Entertainment desk
< February 23	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 25 >

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.

February 24

What Is This Called (So I Can Google It And Look For It Myself, And Find Where I Can Buy It)

Does anyone know where I could get this without the ribbons and writing?174.3.99.176 (talk) 03:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I google for chrome metal armband, I get a lot of similar results. -- kainaw ™ 03:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, they are all ~~cirular~~. Where do you get them where they are that shape, that I posted? What shape is this called?174.3.99.176 (talk) 14:35, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oval. They come circular and you bend them to the size of your wrist, making them oval.

They are not oval because they have 2 parallel sides.174.3.99.176 (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I looked for "arthritis bracelets" and found some very similar once(identical ,if you want copper)..hotclaws 19:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, but, no I don't want copper. Do you have something else?174.3.99.176 (talk) 19:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hollywood paycheque

Hi

How do Hollywood celebrities get paid?

1. Is it after they finished a movie?

2. Do they sign a contract and get a percentage (beforehand) of the agreed earnings as stipulated in a contract and then get the rest after?

3. Is there something like an appearance fee; sign on bonus or incentive of some sort that is paid to the actor/actress who plays the lead role before he/she does the movie?

4. Do they (personally) get in a form of a paycheque or is it paid in their bank account?

5. Who keeps them up to date about their bank balance and how much approximately do those people earn from a single client?

Thanks, NirocFX 41.193.16.234 (talk) 05:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no single answer for your questions:

Some get paid up front Some get paid before/after. Some never get paid.
Some sign a contract for a percentage. Some get a flat pay amount. Some fail to get a proper contract signed and have to haggle pay.
Some have an appearance (pay for play) fee. Some have a bonus to sign on to a project just to others to sign. Some are given percentage bonus. Some are given contracts on other projects...
Some get a check. Some get a wire transfer. Some get objects (vehicles, clothing, etc...)
With the quantity of lawyers involved, only an idiot would go into this mess without an accountant to keep track of everything.

So - your answer to everything is "it depends." -- kainaw ™ 05:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the OP but... A follow up question occurred to me. My apologies to the OP if they feel that I'm butting in. Who pays the celebs? It's the production company, isn't it? Dismas|^(talk) 05:37, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In general (and not even close to always), the producers (which could be a production company) pays for everything. Of note: The producers want to have full claim to all profits and must therefore show they paid for all expenses. If someone else paid for part of a film, they could sue to get part of the profits (and that happens a lot). -- kainaw ™ 06:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kainaw Also thanks for the one that I forgot Dismas

1. What do you mean by some never get paid?

2. What are some of the main reasons that makes a production company decide that it's going to spend money on making a movie especially a big production?

2.1 Is it the quality of the script?

2.2 The pedigree of the director?

Thanks, NirocFX

41.193.16.234 (talk) 11:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The production company folds before paying, the contracts aren't honored, the contracts are written in such a way that some threshold for pay isn't met, the possibilities continue.
Because they think they'll make more money than they spend. Could be script (though I'd think this is comparatively rare, judging by the recent history of big-budget films), could be director, could be actors, could be the franchise they're making a sequel of, could be the genre, etc, etc.
This site attempts to list many of the highest-budget films (noting that such numbers are estimates), and it's interesting to see what's near the top. Sequel, sequel, sequel, Avatar, sequel, sequel, sequel, sequel, sequel, remake, The Golden Compass, sequel, sequel, Titanic, remake, Iron Man, sequel, sequel, sequel, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

Of the ones I spelled out, Avatar is generally recognized as "funded because Cameron made a metric crapton of money on Titanic, and Iron Man was a comic book film in an era of very profitable comic book films. The Golden Compass might be argued as an outgrowth of the success of the Narnia films -- though very different in author intent, they're pretty similar on the surface. LW&W probably rode the coattails of Lord of the Rings as a fantasy tale (consider how LW&W really played up the combat sequences). Titanic itself was driven by Cameron's past pedigree (Aliens, Terminator). So nothing on this list is primarily driven by script. Little of it is driven by actors. Only marginally is it driven by directors. Overwhelmingly Hollywood spends money where it's successfully spent money before. If you were to look at, say, the most profitable movies by budget/revenue ratio, though, I'd expect quite different priorities. — Lomn 15:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quibble: LW&W was Disney's Harry Potter. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe that explains why Hollywood keeps milking the same old crap time and time again with endless sequels, each worse then the one before. If you thought Saw II was bad and Saw III even worse - just how bad do you think Saw VII will be?

