and Martin Sheen's heart attack, finishing around mid '77, but Fishburne was born in 1961 in Augusta, so he had to be under 16 years old by that time, if anyone has any comments on that. This idea of variety in screen credits is excellent, because we do not want to see just the same old thing all the time - sure, it is good to have a bit of order so one knows where one stands, and the credits show who is who and who did what, but the odd joke here might get us to stay behind and be more likely to watch them.

Another thing - how often is there and added scene, either during the credits, involving action or bloopers, or right at the end, and people might miss one little thing if they leave the Cinema before they are done. Also, since the movies Breakdown , Pleasantville, The Negotiator and Hidden Agenda are dedicated to the memory of the brilliant but I think underrated J.T. Walsh, since he died February 27, 1998, aged 54, before three of them were released, what percentage of movies have dedications such as that ? Interestingly, Breakdown was released about nine months before Mr. Walsh died, but the first time I saw it on Television, the dedication was there, but this may be because they had time to add this to the film once it went to video, but I am certain the dedication is there. I know that Shawshank Redemption is dedicated to one Allen Greene, if I recall rightly, and there are others, but I get the impression that most movies do not have dedications, so it would be interesting to work that out. Thanks all again. Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 07:58, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

It would be extraordinarily challenging to figure what "percentage" of films have had dedications, although it's possible someone has done that work. Have you googled the subject? Part of that tedious work would be to figure out which major players or crew died during production. One that comes to mind is British cinematographer Geoffrey Unsworth, who died during post-production of 1978's Superman film. At the other end of the spectrum, there's Plan Nine from Outer Space, which I don't think actually had a dedication to Bela Lugosi, but it did have a poorly-chosen double in a number of scenes. As Leonard Maltin's guidebook once said, "Lugosi died during production, and it shows." In the case of the Chris Reeve Superman films, the absence of Unsworth was evident in the inferior production values of the sequels. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Game of Death was another terrible one in the same vein. Don't rememeber if there was any explicit dedication to Bruce Lee, but using footage of his actual corpse was something like a tribute. The Crow was a lot more straightforward about Brandon. Those sequels sucked, too. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:05, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

No, I have not Googled that. I might simply try noting each movie and making a list, just to see if some sort of proportion emerges. Thanks. Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 02:18, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

• The IMDB has a lot of items about unusual credits in movies, though many of them are about specific credits rather than unusual ways of presenting the credits. The term they use is "crazy credits" and you will find it as a link on many pages about specific movies. But instead of accessing it that way, you can also download and browse the entire set of "crazy credits" entries in gzipped plain text form (your web browser may or may not expand the gzipping to access it as plain text for you). Here is the URL for the download. Currently the file is about 1 megabyte gzipped, 3 megabytes as text and contains 18,576 entries (marked by "- " at the start of a line) under 12,931 different titles (marked by "# " at the start of a line). This includes TV or video productions as well as movies; the first 3,705 titles shown have double quotes around them, which means that those entries are for TV series or TV episodes. Most of the remaining 9,226 titles will be movies, except where you see a code like (TV) for TV-movie, (V) for direct-to-video release, (VG) for video game. The word "dedicated" appears in 385 items; I didn't search for any further specifics. Have fun. --50.100.189.160 (talk) 05:44, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

That is excellent, and I shall have a good look at that. It is amazing how one question can lead to answers to a lot of other ones. This shows, that although many Movies are made, and they do generally follow a basic formula, that each is individual, and we can find many different ways of catergorising them. Thank You. Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 06:33, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Does Queen Elizabeth watch Game of Thrones

There were a lot of news stories about the Queen visiting the Game of Thrones set in Belfast a couple months ago. But I couldn't find anything in the articles about whether she actually watches this dark, ultraviolent show. I would never let my grandma watch such a violent show. If she doesn't watch GoT, what shows does she watch?--24.228.94.244 (talk) 22:20, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

She's led a country through several wars, and was in the military in WW2. She's not just a great-grandmother. But it did look as though the people on set were having to contextualise much of what was shown, so I'm guessing she doesn't watch GoT. Like her mother and her husband, the Queen is very much into horses, so I dare say she watches racing shows like The Morning Line (is that the right title), and others - mostly on Channel 4. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:30, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

