|
RECOMMENDED
READING > DOCUMENTS
>
THE CURRENT FILMS FAQ
From: eleeper@jagon.lucent.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) Newsgroups:
rec.arts.movies.current-films,rec.arts.movies.misc,rec.answers,news.answers
Subject: rec.arts.movies.current-films Frequently Asked
Questions (FAQ) Supersedes: <8j2d11$8h6@nntpa.cb.lucent.com>
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films,rec.arts.movies.misc
Date: 25 Jul 2000 05:12:38 GMT Organization: Lucent
Technologies, Columbus, Ohio Expires: Mon, 31 Dec 2001
00:00:00 GMT Message-ID: <8lj7k6$6ef@nntpa.cb.lucent.com>
Keywords: monthly Originally-From: steves@cica.indiana.edu
(Steve Scher)
Archive-name: movies/faq/current-films
Last change: Mon May 22 11:26:41 EDT 2000
This FAQ is cross-posted to rec.arts.movies.current-films
and rec.arts.movies.misc.
Copies of this article may be obtained by anonymous
ftp to rtfm.mit.edu under /pub/usenet-by-group/news.answers/movies/faq/current-films.
Or, send email to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu with "send
usenet-by-group/news.answers/movies/faq/current-films"
in the body of the message.
Questions include:
1) "Does anyone know this movie?" <plot
summary follows>
2) "What stories/movies/tv shows are about X?"
3) How can I get an address &/or a phone number
for (some famous star)?
4) "Does anyone want to talk about X?"
5) What is letterboxing?
6) What does the number at the end of the end credits
mean?
7) What "ethnic" actors have won/been nominated
for Academy Awards?
8) What are all the James Bond films and who played
Bond?
9) What are those funny dots that blink on in the upper-right
corner of films?
10) How do films, actors, etc., get nominated for Academy
Awards?
11) What are the top twenty grossing films of all time?
12) How can I find out where a certain movie is playing?
13) What is a director's cut?
14) Are there any Web sites for movie scripts?
15) What is Roger Ebert's CompuServe address?
16) Is Jodie Foster gay?
17) Is FARGO a true story? Was the "Victim in
the Field" really played by the Artist Formerly
Known as Prince?
18) When does a movie break even?
19) Why aren't there more G-rated movies released?
Topics include: 1) Product placements in movies
For the following items, see the rec.arts.movies.past-films
FAQ (there is some overlap): 1) "Does anyone know
this movie?" <plot summary follows> 2) "What
stories/movies/tv shows are about X?" 3) How can
I get an address &/or a phone number for (some famous
star)? 4) "Does anyone want to talk about X?"
5) Did Audrey Hepburn do the singing in MY FAIR LADY?
Did Andy Williams dub Lauren Bacall's singing voice
in TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT? How come Julie Andrews did
not reprise her Broadway performance of Eliza Doolitle?
6) What movie did the quote: "Badges?? Badges??
We don't need no stinkin' badges?" come from ??
7) What is the earliest *numbered* sequel? 8) What is
letterboxing? 9) Why are clips of old films always fast?
10) What are the Hitchcock cameos in all his movies?
11) What are the references to "See You Next Wednesday"
in John Landis's films? 12) What does the number at
the end of the end credits mean? 13) What "ethnic"
actors have won/been nominated for Academy Awards? 14)
What are all the James Bond films and who played Bond?
15) What are those funny dots that blink on in the upper-right
corner of films? 16) What is the secret of THE CRYING
GAME? (rot13'd) 17) What are the top twenty grossing
films of all time? 18) What is a director's cut? 19)
Are there any Web sites for movie scripts? 20) What
is the poem in FOUR WEDDINGS AND A FUNERAL? 21) What
is the significance of the stones at the end of SCHINDLER'S
LIST? 22) Where in THE CROW did Brandon Lee get shot?
Did they leave it in? And how did it happen? 23) Is
it true that a hanged person (munchkin) is visible in
the background of one scene in THE WIZARD OF OZ? 24)
What are some movies that were better than the books/stories
they were based on?