Thanks Guys,

I never thought that the movie business was so tricky and seemingly also risky for those who are all involved. I knew I wasn't the only one who thought a movie like LW&W was jumping on somebody else's bandwagon.

Q: On which bandwagon was the movie 300 jumping on?

a) Gladiator

b) The Lord of the Rings Trilogy

c) A combination of both

Thanks, NirocFX

41.193.16.234 (talk) 05:05, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are asking for an opinion. 300 came from a comic book series in 1998. The movie Gladiator came out in 2000. The first of the Lord of the Rings trilogy came out in 2001. So, are you asking if someone travelled back in time after watching the Lord of the Rings to write a comic book series in the hopes that someone would later make it into a movie? Honestly, Hollywood is about genres. If a genre is working, they beat it to death. Then, they hop on the next genre while the old one continues as a long line of straight-to-DVD movies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kainaw (talk • contribs)

See Hollywood accounting for some interesting information related to this question. --Tango (talk) 06:16, 25 February 2010

(UTC)

Thanks Tango

Ok, I wasn't aware that there was a comic book about this particular movie, but then again some might argue that Frank Miller might have had a peak at The Lord of the Rings books before it was made into a movie.

Thanks, NirocFX

41.193.16.234 (talk) 11:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And Tolkien could certainly have been familiar with the battle of Thermopylae when he wrote about Helm's Deep (he was absolutely familiar with all manner of preceding myths and legends). One of the key lessons of the entertainment industry, be it books, movies, or what have you, is that ideas lack value. They're everywhere, they're rarely original, and they don't mean squat. What counts is whether the author/producer/director/actor can execute the idea. — Lomn 14:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lomn

I must agree with you there and I think that a lot of these guys responsible for the outcome of a movie sometimes tend to think that the greater movie watching public are not aware of what they are doing, yet they know that they must up their game everytime.

I think the broader movie industry needs a good helping of some fresh imagination.

Thanks, NirocFX

41.193.16.234 (talk) 05:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Passion of Christ Movie & The Nativity Story

Have The Passion of Christ and The Nativity Story ever released in People's Republic of China's national theatres? How much revenue did these movies made there? 174.114.236.41 (talk) 05:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB lists The Passion of Christ as banned in China. -- kainaw ™ 06:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did these movies show in Taiwan and Vietnam? 192.75.121.45 (talk) 17:28, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amadeus?

WA Mozart's baptismal name was Johannes Chrysostomus Wolfgangus Theophilus Mozart. Where did "Amadeus" come from? (probably a silly question, I know, but it's bugging me.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.194.29 (talk) 06:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amadeus is the Latin form of Theophilus. I know - they don't sound alike, but they mean roughly the same thing: loved by God. See Mozart's name for a lot more information. -- kainaw ™ 06:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or for 'loves God'. (Theophilus is Greek.) —Tamfang (talk) 08:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a German version, Gottlieb. Woogee (talk) 08:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stumped - help me remember this game

There was an online multiplayer game in the late 90's, possibly developed by the same people who created You Don't Know Jack. The concept was that a group of players would be presented with an acronym and each player would create a phrase from the provided letters. When time expired the players would vote on each others' submission to select the best/wittiest submission and that person would win the round. Can someone think of the name of this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.34.104.11 (talk) 16:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I remember a game called Acrony that fits your description.

Turns out they are still around.

Actually, the game you are thinking of is Acrophobia (game). I used to play it often. 10draftsdeep (talk) 16:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - I was thinking of Acrophobia (game). Thank you! Sounds like Acrony has the same gameplay as well. May have to check that out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.34.104.11 (talk) 16:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. glad to help, it was a great game back in the days of dial-up. cheers! 10draftsdeep (talk) 03:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

What was the name of this film

I'm trying to find the name of a film I watched a while ago. The plot centred around a military trial (in America, of an American). There are some action scenes in jungle (suggesting Vietnam war, Korean war or WW2 pacific). In the end an east asian man is brought in as a witness. (I've searched extensively on wikipedia and imdb, but to no avail). Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CyrilPenaCastillo (talk • contribs) 19:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have a Trial movies article, which even has a "Military trial films" section; and we have Category:Courtroom dramas which has 93 entries you might search. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'd checked the "Military trial films" section on Trial movies, but it wasn't there, but found it through Category:Courtroom dramas. I've added Rules of Engagement to Trial movies —Preceding unsigned comment added by CyrilPenaCastillo (talk • contribs) 20:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and thank you for improving the article. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean that was the movie you meant? It doesn't entirely fit your description. (Of course, that often happens with this sort of query. So this is not a complaint, just a request for clarification.) --Anonymous, 03:50 UTC, February 25, 2010.