Entertainment desk
< February 8	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 10 >

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 9

Need help finding a song that seems "voodoo/bayou blues/metal"

I'd heard a very heavy song i heard a while back, kinda sounded like it was bayou metal, if that makes sense...i dont remember much except it was low tempo and the voice of the vocalist was deep and low and the song was pretty heavy. I think it was under the blues genre, and the lyrics may have included talk of "bones". Anyhow, if anybody could help point me to the direction of possible names of the song I need to find, or even possible artists, I would appreciate it greatly.

Thank you.

96.232.199.12 (talk) 02:48, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wild guess... "Voodoo" from Godsmack? 75.157.57.12 (talk) 03:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried that one and it wasnt what i had encountered whenever that was. i think it was more bluesy than metal.

96.232.199.12 (talk) 03:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The theme tune from the TV show True Blood? - "Bad Things" by Jace Everett... here's a video. Astronaut (talk) 04:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't it...I think it was something older. This one is good for comparison though. The voice in what I'm looking for was much lower/deeper and the tempo may have been slower. Also the bass was much louder. Thank you though. 96.232.199.12 (talk) 01:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something by Dr.John the night tripper perhaps?hotclaws 14:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I bet this is "Bad to the Bone" by George Thorogood. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe "Swamp" by Talking Heads? Bones are mentioned. ReverendWayne (talk) 22:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have a List of swamp blues musicians, which might help. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Screamin' Jay Hawkins seems an obvious possibility. Deep voice, likes voodoo. 81.131.11.248 (talk) 19:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking For A TV Show

I recall some tv show where people took pills that changed their skin color for a week to experience how other races lived, but I can't remember what it was called. Doc Quintana (talk) 03:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well there was Watermelon Man (film), and I'm sure there have been many others with the same premise. (No pills in that though.)--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A lengthier self-experiment of this kind was described in his 1961 book Black Like Me by journalist John Howard Griffin. It was filmed under the same title in 1964. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 11:23, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

German journalist Guenter Wallraff did the same in 2009, I saw a tv documentary about this. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 11:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC) Martin.[reply]

You might also be interested in Lois Lane comics issue # 106, which has a very similar plot. Details here: [[1]]. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 11:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC) Martin.[reply]

ADDENDUM to archived answers: you might be thinking of Soul Man (film), which has tanning pills in it's plot. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 10:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC) Martin.[reply]

Neighborhood hole

There is a line in the Switchfoot song "Free" (from Hello Hurricane, 2009) which goes "There’s a hole in the neighborhood/Where the shadows fall". When I heard it, it reminded me of the line in the Elbow song "Grounds for Divorce" (from The Seldom Seen Kid, 2008) that goes "There's a hole in my neighbourhood down which of late I cannot help but fall". Is the Switchfoot line an allusion to the Elbow song, or are they both drawing from a separate phrase that I am unfamiliar with? —Akrabbim^talk 03:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding article Billy Garland( exblack panther)

Hello,Im a researcher and i read an article on the wikipedia website about ex black panther/ tupac's father Billy Garland.Im doing a research project on Tupac,now there is something interesting in the article about tupac's biological father Billy Garland that he is a decendant of the african tribe tuareg.Now I don't know the credibility of this information about billy garland's orgins which is stated on the wikipedia website.Please let me know where the information about tupac's father billy garlands heritage was obtained.I cannot find much information about billy garland, if the information about him being of tuareg heritage is credible. Then i can use it for the research paper im writing.

Thank you

Kops —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zolani7 (talk • contribs) 08:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That information on Billy Garland (Ex-Black Panther) seems not to be reliably referenced at present. Charles Matthews (talk) 13:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which means, Kops, while researching your paper, if you can find a reliable reference that confirms the claim, or confirms a different story, please be bold and correct that article yourself. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Australian radio show: Kyle & Jackie O

Hi guys.. Could anyone please tell me where I can download an audio clip of the infamous lie detector episode (where a teenage girl confessed being raped) from the australian radio show "Kyle And Jackie O Show"? I've looked everywhere but couldn't find it. Thanks in advance...Johnnyboi7 (talk) 09:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Super Bowl XLIV