For the following items, see the rec.arts.sf.movies
FAQ: 1. Star Trek. 2. The animated LORD OF THE RINGS
by Ralph Bakshi covers only the first half of the trilogy.
Bakshi did not make the second half. 3. Frequent subjects.
4. Abbreviations commonly used in this group: 5. BLADE
RUNNER: the sixth replicant, why voice-overs, and Deckard
a replicant? 6. "Can the X beat the Y?" where
X and Y are mighty ships or alien races from different
space opera movies/series. 7. Is the movie HEAVY METAL
out on video? 8. Why is there an acknowledgment to Harlan
Ellison in the credits of THE TERMINATOR? or Doesn't
THE TERMINATOR have the same plot as a TWILIGHT ZONE
episode? 9. What about the relationship between HAL
(the computer in 2001: A Space Odyssey) and IBM? (If
you add 1 to each letter in HAL you get IBM.) 10. Who
was the voice of the seductive Jessica Rabbit in the
film "WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT?" 11. What are
all of the "cute" gimmicks in the film BACK
TO THE FUTURE? 12. What role did Jamie Lee Curtis play
in THE ADVENTURES OF BUCKAROO BANZAI ACROSS THE 8TH
DIMENSION? 13. When is George Lucas going to make more
STAR WARS films? What will they be about?? 14. In OUTLAND
and TOTAL RECALL, astronauts exposed suddenly to vacuum
promptly explode. In 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, a few seconds'
exposure to vacuum doesn't bother one at all. Which
is right? 15. What does "FTL" mean? 16. I
was told that the director's cut of DUNE was seven hours
long, and did a much better job of portraying the novel.
Where can I find it? 17. What are the two minutes of
new footage on the STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY
videocassette? 18. What are the various Quatermass films
and the names they go under?
Items covered in the rec.music.classical FAQ (cf):
Q6. What is that [classical] music in [insert TV show/movie
here]?
rec.arts.movies.* are newsgroups devoted to discussions
of movies. They are high-volume newsgroups and this
article is intended to help reduce the number of unnecessary
postings, thereby making them more useful and enjoyable
to everyone.
If you have not already done so, please read the articles
in news.announce.newusers. They contain a great deal
of useful information about network etiquette and convention.
Before we begin, two pieces of net.etiquette. Both
of these are mentioned in news.announce.newusers, but
since they are so frequently violated, and at least
one of them is particularly relevant to this group,
we mention them here:
SPOILER WARNINGS: Many people feel that much of the
enjoyment of a film is ruined if they know certain things
about it, especially when those things are surprise
endings or mysteries. On the other hand, they also want
to know whether or not a film is worth seeing, or they
may be following a particular thread of conversation
where such information may be revealed. The solution
to this is to put the words SPOILER in your header,
or in the text of your posting. You can also put a ctl-L
character in the *first* column for your readers who
are using rn. Some people think that spoiler warnings
are not necessary. We don't understand why, and do not
want to discuss it. Use your best judgment.
REPLIES TO REQUESTS AND QUESTIONS: When you think that
many people will know an answer to a question, or will
have an answer to a request, RESPOND VIA E-MAIL!!! And
if you don't know the answer, but want to know, DON'T
POST TO THE NET asking for the answer, ask VIA E-MAIL!
If you think a lot of people will want the same information,
you might suggest that the person summarize to the net.
Even if you don't see an answer posted, and you have
the answer, please send it e-mail. The thirty other
people who answered may have already sent it, and your
site just hasn't gotten it yet. It clogs the net and
gets very tedious to see 30 people answer the same question,
and another 30 people asking for the answer to be posted.
All of that should be done via mail. The net is a highly
asynchronous medium. It can take several days for an
article to make it to all sites. It is also quite common
for followups to messages to reach a site before the
original.
