Entertainment desk
< April 3	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 5 >

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.

April 4

Saved by the Bell educational and informative?

Why the hell do Saved by the Bell reruns have an E/I bug? Mike R (talk) 17:10, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the E/I article "What constitutes the shows as "E/I" is determined by the Federal Communications Commission, which enforces the regulations." - so you'd have to contact them to ask them why the show qualifies. Exxolon (talk) 01:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because the show regularly had its 'teenage' cast confront moral and ethical dilemmas. It regularly showed the main characters facing the growing-up/coming-of-age type scenarios that millions of children are facing every year - and the characters make mistakes, do bad things, but ultimately they learn and grow from it. To be honest most teenage tv shows of this genre would easily be considered 'educational' in my mind - sure they aren't purely about teaching you X or Y like a documentary is, but they undoubtedly 'teach'. The same would be said for The Wonder Years, Boy Meets World, Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Hangin' With Mr. Cooper and countless over great tv shows where people go on life-journeys and learn. Of course Exxolon's answer is better in that technically the criteria will be the FCCs rather than based on my criteria - but i'd suspect their reasoning draws heavily on the growing-up aspects of the show(s). ny156uk (talk) 11:40, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this is why it's given the E/I rating, but also think calling any show with a "moral" an educational show is a bit of a stretch. After all, doesn't just abut any show have some type of moral lesson if you look for it hard enough ? I therefore think they should reserve an E/I rating for those shows which teach something concrete, like how to add fractions. Otherwise, TV stations will just play whatever shows they want, and label them as E/I shows, as needed, to fulfill the requirements. StuRat (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But that risks ignoring 'life lessons' because having a teacher/presenter tell you X is wrong, or Y is dangerous doesn't necessarily make entertaining tv. Having your lead character be both cool, interesting, clever but also flawed may mean you can 'teach' without appearing to be 'teaching'. Certainly it's a tough call and I do agree morality-tales alone wouldn't be a particularly great criteria, but one of the things I think tv shows can teach children (and lets be honest, adults too) better than a teacher in a classroom is the sort of thing that the above shows do. ny156uk (talk) 19:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of Saved by the Bell, Zack routinely does something devious, gets into trouble for it, then relates how he has learned his lesson and won't do it again. But then, in the next episode, he does something very similar. So, while it could be argued that each episode is a moral tale, the overall lesson seems to be that you can be as devious as you want, apologize for it when caught, and continue on, unchanged, without consequences. StuRat (talk) 19:30, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can remember (who could forget...) the episode when Jessie bravely overcomes the dark bonds of caffeine addiction (with the help and love of her friends and all within the same episode, of course). There was also the episode when (I think it was Zack) got a bit tipsy and wrecked a car, after which he got yelled at by his dad and grounded. (See also:Very special episode.) Other than that, though, I can't remember too much informative/educational stuff about the show, other than letting current kids know to avoid the fashions of the "brighter is better" era and how huge mobile phones once were. Perhaps the FCC standards are just really low as far as what constitutes "educational".Alexius Horatius 18:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't underestimate the "dark bonds of caffeine addiction". After all, it's a gateway drug leading to all sorts of undesirable behavior, like becoming a Las Vegas stripper. (I'd be willing to bet that just about every stripper once consumed caffeine !). :-) StuRat (talk) 15:22, 9 April 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Best Picture 2006: Bring It On: All or Nothing

So unfortunately "The Departed" won that year. "Bring it On: All or Nothing" got screwed out of even an Academy award nomination. My question is: roughly how many films would have had to be knocked out of contention before this epic motion picture could have taken home the ultimate prize? They certainly brought it on. Sappysap (talk) 21:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your question does not have an answer. The movie you mentioned was not released in theaters. Therefore, it did not qualify to be nominated for an Academy Award. -- kainaw ™ 22:54, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]