Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2012 September 13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Entertainment desk
< September 12 << Aug | September | Oct >> September 14 >
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.

September 13[edit]

21st Century Fox[edit]

I am aware that on Futurama, the 20th Century Fox logo is modified to 30th Century Fox. Is there any non totally-fancruft discussion or comment on the anachronism of the name or whether Fox ever considered updating it to 21st Century Fox or the like? μηδείς (talk) 00:04, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't believe they have any intention of changing their name. 20th_Century_Fox#Twentieth_Century_Pictures explains where the name comes from. Lots of names which include dates become anachronistic; 2001: A Space Odyssey didn't get a name change once that date past, you can still read it or watch it and enjoy it for what it is, even if the name is wildly inaccurate. --Jayron32 01:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
That link doesn't really explain anything about the origin of the name, but of the company. A company is a very different dynamic sort of thing from a static work of art. I am not sure the analogy has legs. Companies rebrand themselves. I do not expect to hear that the owners of the rights to 1984 are goind to republish it as 4189. μηδείς (talk) 01:48, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
The company's official webpage has no indication they have ever considered changing the name, see [1]. The relevent google search [2] turns up a lot of people like you asking the question, and a lot of amateurs like me fumbling through it. After a good faith search of everything I can find, the best I can come up with is that there is zero evidence that changing the name has every been considered. --Jayron32 02:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
More: Here's an article from 1997: [3] which is relevent. Quoting that article: "So in Hollywood 20th Century Fox is planning no name change, says Jeff Godsick, a West Coast spokesman for the entertainment giant. The company, now a division of billionaire Rupert Murdoch's media empire, was a pioneer in the film business. So the name still has ``a great heritage, Godsick said. But let's not get too sentimental. The Wall Street Journal recently noted that Fox also has filed an application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, declaring its intent to use the name ``21st Century Fox. Perhaps as a way of keeping some wise guy from stealing the name, lawyers say." So, they did trademark the "21st Century Fox" name, but don't intend to use it; they just did so to block anyone else from taking it. The official company position (15 years ago at least) was that it was keeping its name. --Jayron32 02:04, 13 September 2012 (UTC) *
Them's some dumb lawyers. If they had no real intent to use the mark, then their application and subsequent claim to it is essentially invalid. In the United States, anyway. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 02:07, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
It doesn't take much imagination to think they named it after the current century, at the time. They likely weren't too concerned that the name would become obsolete in 67 years, as, even if the company was still alive then, they wouldn't be (or would be too old to worry about it). Something even worse than putting a date in a company name is a price. NetZero, for example, meant you could get on the 'net for zero money (ad supported). Then there are companies with names linked to a specific product, like Johnson Wax. They make a lot more than wax these days. StuRat (talk) 01:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Jayron's got the answer I was looking for. μηδείς (talk) 02:21, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


Australian horror film[edit]


Last night I watched a really frightening film set in Australia but I failed to learn the title. It's about a married couple who go on holiday near a beach and strange things happen with animals attacking them for no reason, bizarre sea creatures washed up on shore etc. Eventually the wife is killed by an arrow shot through her neck and the husband is mown down by a truck. Would anyone happen to know the name of this film? Thanks.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:55, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I haven't seen either, but this sounds like it could be Long Weekend (1978), or its 2008 remake. Steve T • C 07:16, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
It's the "Long Weekend" 2008 remake. Thanks Steve!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Religious Views - Kelsey Grammer[edit]

I was wondering if anyone out there knows what Religious preference Kelsey Grammer has? He is my daughters favorite actor and would like to know. Thank you so very much. Sincerely Tammy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:33, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Tammy. This article quotes him saying, in 2008, that "I'm a Christian Scientist but I'm not a full blown practising one. I actually visit doctors and I do take medication. But a lot of the principles of my approach to faith are rooted in that, which is pretty much mind over matter, if you want to reduce it to one thing." On the other hand, this article (from 2004) says that although he was "[i]nformally raised a Christian Scientist, Kelsey says he turned his back on God after his sister's murder." Maybe, though, he rejoined the faith, since he is then quoted saying "I found myself praying a lot, which I hadn't done in a long time." Nevertheless, he is either a current or former Christian Scientist. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 20:48, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
I've edited the questions title to distinguish it from the next question. Mingmingla (talk) 21:50, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Religious Views - Christian Science[edit]

Is that a cross between Christianity and Scientology? I'm not sure. Or is it a Christian that also believes in modern medicine. Could you please elaborate? Thank you again for all your help and research. Sincerely Tammy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Christian Science and Scientology are totally unrelated. Both use the word "Science" in their names, but that's about all they have in common. Here's an editorial reprinted from the Christian Science Monitor discussing this exact question: Scientology or Christian Science? Mingmingla (talk) 21:15, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
As to whether they are "Christians that also believe in modern medicine", read this part of our article on Christian Scientists: Christian_Science#Healing. My understanding is that the prefer to avoid medicine of any kind, modern or otherwise. That doesn't mean they won't use it if absolutely necessary; they would simply rather not, and would rather rely on prayer and cleansing of sin to cure illness. Mingmingla (talk) 21:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
I've edited the title of this to distinguish it from the previos questions. Mingmingla (talk) 21:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)