Please keep in mind two points:
1. Always remember that there is a live human being
at the other end of the wires. In other words, please
write your replies with the same courtesy you would
use in talking to someone face-to-face.
2. Try to recognize humor and irony in postings. Tone
of voice does not carry in ASCII print, and postings
are often snapped off quickly, so that humorous intent
may not be obvious. More destructive and vicious arguments
have been caused by this one fact of net existence than
any other. It will help if satiric/ironic/humorous comments
are marked with the "smiley face," :-)
The first part of the list is a compendium of information
that has been posted to rec.arts.movies.* many times
in the past. If you have received this list through
e-mail, without requesting it, this is most likely because
you posted one of the questions on the list.
The second part of the FAQ list contains a series of
topics that are repeatedly discussed, along with a bit
of editorial comment on each one. The reason for including
this information is merely to provide new readers with
some background and context. In no way do we mean for
this to preclude anyone from discussing these topics
again. While the items listed in part one are (indisputable??)
facts, the topics in part two are objects of opinion.
As such, they can be discussed ad infinitum without
any resolution. Do so if you wish. Remember the first
amendment...
The last part of the FAQL contains a few further bits
of information for readers of rec.arts.movies.*. This
includes several other lists that are kept by members
of the group, trivia contests etc. Interested readers
should seek out the companion FAQ in rec.arts.sf.movies.
If you have any questions about this list, or if there
is something you think should be added, you can contact
me through e-mail at:
evelynleeper@geocities.com
Now, here are some frequently asked questions...
PART ONE: Frequently asked questions, and some answers
(and some of them may be right).
0) "What movies has X appeared in/directed/written
etc.?"
The Internet Movie Database (IMDb) can answer a huge
range of movie related questions, so it's always worth
checking out before posting to the groups. The IMDb
has over 1,000,000 filmography entries for more than
75,000 movies. It includes filmographies for actors,
directors, writers, composers, cinematographers, editors,
production designers, costume designers and producers;
plot summaries; character names; movie ratings; year
of release; running times; movie trivia; quotes; goofs;
soundtracks; personal trivia; alternative names; certificates;
color information; country of production; genres; production
companies; sound mix; reference literature; filming
locations; sequel/remake information; release dates;
advertising tag lines; detailed technical data; box
office grosses, language and Academy Award information.
Many thousands of movies are covered completely from
the major actors to the minor bit players.
The IMDb FAQ contains full details and is posted weekly
to the many of the groups, alternatively copies can
be obtained by anonymous ftp to rtfm.mit.edu under /pub/usenet-by-group/news.answers/movies/movie-database-faq
or send e-mail to <mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu> with:
send usenet-by-group/news.answers/movies/movie-database-faq
in the body of the message. Here's a quick summary
of how to access the database:
(a) Web access:
http://us.imdb.com/ (USA) http://uk.imdb.com/ (UK)
(b) To use the e-mail interface, send a message with
the subject:
HELP
to <mail-server@imdb.com> and the movie mail-server
will respond with a copy of the help file.
(c) For local interactive access to the database,
the FTP site uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu has software for
several operating systems:
Unix in /pub/info/imdb/tools/moviedb-3.2f.tar.gz MS-DOS
in /pub/info/imdb/tools/msdos/cb153.arj Amiga in /pub/info/imdb/tools/MovieMUI3_2.lha
1) "Does anyone know this movie?" <plot
summary follows>
When making this kind of request, ask that all responses
be e-mailed back to you. After having found out what
it is, then post the correct answer to the net.
If you know the answer but are unable to send a message
to the requester, wait a few days. It's likely that
someone else will post the correct answer, thus sparing
you the effort.
Do not post messages like "I want to know, too"
to the net. E-mail the person who asked the question
and request that they send you any information they
get by e-mail. Only if you cannot reach the person by
e-mail *and* no one has posted about the request after
several days should you post.
2) "What stories/movies/tv shows are about X?"