This question is about Super Bowl XLIV. I was surprised to see how many people — above and beyond the "normal" Super Bowl audience — watched this particular Super Bowl game on TV. Apparently, it was the highest rated Super Bowl ever. And, apparently, it was also the highest rated TV show ever ... even beating the 27-year-old record held by the final episode of M*A*S*H back in 1983. So, my question is ... what was the big draw to this particular Super Bowl game? How was this particular game different from any other ordinary, run-of-the-mill Super Bowl games? In all honesty, this year's match-up seemed relatively low-key, without an inordinate amount of pre-game hype. So, I was shocked to see the TV ratings records being broken. Any insights? Thank you. (64.252.68.102 (talk) 14:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Perhaps because the team from New Orleans was playing? It seems all of New Orleans was watching. And people love an 'underdog'. They certainly needed a bit of a morale boost after Cyclone Katrina (Just a bit of a guess from Australia). 220.101.28.25 (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is a New Orleans thing. For the next 30 years, the media will keep pushing for help for New Orleans because of Hurricane Katrina (which happened in 2005). They gave up on Homestead, Florida after a month or so, even though it hadn't recovered from Hurricane Andrew yet. They never suggested anyone should help Charleston, SC after Hurricane Hugo. The whole Haiti thing will dissipate in a month or so, but we'll still hear that New Orleans needs help to recover from Hurricane Katrina. The New Orleans bias is very clear. I don't personally understand it. -- kainaw ™ 15:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even if all of New Orleans was indeed watching ... doesn't that one small city represent only a tiny miniscule percentage of the entire USA population as a whole? The New Orleans theory doesn't "add up" ... does it? Even if every single New Orleans citizen were watching, aren't they all collectively still a tiny drop in the bucket? (64.252.68.102 (talk) 15:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

He was saying that because it is New Orleans, the media was pressuring everyone else to watch (not just New Orleans). -- kainaw ™ 15:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes ... that "pressure" goes exactly to my point. Where was that pressure? I missed it completely. As my original post said ... "this year's match-up seemed relatively low-key, without an inordinate amount of pre-game hype". What did I miss? (64.252.68.102 (talk) 15:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

The pre-game hype was, in my opinion, more about New Orleans than the game. This is the type of news that I saw (what you saw may have well been very different): Will New Orleans win? New Orleans needs a win. How will New Orleans handle a loss on top of Katrina? Imagine the party if New Orleans wins! ... on and on, it was a media blitz to guilt everyone into watching to see how New Orleans would do. -- kainaw ™ 15:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just now, on First Take on ESPN2, they just discussed this. They brought up two very good points:

The American population is 31% higher today than it was in 1983, when the M*A*S*H last episode aired.
The % of households tuned in to the game was 45% for this game. For Super Bowl XVI in 1982, a year before the M*A*S*H final episode, had a 49% rating. That M*A*S*H last episode? 60.2%.

Given the rising American population, having the last M*A*S*H episode defeated in terms of overall number of viewers was inevitable. In terms of a % of the American TV owning public, which is the vital stat here, it wasn't even the best rated Super Bowl, let alone the best rated show. --Jayron32 15:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Figures don't lie, but liars do figure!" Still, the numbers are pretty good. I would like to think that it being about New Orleans gave it a boost (New Orleans has a special popularity in the U.S. as cities go), but another couple of considerations are that the Super Bowl typically draws well anyway, and a lot of folks were snowed in and had "nothing else to do." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, see List_of_most-watched_television_broadcasts#Top_network_primetime_telecasts_since_2000. Notice the raw number of viewers for the Super Bowls since 2000. WIth a few minor inversions, it has generally been true that the trend is that the number of viewers for each Super Bowl since 2000 has gone up incrementally. No Super Bowl did worse than the one two years before it; only two Super Bowls did worse than the one immediately preceding it, and most Super Bowls simple marginally beat out the one right before it. Its been a trend for some time now. --Jayron32 16:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also - the press made sure to tell everyone that President Obama was throwing a Super Bowl party. If you want to be cool like the President, you had to have a party yourself, right? -- kainaw ™ 16:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe how they calculate viewership numbers is different now (vs. MASH) and results in higher figures. I'll go and find a ref. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 16:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that back in 1983, television viewers were severely limited in programming choices compared to today.10draftsdeep (talk) 17:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This goes to Jayron32's point above. On this table --> List_of_most-watched_television_broadcasts#Top 46 network primetime telecasts of all time (1964–2010) ... the M*A*S*H finale is ranked #1 and the 2010 Super Bowl is ranked #26, when ranked by percent of households watching the broadcast. Interesting. (64.252.68.102 (talk) 00:16, 10 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Don't forget that much of the East Coast was home-bound because of a record snowfall. With no where to go, more "Nielsen families" watched the game on their home TV rather than at a friend's house or restaurant. The Super Bowl got a higher rating in the Washington area than anywhere else in the country save New Orleans. That shouldn't affect total viewership, but Nielsen does a better job of "capturing" home viewers than people at sports bars. The fact that the Super Bowl always airs in at least 40% of American households is even more amazing when you consider that so many people are watching at other people's houses. It is possibly the biggest shared national experience there is in America. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:11, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't notice any Presidential elections on there, but maybe news events coverage is a separate category somewhere. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well more Americans watched at least some of the Super Bowl (153.4 million) than voted in the last presidential election (131.2 million), so who knows whether as many people were watching Obama vs. McCain as Brees vs. Manning. Plus the election coverage is split between all the different networks while the Super Bowl is only on one network. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, one might expect that there are a fair number of people under the age 18 watching the game who would obviously not be able to vote, not to mention those felons watching from their ultra plush prison cells. Googlemeister (talk) 21:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a Brit,I like to feel it was The Who on the half time show.hotclaws 14:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If they ever bring Janet Jackson back for the halftime show, they might set a record that's untoppable. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:57, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all for the above input and discussion ... much appreciated ... (64.252.68.102 (talk) 15:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

