Entertainment desk
< January 18	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 20 >

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.

January 19

Language(s) of "Chori Chori"

What is/are the language(s) Chori Chori is sung in? --KnightMove (talk) 00:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be consensus that the man is speaking Persian Farsi, and the woman is probably speaking Urdu, Hindi, or Punjabi. This guy says Urdu-Farsi, and sounds like he might know what he's talking about. --Me, but logged in (talk) 03:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arash is speaking Farsi and Aneela is speaking Hindi in Punjabi accent. deeptrivia (talk) 21:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

System for rating the strategic depth of a game

I can't remember if I read this somewhere, or made it up myself. I'm looking for a system for rating the strategic depth of a game. Specifically, it involves the number of "levels" of play: the number of skill levels for which the higher skill level player can consistently (weasel word, I know) beat a lower skill level player. For instance, a game of chance like war would have a rating of 0, because no player could consistently beat another. Tic-tac-toe would have a rating of between 0 and 1, because players who know the game will never lose. A game like chess has a much higher rating, like maybe 20. (Although I haven't thought about it properly, I think this concept might also be conceptualized as the range of Elo ratings among the game's players. It also seems similar to the number of kyo and dan ranks in Go, as well as the range of handicaps in many games like golf or darts.) --Me, but logged in (talk) 02:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it depends on what you mean by "consistent", if it's required that the more skilled player be able to win every time then something like golf handicaps is far too fine - you would need a difference in handicaps of quite a lot in order guarantee victory (even if you just want 75% wins, you would probably need more than a difference of 1). The same applies to ranking systems in other games. ELO ratings basically give a probability of winning, which is quite good for what you want, although you're never going to get discrete levels where one person is guaranteed to beat (or even highly likely to beat) the person one level below. --Tango (talk) 03:05, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Film about Jesus

There was a film I saw a long time ago on VHS about the life of Jesus and I want to find it again. I don't remember much but the ending had a voiceover from Jesus I think and it was a shot flying upwards towards the sky looking down at the ground with maybe a greenish tint? I know it sounds pretty vague but is there a chance anyone knows what I'm talking about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.134.129.235 (talk) 04:35, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer, but you could try looking at the films listed in Category:Films based on the Gospels and see if any of them rings a bell. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 06:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know but it might help someone here if you were to specify if it were more of a documentary or a re-telling by actors and such. Dismas|^(talk) 06:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a documentary, it's an actual film with blood makeup and such —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.134.129.235 (talk) 16:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

King of Kings and Jesus of Nazareth are the usual ones on TV or watched in religion class at school, maybe one of those? Adam Bishop (talk) 20:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It may have also been Jesus (1979 film), which by some estimates may be the most viewed film in history. There was also a more recent film which was in some mainstream theatres called The Gospel of John (film), and of course there was the rather famous The Passion of the Christ. It could also have been the The Last Temptation of Christ (film) which was as well known as the Passion, and about 15 years older. If you are looking for really old, but still well known, there is of course The Greatest Story Ever Told from 1965. Do any of those work? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Early 80s Horror Movie about possessed robotic house?

I saw this film several times on ABC. I first thought it was Demon Seed, but I rented that and it wasn't it. A dark haired woman lives in a house where security cameras are always looking in on her. I can't remember if the house was haunted, or controlled by an evil computer, or the computer was being controlled by a ghost. (I think it was the last one). Any ideas? --69.151.28.135 (talk) 05:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How long ago did you see the movie (i.e. how old is it)? Is it a well-done horror film or B flick? Might "This House Possessed" be the movie you're remembering? 152.16.59.190 (talk) 07:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mixed Martial Arts 'Fight Girls'

Can an MMA fan out there define for me what an 'MMA Fight Girl' is? Evidently it does not mean she is a fighter, since the woman I've been assigned to write a profile about is not on the List of female mixed martial artists. Is it merely a modeling job? Any help is great, thanks. Wolfgangus (talk) 07:42, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the first hit I got from Google with "mma fight girl" seems to kind of indicate that it does refer to fighters, though not necessarily only them. Generally, though, they seem to differentiate between a "fight girl" and a "ring girl". -- Captain Disdain (talk) 08:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that page as well, but I don't see the difference. The page - for 'fight girls' - promotes its newest 'ring girls'. Maybe the terms are interchangeable; maybe they illustrate different roles. Maybe I'm overthinking the sport. Wolfgangus (talk) 09:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a 2006 tv series about Muay Thai girls called Fight Girls[1]. Hardly expect it to be modelling unless a Ring girl is what you have in mind, posing with a round sign[2] as part of the event's attractions. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wii 2?