When making these kind of requests, ask that all replies
be e-mailed to you and that you will summarize. Note
that a summary is not just concatenating all the replies
together and posting the resulting file. Take the time
to strip headers, combine duplicate information, and
write a short summary.
3) How can I get an address &/or a phone number
for (some famous star)?
You *can't* get phone numbers. But you can often get
contact addresses (usually an agent or publicist), by
calling the Screen Artists Guild at 213-954-1600. They
will give you a phone number and/or address for the
agent. The agent can provide you an address to write
and may send pictures on request or provide the publicist's
addresses. Another method (if the star has written a
book) is to send mail in care of the publisher of that
book.
4) "Does anyone want to talk about X?"
If nobody seems to be discussing what you want to talk
about, post a (polite) message opening the discussion.
Don't just say, "Does anyone want to talk about
X" or "I really like X" however; try
to have something interesting to say about the topic
to get discussion going.
Don't be angry or upset if no one responds. It may
be that X is just a personal taste of your own, or quite
obscure. Or it may be that X was discussed to death
a few weeks ago, *just* before you came into the group.
(If this is the case, you'll probably know, though,
because some rude fool will probably flame you for "Bringing
that up *AGAIN*!!!" Ignore them.)
5) What is letterboxing?
In case you hadn't noticed, movie screens have a different
shape than television screens. This means that when
a movie is shown on a television screen, it doesn't
fit. Up until recently, this meant that either the left
and right ends of the picture were cropped off, or the
picture was "panned and scanned" (the camera
would seem to go back and forth between the left and
right sides, usually done for scenes in which the two
characters speaking were at the far left and right of
a scene), or that the picture was warped so that everyone
looked tall and thin (this was usually done for credit
sequences so the full names could fit on the screen,
or you would think you were watching "ne with the
Wi"). Now some companies are releasing "letterboxed"
versions of films on videocassettes and videodisks.
These have a black bar at the top and bottom of the
screen, allowing the full width of the picture to be
included, but resulting in a smaller picture--that is,
a character ten inches tall in a non-letterboxed version
might be eight inches tall in a letterboxed one.
Long answer: From Matthias Walz (b228@mail.fh-wuerzburg.de)
Some remarks related to the pan&scan-theatrical-format-confusion
in several film-related groups (sorry for being lengthy,
but the matter is complicated):
Once or twice a week I'm working as projectionist in
a repertory cinema, where four (!) different formats
are used for projection (1.33:1, 1.66:1, 1.85:1 and
CinemaScope, 2.35:1). My job includes assembling the
different reels (usually five for 90-100 minutes) of
the film before showing it the first time. During this
process, the projectionist has to figure out which picture
format to use for projection. This is sometimes quite
confusing - a few remarks about the topic:
1. Up to the Fifties, all films were shot in 1.33:1
and also intended for projection in this aspect ratio.
2. Since the Fifties, many films were still shot in
1.33:1 (probably for financial reasons), but most of
them are intended to be shown in 1.66:1 or even 1.85:1.
If you'd show them in 1.33:1, you'd see exciting things
like dolly tracks at the bottom or microphones and even
studio lights at the top of the picture. Once I used
1.33:1 (by mistake) for Hitchcock's "North By Northwest",
with the result that in the forest scene preceding the
Mt.Rushmore finale, studio lights as well as the top
of the stage decoration depicting the forest became
visible. This ruined the effect of the scene completely
- the magic was gone.
3. To make things even worse, sometimes different aspect
ratios are used in one and the same film - up to three
(the reason for tgis? I'm not sure. Maybe the film studios
use up film material that's left over from other projects).
I can remember a print which contained shots in all
three "normal" formats: 1.33:1, 1.66:1 and
1.85:1. In this case, you have to show the print in
the widest format (1.85:1), otherwise you'd have a "letterbox
effect" on the screen during scenes shot in 1.33:1
or 1.66:1 !
