Entertainment desk
< January 8	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 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.

January 9

Love Me Tender recording

Love Me Tender (song) says that Elvis never re-recorded the song in a studio. Was the version we commonly hear from the film soundtrack recording? (It sounds like it.) Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 02:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

film genre dealing ethnic stereotypes like Bourekas films

Is there any film genre that has the name of a dish and it deals with ethnic or racial stereotypes like Israel's Bourekas film genre? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donmust90 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spaghetti Westerns? --Jayron32 03:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, we have articles on Meat pie Western and Macaroni Combat. Not sure the films in these genres are about ethnic or racial stereotypes, but their labels are what they are. Kitchen sink drama? ---Sluzzelin talkñ

Hurricane relief benefit single

In the article about We Are Family (song), there were several cover versions mentioned. But I wish someone had edited into the article something about a Hurricane Katrina benefit version. Here are a few sentences to get that person started. In 2006, there was a re-working of the song for Hurricane Katrina relief. In 2007, there was a benefit concert. It was We Are Family: Hurricane Katrina Benefit Concert, hosted by Steve Harvey. The song might've been included. Where else is there a good place to start? Anyone know?142.255.103.121 (talk) 07:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is the encyclopedia anyone can edit - even you! But "The song might've been included"? We only deal in facts here. Was it included or wasn't it? If it wasn't, what's the point of the sentence or question? --TammyMoet (talk) 10:36, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I tried looking around. But all I get is a lot of the wrong information. So I put the statements in bold for another person to help me out.142.255.103.121 (talk) 04:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Robin Hood's real name

In your article on the Errol Flynn 1938 movie "The Adventures of Robin Hood", you have a list of actors along with the character they play in the movie.

You show Errol Flynn and

"Sir Robin of Locksley"

and then

at the least "Earl of Locksley"

This makes no sense. Did you mean to say that at the end of the movie the King awarded Robin with the title of Earl of Locksley (a higher rank than Sir) ? If that is the case, you need to CHANGE the word "least" to "at story's end, named"

I think the writer meant to say "last", but I think it should be expanded as I've written above.

Thanks !```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.14.19 (talk) 18:04, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's a bit awkwardly phrased. It should be sufficient to credit Errol Flynn as "Robin Hood". The cast list doesn't need to become needlessly complicated with the intricacies of his titles and names. I'll fix that presently. If you want to know the full bredth and depth of the history of the fictional character in various media, and of his historical antecedants, the Wikipedia article Robin Hood is probably a good place to start. --Jayron32 18:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And apparently "Robert", Robin being a nickname for Robert. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:21, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Songs from Horror Films

I am looking for songs that act, in horror films, as an entrance for the villain. This began after watching 1408 (film) and its use of "We've Only Just Begun" by The Carpenters. Unfortunately, I am not a huge horror film person, having only seen 4 before. The other example that jumps to mind is Jeepers Creepers (song) in the film with the same title. I prefer songs, not musical scores. Pop-like stuff. Thanks for any help you can provide. The Reader who Writes (talk) 21:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The most singular horror movie song I can think of is Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells, which I've never met a person who didn't think "Horror film" when they heard the opening of it. --Jayron32 21:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There must be not a few people like myself who (a) first heard the tune on record and (b) have never watched the relevant movie, who therefore do not have that association. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 84.21.143.150 (talk) 14:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Jeepers Creepers" may have been used as kind of dark satire, like the renditions of moon-related songs in An American Werewolf in London, but the song itself is bouncy and lively. I'm not sure if the OP is ruling out instrumentals, but if not, then Mancini's theme for Experiment in Terror and Bernard Herrmann's theme for Psycho might fit. Also the Jaws theme by John Williams, a leitmotif for anytime the shark shows up (assuming you consider the shark a villain, which could be arguable). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you are willing to include Horror comedy (genre) then Sweet Transvestite from The Rocky Horror Show and the The Rocky Horror Picture Show fit.

It's not exactly what you're looking for, but in the film Lady in White the song "Did You Ever See a Dream Walking?" is associated with the ghost of a young girl. The ghost is not a villain, but her murderer's whistling of the song is what identifies him as the killer. And my mention of whistling just now brings to mind Hans Beckert (Peter Lorre) in M, whose continual whistling of Grieg's "In the Hall of the Mountain King" serves as a kind of "entrance music", alerting the viewer to his presence. It's not technically a song, I guess, but its not part of the musical score of the film, either. Deor (talk) 13:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Telltale signs that this (show - recording - broadcast) is instructed / faux opposed to not instructed reality

Just wondering ..... I'm much more skeptical about freak news and other actually a lot of other things being shown on regular broadcast tv.