I'm thinking of buying a Wii, but I don't want to get one now if the thing is going to become obsolete within a few months. Is there any information on if and when a successor to the Wii is planned? Thanks. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 10:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found no consumer tips under planned obsolescence (only a link to information asymmetry ;). ---Sluzzelin talk 10:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, most video game systems last longer than the 2 years the Wii has been out. Sony, for example, still supports the PS2, and new games are released for it, even though the system is almost 10 years old. In general, most "generations" of video game consoles tend to last 10 years, with about a 3-4 year overlap between generations. See the infobox on video games history below. From the past patterns of obsolescence, the Wii 2 will likely be released sometime around 2012-2013 or so, and the old system will stop being supported some time around 2015-2016 or so. So if you bought one today, you would probably have 3-4 years before you had an option to replace it, and 6-7 years before you stopped getting new games for it. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and buy yourself a Wii. Nintendo isn't going to drop support for this system for a very long time. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name that film

Can someone help me, year's ago a caught the last few minute's of this film and from what I seen this kid (in his teens I think) was either killed off or swapped places with his mirror image. Any idea's ?

Scotius (talk) 11:14, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I say "his mirror image", what i mean is from what little of the film I had seen, his refection in the mirror climbed out of the mirror and either killed him off or swapped places with him, i'm not sure which happened because the time the film was on and the age I was at the time I wasn't supposed to be watching it.

Scotius (talk) 11:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The horror movie Phantasm has an ending where a boy/teen is pulled into a mirror.91.111.84.39 (talk) 13:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Early in his career, Bruce Willis did an episode of The Twilight Zone called "Shatterday", in which his mirror image takes over his life. AnyPerson (talk) 23:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would pulling a guy's hair to bring him down be unsportmanlike in the NFL?

Okay, this may sound like fodder for a Seinfeld episode to some. But, I was watching the NFL games, and seeing a receiver with very long hair brought up this question. While face masking is a penalty, the hair is part of the body, and a couple guys have hair long enough that it's possible for an opponent, even accidentally, to try to grab onto something and have a grasp at a few locks of hair rather than part of the uniform; and hair would be easier to hold onto, anyway.

It'll probably never happen because (can't you hear Jerry saying?) you'd think there'd be some sort of man-code against that; that's only done to girls on the playground. But, I can't imagine the NFL ever had anti-hair-pulling rules.Somebody or his brother (talk) 13:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The rules might have changed, but it was legal to tackle by the hair as recently as 2 years ago. --Onorem ♠Dil 14:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; man, that's some long hair;it'd be 7 years now he's let it grow. I'd have compared it to what the article says is a "horse collar" too.Somebody or his brother (talk) 14:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you say Garfunkel?

Garfunkel's "u" as in put or cut? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raosab (talk • contribs) 17:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cut. If you are referring to the last name (as in Simon & Garfunkel musical group) ... that is how I have always heard and said it. The "u" is sounded as in "cut". Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

You could always check your Funk & Wagnalls. :-) StuRat (talk) 22:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's pronounced like the word "funk" or "funky", rhymes with spunk, bunk, gunk, junk, monk, punk, sunk, etc. --69.151.28.135 (talk) 05:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the song "A Simple Desultory Philippic (or How I Was Robert McNamara'd into Submission)", Paul Simon rhymes it with "uncle". Since he should know, I'd be willing to go with that, at least as far as Art's name is concerned - though surnames are notoriously able to have different pronunciation from individual to individual. Grutness...wha? 05:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Academy Awards

Does anyone know if the Academy makes public the actual number of votes that winners/nominees receive? If so, where can one get this information? Since I have never seen this information anywhere ... my guess is that they do not release it to the public. If that is the case ... what would be the reason / rationale for keeping this info "secret"? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Also ... if it is not released to the public at large, is this info available to Academy members themselves? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I would be very surprised if that were the case. There's no way it could remain a secret if thousands of Academy members had access to it. It would definitely leak. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that. I guess I am curious about all the secrecy ... what's the big deal? I guess I am just curious as to the Academy's rationale / philosophy regarding this matter. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Unreferenced, unfortunately, but here's what I found under 12th Academy Awards (which were held in 1940):

"Further controversy erupted following the ceremony, with the Los Angeles Times reporting that Leigh had won over Davis by the smallest of margins and that Donat had likewise won over James Stewart by a small number of votes. This led Academy officials to examine ways that the voting process, and more importantly, the results, would remain secret in future years. They considered the Los Angeles Times publication of such details as a breach of faith."