4. The reason why film companies don't bother about
using different formats for the same film lies in the
fact that most cinemas use only two different formats
for projection anyway (one theater-specific lens in
the range from 1.66:1 to 1.85:1, and 2.35:1 for anamorphic
projection). Therefore, if a 1.33:1 film is shown in
such a theatre, portions of the picture are cropped
at the top and the bottom of the screen.
Now to the film-on-tv-thing:
The normal TV screen has an aspect ratio of about 1.3:1.
If the network wants to show the film in the format
intended by the filmmakers, it has just the same problems
as the poor theatre projectionist dealing with four
different formats. If the network doesn't care too much
for artisitc subtleties and follows a "full screen"-policy
(as some German commercial networks do), you'll see
effects like the above-mentioned (North By Northwest).
Conclusion:
If the film is shown on TV in the aspect ratio it was
intended to be shown, it has to be letterboxed, except
for the 1.33:1 films. In the case of CinemaScope films,
there's definitely nothing hidden by the black bars.
In all other cases of letterboxing, there may be something
hidden behind the bars - but something you wouldn't
care for anyway.
I hope this brings all this nonsense (B. Faber et al.)
about censorship by letterboxing to a well-deserved
end in cyberhell. Letterboxing is the only way to show
a film on TV as it was meant to be shown.
6) What does the number at the end of the end credits
mean?
The Motion Picture Association of America (the MPAA)
is responsible for assigning these numbers. It is part
of their film rating service. Any film can be submitted
to the MPAA for rating (the G/PG/PG13/R/NC-17 ratings
Americans are familiar with), for a small fee. Any film
rated by the MPAA is issued a unique number. Any film
can be submitted, but many aren't, including most adult
sex films, many foreign films, industrial films and
other training and educational films, television films,
and some independently made films.
The rating service (and the numbering associated with
it) was started in 1968. There is no publicly available
list of films and numbers, and the MPAA information
office does not have the title of the film issued certificate
#1 readily available. [Joshua Kreitzer, gromit82@hotmail.com,
pointed out after this was written that cccording to
Mark A. Vieira's SIN IN SOFT-FOCUS, the first film to
receive a certificate under the Production Code was
John Ford's THE WORLD MOVES ON (1934).]
Films before 1968 were assigned numbers based on their
agreement to the Production Code, instituted July 1,
1934. Under that scheme, the film SHE, released in 1935,
has number 985. Rod McKim (Rod@usenet.despot.com) reports
that THE SCARLET EMPRESS, released in 1934, has number
16, the lowest by far that he has seen. Reports of any
other low number spottings would be appreciated. Given
that the current number is in the 30,000, I believe
the current numbers are continued from those, rather
than restarted in 1968.
A word or two more about MPAA ratings. The ratings
are assigned by a board composed of "ordinary citizens",
largely parents, as the intent of the rating system
is to protect the tender minds of children from harm.
The board watches the film and collectively assigns
a rating. If the producer doesn't like the rating, s/he
has a couple of options. The rating can be appealed
to the MPAA official in charge of rating films. On a
few occasions, the appeal has been successful. Not too
surprisingly, appeals by large studios tend to have
a better success rate than appeals by smaller studios.
Alternately, the producer can recut the film and resubmit
it. The MPAA rating board will tell a filmmaker what
caused a film to get a rating, but they never actually
tell a filmmaker that if this scene is cut, you will
get that rating. Somehow or other, though, the information
tends to get to the filmmakers, so that Alan Parker,
for instance, somehow knew that cutting a few seconds
of Mickey Rourke humping Lisa Bonet while blood drips
from the ceiling changes ANGEL HEART from a film no
child should see to a film merely requiring parental
presence.
While we're at it, what is the MPAA? It's an industry
organization for the American film production business,
particularly for the major studios. Its members are
Disney, Columbia, MGM, Paramount, 20th Century Fox,
Universal, and Warner Brothers. These companies pay
fees to the MPAA that are used as the primary source
of financing for the organization. In addition to the
ratings, the MPAA performs other services for their
members, including lobbying the government. (They prefer
to refer to this service as "working on issues
important to the film industry.") Jack Valenti,
the head of the MPAA, is a prominent spokesman who speaks
for "Hollywood" as a whole, generally on issues
important to all the studios, like film piracy, trade
disputes with other countries, and censorship. The MPAA
was founded in 1922, so it's been doing this sort of
thing for quite a while.