So this is it -> After I've been working as a Runner on two different film casts - one fictionary film with 10 shooting days in a lot of different locations I was amazed... shit... these people were not experienced filmmakers.... but ten days and no budget.. and still they managed spend like 8 hours for scenes only supposed to last maybe 20 mintes.

Anywyays...the other film was a sort of a documentary.... shot during 3 days.....very much different.

When these films will be shown it's of course gonna be advertised as movies/fiction...

But I just saw to much.... Moving around..doing scenes different...

If you get my idea.. iS THIS ALSO the reality for all the shows on tv...like ultimate survival, myth buster's and etc.

Damn I was in the midst of it all...and it was so many people faking reality...

The question is..... How much of what you can see in TV shows/programmes are not instructed... I think NOthing... Weird examples please...with cigars on top.85.81.121.107 (talk) 22:11, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, there's really nothing on TV that isn't carefully edited together to maximize the dramatic interest. At all. There's no examples of someone that just points a camera at a scene and leaves it on for a while and then airs that footage. Well, maybe C-SPAN. But nothing anyone actually watches. --Jayron32 22:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How about interviews where the (smart) guest insists that they broadcast the interview in whole, to prevent them from warping what was said ? StuRat (talk) 22:43, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If by "not instructed" you mean not scripted, then sure, there are quite a few. Most game shows, many "reality" shows (although some are faked), many interviews, many clips on America's Funniest Home Videos-type shows, much news footage, sports events, etc. StuRat (talk) 22:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, except that most reality shows, even if not scripted, are edited to be essentially scripted. The producers decide that certain persons on a reality show will fill certain archtypical roles (the nerd, the asshole, the priss, the nice guy, etc.) and then will edit scenes and dialogue to give them those archetypes, even if the people themselves aren't that way really. It's how they work: they create the "script" on the fly with creative editing. Reality shows are no more real than sitcoms, they just go about generating their fiction in a different manner. --Jayron32 02:56, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It makes for a snappier package, for sure. Think of the average fishing show. Isn't it amazing how they always manage to catch some fine fish within an hour? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't know. Never watched a fishing show. I'm aware they exist, but then again I'm aware that Inguinal hernias exist, but I do what I can to avoid them. --Jayron32 06:26, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good plan. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually they don't always catch a fish "within the hour". Both Robson and that chap who searches exotic rivers for monster fish occasionally say things that amount to "...and then we waited for ages but that bit's not very telegenic so we'll only show enough of the waiting to give you the idea that it happened". Britmax (talk) 10:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do the characters ever go to the toilet, just do their business and leave again? Most people assume Star Trek never had toilets (see this search), probably because it's never interesting enough to broadcast. Characters also rarely talk about the normal banalities like everyone else does. Film and TV is full of the interesting stuff that is usually essential to the plot in some way - the exception that immediately leaps to mind is Pulp Fiction which is full of Jules and Vincent chatting about European burgers, foot massages, and so on. Real life on the other hand is full of dull moments which very few TV shows bother to show the audience. Astronaut (talk) 17:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not. TV is an escape from reality. So is the cinema, and novels, and music, and alcohol and drugs, and travel, and food, and Wikipedia, and sex. Not saying they're necessarily bad things. Ever wondered why so-called "reality television" is even less like actual reality than TV shows that are not so-described? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:25, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Home movies were/are kind of a primitive "reality" filming. Imagine your family being filmed for 24 hours. That might be a bit much. 8 minutes? That, we could handle. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

US TV ratings

I was wondering if someone could direct me to a source giving ratings for a film that appeared on HBO on October 20, 2012. I've recently been expanding The Girl in the hope of getting it to GA status, and although I can find ratings for its UK television debut (like this one), the same information doesn't appear to be available for the US broadcast. Someone gave me this link which does give listings, but there's nothing for The Girl. Can anyone help? Cheers in advance. Paul MacDermott (talk) 22:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Think I have it from here. Paul MacDermott (talk) 23:54, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then I'll mark it resolved. If you disagree, please remove the tag. StuRat (talk) 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did think I'd resolved it, but unfortunately this isn't a reliable source as the stats are in a posting after the article. They're sourced from here, which in turn is sourced from Nielsen, but I can't seem to track that down. I've added it as an offline ref for now, but would appreciate it if anyone could find the original somewhere on the web. Cheers, Paul MacDermott (talk) 13:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]