See What are the Queen's favourite TV shows? for some idle speculation by the Radio Times. Alansplodge (talk) 01:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

It's well known that she edits Wikipedia in any spare moments she gets, so she would never have time to watch TV. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

• That explains why hers is a featured article! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't know about her, but Elizabeth of York lived Game of Thrones. And let's not forget how common royal ghosts are in England. If any walls could talk, the Queen's likely heard the stories. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:19, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

To be honest, Game of Thrones is fine, but I find the real thing more fascinating, especially The White Queen, where Elizabeth of York, our Elizabeth's ancestor, features - you couldn't make half of that stuff up they really got up to - although I suspect the makers of most historical dramas still do, even though I do not think they need to. I understand Her Majesty does watch Coronation Street, although it is not to my taste. I think we need more real historical drama, and sure the altered stuff is fine, but it would be good if someone could come up with something as historically accurate as possible, as I recall with amusement the glaring impossibilities of Braveheart, as entertaining as it was. Having read certain works of history, a lot of it needs no added spice. Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 08:04, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

To be fair, a lot of the history you find in old books (or scrolls) has already been spiced before Hollywood and hobbyists find it. Today, there's no way a baby prince (I don't even have to say which) can get away from scrutiny. But if he was born 500 years ago, scaled like a lizard, blind, with the stub of a tail and small leather wings like the wings of a bat, who would know? And who would dare to tell? InedibleHulk (talk) 08:49, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Considering GoT is basically the War of the Roses[1] with a few episodes from other parts of European history thrown in (I.E. Robert Baratheon as a Henry VIII type character), I'm sure the Queen is familiar with the history thereof. --Jayron32 19:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Not sure if that Cracked video (didn't watch) mentions the Black Dinner connection. Probably, but there it is, just in case. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:31, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

It actually does, IIRC. I just watched it a few days ago... --Jayron32 21:07, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

And the finger that stirs the pot? I guess I could just enable Javascript and watch the link, eh? Cracked is cool. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:30, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Nope, no Thomas Cromwell. To sum it up for those who didn't watch, Tyrion is Richard III, Daenerys is Henry VII and Cersei is Margaret of Anjou. Sort of. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:46, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

And dragons are basically everywhere in literature, all the time. The Lord of Light is from Lord of Light, but the whole religion is even simpler Manichaeism. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:53, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that is fair enough about History having been spiced up - there are certainly allegations that Henry VII altered History to suit his version of events, since there is documentary evidence he predated his Reign to August 21, 1485, one day before the Battle of Bosworth, but whether he or his relative Richard III killed the Princes in the Tower is not proven either way. One can argue validly for each scenario. It is this idea of Henry Tudor being a liar that forms the basis for the first ( very spiced up ) series of Blackadder. But then which historians do we trust - those who report the facts in what may be called a very dry, lifeless manner, or those who take the same facts, and it is just the way they are described that spices them up, rather than adding any scandalous or exciting tidbits ? When mentioning before having read History, I was referring specifically to the Biography of Mary Queen of Scots by Antonia Fraser ( 1967 ), although I have looked at much more than that. In there David Rizzio is butchered before pregnant Mary's eyes, and round the same time she makes a night time escape on horseback - almost like something out of the later set Lorna Doone, or some such thing. Of course in this work, the writer does not believe Mary had anything to do with the death of Darnley at Kirk O' Field, so then, what counts as History, the truth, or our interpretation of it ? Consider George Orwell's 1984, where Winston Smith and his comrades at the Ministry of Truth altered History every day, and once the evidence that it was any different was gone, who could say ? In the end though, spiced up or not, I still contend that History can be as intriguing as any made up thing, and sure, we want it to be perfectly true, but I guess, we can only accept as History what the evidence, whatever that is, tells us. Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 02:16, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Aye. A lie we then agree to tell ourselves, over and over till we forget that it's a lie. Only the ladder is real!