[Thanks to Peter Reiher, reiher@ficus.cs.ucla.edu,
for this answer.]
7) What ethnic actors have won/been nominated for
Academy Awards?
(This question seem to come up every year at Oscar
time.)
"Actors of ethnic extraction other than European/Mediterranean
who have been nominated for Academy Awards" (so
we don't start quibbling over Omar Sharif). I'm not
a big fan of groupings by race, but it has its educational
values in a situation like this, showing Hollywood's
record in honoring minority contributions. In borderline
cases, we have gone by the "as generally perceived"
standard--thus no Ben Kingsley, who seems thoroughly
British despite the fact that his father was Gujrati,
and none of the many American actors who proudly say
they're "part Indian" when they mean 1/16
or 1/32. With that ponderous preamble out of the way,
here's the list:
BLACK
Hattie McDaniel 1939 supp Gone with the Wind WON Dorothy
Dandridge 1954 lead Carmen Jones Sidney Poitier 1958
lead The Defiant Ones 1963 lead Lilies of the Field
WON Juanita Moore 1959 supp Imitiation of Life Beah
Richards 1967 supp Guess Who's Coming to Dinner Rupert
Crosse 1969 supp The Reivers James Earl Jones 1970 lead
The Great White Hope Paul Winfield 1972 lead Sounder
Cicely Tyson 1972 lead Sounder Diana Ross 1972 lead
Lady Sings the Blues Diahann Carroll 1974 lead Claudine
Howard E. Rollins Jr 1981 supp Ragtime Louis Gossett
Jr. 1982 supp An Officer and a Gentleman WON Alfre Woodard
1983 supp Cross Creek Adolph Caesar 1984 supp A Soldier's
Story Whoopi Goldberg 1985 lead The Color Purple 1991
supp Ghost WON Margaret Avery 1985 supp The Color Purple
Oprah Winfrey 1985 supp The Color Purple Dexter Gordon
1986 lead Round Midnight Morgan Freeman 1987 supp Street
Smart 1989 lead Driving Miss Daisy 1994 lead The Shawshank
Redemption Denzel Washington 1987 supp Cry Freedom 1989
supp Glory WON 1992 lead Malcolm X Jaye Davidson 1992
supp The Crying Game Laurence Fishburne 1993 lead What's
Love Got to Do with It? Angela Bassett 1993 lead What's
Love Got to Do with It? Samuel L. Jackson 1994 supp
Pulp Fiction Cuba Gooding, Jr. 1996 supp Jerry Maguire
WON Marianne Jean-Baptiste 1996 supp Secrets & Lies
Denzel Washington 2000 lead The Hurricane Michael Clarke
Duncan 2000 supp The Green Mile
ASIAN (including Polynesian)
Miyoshi Umeki 1957 supp Sayonara WON Sessue Hayakawa
1957 supp The Bridge on the River Kwai Mako 1966 supp
The Sand Pebbles Jocelyn LaGarde 1966 supp Hawai`i Haing
S. Ngor 1984 supp The Killing Fields WON Noriyuki "Pat"
Morita 1984 supp The Karate Kid
[whatever your term is for] PRE-EUROPEAN NORTH AMERICAN
Anthony Quinn 1952 lead Viva Zapata WON Anthony Quinn
1956 supp Lust for Life WON Chief Dan George 1970 supp
Little Big Man (Squamish) Graham Greene 1991 supp Dances
with Wolves (Oneida (Iroquois))
HISPANIC Rita Moreno 1961 supp West Side Story WON
Norma Aleandro 1987 supp Gaby--A True Story Andy Garcia
1991 supp The Godfather Part III Rosie Perez 1993 supp
Fearless Fernanda Montenegro 1999 supp Central Station
Note that John Singleton is now the first black to
be nominated as best director (1991, BOYZ N THE HOOD).