MA*SH

My above Super Bowl question also brought to mind this question about the TV show M*A*S*H. Does anyone know why they use the three asterisks in the title? I could not seem to find out any information about this. I know that the M, A, S, and H stand for "Mobile Army Surgical Hospital" (or some such) ... but that still does not explain the odd use of three — not four — asterisks. Any insights? Thanks. (64.252.68.102 (talk) 15:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

It will be difficult to find a reference for this, but this is my memory... MASH, the movie, did not use asterisks. The movie poster did at the suggestion of producers/executive types who wanted people to understand that MASH was an acronym. This was a movie about mashed potatoes or something similar. The artist used asterisks instead of periods because it looked prettier. People seemed to like M*A*S*H as it was written on the poster as opposed to MASH as it was written on the film. So, the television series kept the asterisks. -- kainaw ™ 15:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK ... that is as I thought. So, you're saying that the asterisks are replacing conventional periods ... and that they simply omitted the final (fourth) asterisk/period? That is more or less what I assumed had transpired. Even though, of course, most acronyms do not even use periods anyway (radar, sonar, NOW, ERA, etc.). Thanks. (64.252.68.102 (talk) 15:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

That is just a memory from way back in the early 80's (possibly even late 70's). Since it was long before the Internet, I'm not finding much of anything to back that memory. -- kainaw ™ 15:48, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, for you geeks, I mean "web" when I say "Internet". Heehee! -- kainaw ™ 15:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hate to sound like a broken record, but did you read the M*A*S*H* article? The "synopsis" section addresses the question. Kingsfold (talk) 16:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That synopsis doesn't make much sense. The novel is spelled "MASH". The movie is spelled "MASH". The movie poster is spelled "M*A*S*H". How does the use of asterisks come from the novel? -- kainaw ™ 16:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, the original novel was MASH, as is evident even just from google-imaging [mash novel]. I'm thinking that the re-issued novel had the movie poster as its cover, and maybe that compounds the confusion. I also saw that in the original illustration with the stars, they were much smaller, almost like dots, which is a convention sometimes used with acronyms. Later, the stars were made much larger. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all for the above input and discussion ... much appreciated ... (64.252.68.102 (talk) 15:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Accordion/Techno song in Italy, Help!

I'm currently in Italy, and just the other day in Palermo, on 5 separate occasions I heard a song that had a really catchy accordion tune. I don't know if it was Italian or not, and I don't think the song had lyrics, but it was sort of techno-y and really happy sounding. I wish I could describe it more, but I really only heard snippets of it. I would know it if I heard it. Someone help! Thanks!! Jared (t) 18:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

iPod Touch camera

Are there any plans/rumors for a future generation of the iPod Touch to have a built-in camera like the iPhone or iPod Nano? —C Teng ^(talk) 21:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of Apple rumour sites out there, here's a link to just one of no doubt many articles suggesting the touch will be getting a camera (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/12/leaked-ipod-touch-with-camera-photos-were-real/). As with all rumours around Apple take them with a pinch of salt as they're so many of them. ny156uk (talk) 22:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rumors suggest the iPod touch was going to get a camera on par with the camera in the iPhone 3GS, but it didn't fit in the iPod touch form factor so it was dropped until it could be miniaturized enough to fit. If that is true, it suggests that some future generation of the iPod touch will receive a camera, but speculation on when that might happen would be best found by watching the market on auto-focusing cell phone camera components. Caltsar (talk) 17:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]