I might check out this Antonia Fraser. Thanks for the tip. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

How about that? She went to Dragon School. So she's technically a Lady and an Old Dragon. The last (or only) of her kind, at least by Wikipedia's list. Apparently she and Caroline Kennedy of Camelot were at least somewhat fireproof when the IRA tried to blow them up in 1975. That's rather insane. I think I can trust her. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:41, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

A side note, but I find the concept of letting your grandma watch something bizarre. I think she's old enough to make her own decisions, and know what she likes. Katie R (talk) 17:49, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

My mom knew she liked the show, but the entire Internet seems Greek to her. So I'd download them, and drop off a season at a time. I made a point of making her wait at least a week between seasons. Gotta let it sink in a bit, and have some anticipation grow. She decided I was wrong, but it didn't matter. She was powerless. I imagine other mothers and (great) grandmothers are in the same boat, and/or completely tuned out from pop culture. These ones need to be shown (or not). InedibleHulk (talk) 21:26, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Yea, I guess some ( hopefully not all ) of History could be seen as a lie that perpetuates until it seems true, like the old fisherman who caught a tiddler, and over the course of decades it turned it Jaws himself, and the fisherman even begins to believe it, but this is not always good enough for me. I am always holding out for someone to come up with the truth, and indeed, even now the experts are telling us all new things and saying the Dark Ages were not so dark, and it might just be a comparative term, and even in the realm of other subjects, ( wrongfully, I believe ), downgrading Pluto to not being a planet when they might have rapped us over the knuckles before if we forget it in our list of nine. Now they also say Sharks do not have to keep moving, when previously they believed they had to, lest they die - so also it is not always that they are lying, although some certainly are, but that they did not know. So if I cannot find the truth in what is written already, I might also be minded to check it out myself.

One thing about Antonia Fraser is that she made the story of the Queen seem very fairytale exciting, but no less true, compared to one like Richard John Green, who just gave the facts. This I am not criticising, as long as the facts are true. I should come to a point, and this is that, we have History recorded for us, this is it, true or not, it is all we have, it reminds me of Martin Luther saying " Here I stand - I can do no other ", and so, if I have this version of History given to me, it is all I have, at least until I can find the evidence that overturns it, just as the Lady did who led the expedition to dig poor King Richard the Third out of the carpark, and thus alter to some extent our perception of him. As for Richard, for over twenty five years I have neither called him hero nor villain, as yes, he usurped the throne, but there is no evidence he murdered his own nepehews, and sure, no evidence he didn't, but in modern courtroom trials we at least have the presumption of innocence.

The moral to this then, is we might have to accept the official version of History, but never stop trying to overturn what we believe to be the actual truth if this History is flawed. One major example for me is the JFK Assassination - now I could go on for ages about this, but suffice to say, the overwhelming evidence from many different sources points to a conspiracy, and a gunman on the grassy knoll. Oswald was involved, to what extent I do not know, but it irks me that in official accounts and questions on some quiz shows he is considered the lone assassin, and no leeway is given, and this is indeed the false History that keeps getting repeated til one believes it, unless those determined people keep up their investigations and such to change the official story. I have no doubt a lot of History can be and is faked, but the one thing is trying to work out what is left that is at least genuine.Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 13:03, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I know one thing for sure: If you ever find the truth and hope to preserve it in writing, many will turn a blind eye if you don't use paragraphs. I mean that in a helpful way. I'd like to read your book one day. There's a lot of truth buried in that block of text already.

Cold, hard facts are only part of the truth. When a writer adds a certain tone to the tale (fairytale or otherwise), she shapes the lens you see through. People and places stay vaguely familiar, but become brighter, darker, wider, taller, whatever. Former fictional vampire Billy Corgan once sung "My reflection, dirty mirror, there's no connection to myself." A few other relevant lyrics there, and a certain tone to the guitars that's never quite replicated in his live shows. I recommend listening, even if you've heard the exact recording before.

One eternal truth is that keeping your eyes and ears open will find you new clues every day. Another is that many of those clues won't be clues at all. So it stands to reason that you should learn to easily identify red herrings before attempting to learn anything new. And never pretend to already know what you're looking to find. Anyone can find that. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:52, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. Chris the Russian Christopher Lilly 13:03, 22 July 2014 (UTC)