(Although Anthony Quinn is often listed as Hispanic,
comments by him about his ancestry on "The Actors
Studio" lead me to list him as "Pre-European
North American." I will not entertain arguments
about whether Montenegro is Hispanic or not--there are
at least several definitions that would include her,
and I'll fall back on "generally perceived.")
[Thanks to Jon Conrad, conrad@sun.acs.udel.edu, for
bulk of this answer. John Cawley, johnmike@news.delphi.com,
maintains a list of Native American actors and their
tribes.]
8) What are all the James Bond films and who played
Bond?
"Casino Royale" episode of CLIMAX TV series
1954 Barry Nelson Dr. No 1962 Sean Connery From Russia
With Love 1963 Sean Connery Goldfinger 1964 Sean Connery
Thunderball 1965 Sean Connery Casino Royale 1967 David
Niven* You Only Live Twice 1967 Sean Connery On Her
Majesty's Secret Service 1969 George Lazenby Diamonds
Are Forever 1971 Sean Connery Live and Let Die 1973
Roger Moore The Man With the Golden Gun 1974 Roger Moore
The Spy Who Loved Me 1977 Roger Moore The Strange Case
of the End of Civilisation as We Know It 1977 x Moonraker
1979 Roger Moore For Your Eyes Only 1981 Roger Moore
Octopussy 1983 Roger Moore Never Say Never Again 1983
Sean Connery The Return of the Man from U.N.C.L.E. 1983
George Lazenby+ A View to a Kill 1985 Roger Moore The
Living Daylights 1987 Timothy Dalton Licence to Kill
1989 Timothy Dalton "Diamonds Aren't Forever"
episode of ALFRED HITCHCOCK PRESENTS 1989 George Lazenby=
Goldeneye 1995 Pierce Brosnan Tomorrow Never Dies 1997
Pierce Brosnan The World Is Not Enough 1999 Pierce Brosnan
* Woody Allen plays his nephew, "Jimmy Bond"
+ Only a cameo--Lazenby drives an Aston Martin with
license plate "JB" in this made-for-television
movie and is clearly supposed to be Bond, though he
is never called by name. = Lazenby plays "James
... [sic]" x Bond does not appear, but "Miss
Moneypacket" drives a car with a "JB 007"
license plate.
(Many people say that CASINO ROYALE is not a real Bond
movie, but rather a parody. NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN is
a movie not made by Broccoli & Co, but otherwise
has the usual look. "The Strange Case...,"
"The Return of ...," and "Diamonds Aren't
Forever" are also not part of the "main line"
of Bond films.)
(Michael Golan mentions also CANNONBALL (1976), but
in that Roger Moore is explicit that he is *Roger Moore*,
not James Bond, in spite of all appearances. Still,
some may want to count this. "M" and "Miss
Moneypacket" appear in "The Strange Case of
the End of Civilisation as We Know It," a 1977
British television production starring John Cleese;
they were played by Kenneth Benda and Charlotte Alexandra
respectively.)
Bruce Long (bruce@asu.edu) says, "The 'Hostage'"
episode of 'The Master' (series starring Lee Van Cleef)
has George Lazenby and David McCallum as guest stars.
Each of them are obviously supposed to be his famous
character (but McCallum is the villain, as though Kuryakin
had become cynical in his later years)."
9) What are those funny dots that blink on in the
upper-right corner of films?