Might be a start. ---Sluzzelin talk 23:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the only margin ever officially released since then, was the margin of zero at the 41st Academy Awards where Katharine Hepburn and Barbra Streisand had the exact same number of votes. But the number wasn't published here either, as far as I could dig. ---Sluzzelin talk 00:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A side note ... Sluzzelin, there have been several instances of ties with zero-margins in the history of Academy Award wins ... the Hepburn / Streisand tie was not an isolated case by any means. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

You're right, I was thinking of what the regular and gossip press might find interesting enough to publish, i.e. the big six awards, which saw no other ties since 1940 as far as I could tell. I wasn't thinking of Academy Award for Documentary Feature, for example.---Sluzzelin talk 11:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One advantage of keeping the votes secret is that all four nominees who don't win an award can consider themselves equally honored. If three of them knew they didn't finish as high as second, they might feel (or be seen as) slighted, and also the one who did finish second might feel aggrieved at not winning. --Anonymous, 23:09 UTC, January 20/09.

Yeah, I guess ... but the same argument could be made for pretty much any contest / competition. I wonder what makes this contest / competition any different. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

The difference is that acting (and likewise directing, editing, etc.) is a profession and not a competition, and the awards are a recognition of high professional achievement. (Well, that's the theory anyway! Obviously it is also a business and the awards not only serve that end but also have a strong element of Academy politics.) If they started releasing the numbers, it would seem less like an award of merit and more like a competition. As it is, there have been some stars who find it too much like one and refuse to attend the Oscars, for example George C. Scott. --Anonymous, 07:20 UTC, January 21, 2009.

Thanks for all of the input. Much appreciated! Thank you. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Musical inserts

What is it called when one song includes small snippets from other songs? Not like a medley; there's one main song, and it just makes little detours into other popular stuff before going back to normal. It's especially common in jazz music, and there's a particular name for it, but I can't seem to dig it out of my head. I think it starts with R? Any idea? --Masamage ♫ 22:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sampling ? StuRat (talk) 22:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's it. Sampling refers to using actual recorded bits and remixing or splicing them together to make new music. There is also the thing where composers will nab a piece of music from another source and splice it into one of their works, note for note, for example when Beethoven used bits of Rule, Britannia! in several of his works, Symphony No. 3 IIRC, where it generally represents the British Military, such as Duke Wellington. The OP could be refering to Quodlibet or possibly Variation (music) or something like that. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, none of those... The sort of thing you're describing with Beethoven is close to what I'm talking about, although this would even bring in lyrics. It's definitely an English word. --Masamage ♫ 00:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beethoven wrote a complete set of variations for piano on Rule Britannia!. It starts with the theme, followed by the variations. I wasn't aware he used it in the 3rd Symphony (Eroica), but he probably quoted it in Wellington's Victory, a different piece. Tchaikovsky quoted the Russian national anthem and the Marseillaise in the 1812 Overture, Schumann quoted various bits and pieces (such as the Marseillaise again in his song The Two Grenadiers), and there have been many other examples. These are generally referred to as musical quotations, but we don't seem to have an article on the topic, worse luck (it could be made into quite a lengthy and useful article. Any takers?). -- JackofOz (talk) 00:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The German WP has an article on Musikzitat [3] (musical quotation, verbatim), but it deals mainly with copyright legalities of compositions quoting excerpts of other pieces. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 16:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ta da! We now have a stub for Musical quotation. Feel free to improve it. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duke Wellington? But he lived long after Beethoven ... —Tamfang (talk) 06:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TV commercial lengths in the US

I've noticed that The Pink Panther 2 ads on now seem very long. They run about 90 seconds. Is this unusually long for US TV ads ? StuRat (talk) 22:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While most TV ads are about 30 seconds long, there are often longer ones. The 90 second spots are likely movie trailers as opposed to standard ads. I have seen ads as short as 15 seconds and as long as 2 minutes or more (for example, the "Not Availible in Stores" ads, which tend to run longer than, say, a typical Bud Light ad). Our article on Television advertisement is sadly lacking in this regard. I seem to recall that most ads are at a standard length (15, 30, 60, 90, and 120 seconds IIRC) to make them essentially modular (i.e. easy to plug into the availible time). --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

as Jayron says, first it's the "feature" length to imbue the recognition factor, then snippets that play on association (and to save expenses) as they go along. -- Julia Rossi (talk) 08:53, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The most common length for Network television commercials in the US is 30 seconds, but some are 120, 90, 60, 45 or 15. Local commercials can be even shorter: 5- and 10-second spots are increasingly common nowadays. The CW network employs the 20-second length for many of its promos. Commercial lengths have been tending shorter over the years. --Thomprod (talk) 00:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a bit of an aside i recall the first time I saw the Sony Bravia ad (bouncing balls one). It was during a football game and it was the length of the entire commercial break. I was in the pub, it was a rowdy atmosphere as it was a big game and as the ad progressed everyone in the pub seemed to fall silent. Sounds ridiculous and wouldn't believe it if wasn't there but it really did seem to grip the attention of everyone. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 14:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]