These are cue marks, or "reel-change dots,"
signaling the projectionist that it is time to change
reels. There is actually a set of dots. Four consecutive
frames are marked with a little circle in the upper
right-hand corner of the frame. The first set (4 frames)
of cue marks (the motor cue) is placed 198 frames before
the end of the reel. (198 frames is 8.25 seconds, or
12.375 feet.) There are 172 frames between the first
set of cue marks and the second set of 4 frames, the
changeover cue. There are 18 frames between the changeover
cue and the runout section of the trailer (or foot)
leader. The projectionist threads up the next reel of
film so that he has about nine feet of leader between
the lens and the start of the film. At the first cue
mark, he starts the motor on the second projector. This
gives the projector time to get up to to speed and for
the speed to stabilize. On the second cue mark, he throws
the switches that change the picture and sound sources.
In some old films on TV, you'll see long changeover
cues since some projectionists were paranoid that they
would not see the marks.
Video versions usually do not have these dots because
when the transfer was made, the original negative was
used, or a postive that was made from the original negative
was used. Sometimes an interneg is used. In any event,
only prints that make it to the theatre have the change-over
dots. For older movies, sometimes the only available
print is a release print, which means the dots will
appear.
(Paul Parenteau [dog@sequent.COM], Ron Birnbaum [ron@osf.org],
Harris Minter [harris.minter@datadim.com], Jeffry L.
Johnson [ac717@cleveland.freenet.edu], and Mike Brown
[vidiot!brown%astroatc.UUCP@spool.cs.wisc.edu]).
10) How do films, actors, etc., get nominated for
Academy Awards?
The general model is that the Academy members who work
in the particular specialty make the nominations. Thus,
the Academy's actors nominate the performers (no sex
differentiation - actors/actresses both nominate actors/
actresses), directors nominate directors, writers nominate
writers, etc. All Academy members get to nominate films.
In the categories of foreign language film, documentary,
and short film, the Academy does things a bit differently.
(See below.)
All Academy members get to vote on all awards, except
for the foreign language film (and possibly the documentary
and short film awards). Only members who have seen the
nominated films get to vote on the foreign language
film awards.
Foreign language films are nominated by a complicated
[and totally ineffective] process. Each nation of the
world (except possibly the United States) [though there
was a Puerto Rican entry a few years ago] can submit
one film per year for consideration. The film must have
had its first run in that country that year, and there
are a variety of other arcane, frequently changing rules
to determine eligibility. (A few years ago, the Dutch
film "The Vanishing" wasn't eligible because
of a rule that stated the film had to be almost entirely
in the language of its native country to qualify; "The
Vanishing" had much more French than Dutch. That
rule was changed. Recently, a supposedly Uruguayan film
was removed from consideration because the Academy determined
that the Uruguayan participation in it was insufficient
to make it truly Uruguayan.) The national film boards
of the various countries select the film they will submit,
and there is room for controversy here, too. A couple
of years ago, the German national film board caused
a major fuss by refusing to nominate "Europa, Europa"
for the award. Both German and American filmmakers protested,
but to no avail. The nature of the nominating process
is such that, some years, two great films will come
from one country, but only one can be nominated. In
some cases, the producers of the other will use various
tricks to get it submitted by another country. For example,
"Close To Eden" was a French financed film,
but was made in Russia by a Russian director, and hence
could be submitted by Russia. More controversially,
"Black and White In Color", a French film
largely in French, by a French director, but set in
Africa, was submitted by the African nation where it
was filmed.
A board of "experts" [and Lord only knows
what makes them experts!] then reviews all submitted
foreign films to select five to nominate.
In the case of documentary and short films, anyone
can send their film to the Academy for consideration.
The film basically has to have been made for theatrical
purposes (this issue is very fuzzy, but an obvious television
episode is not eligible), and has to have had its first
release that year. There are separate boards for documentaries
(full length and short) and short films (dramatic live
action and animated). They review all submitted films
and select at most five for nomination. [And apparently
they often don't view each film completely.] The animation
board frequently chooses only three films, rather than
five. These boards are generally made up of volunteers
who may or may not work in the particular fields.
This process has come under fire in the last few years,
particularly as regards documentaries. Many of the best
known and best reviewed documentaries of the past five
years [as of the writing of this] ("Roger and Me",
"The Thin Blue Line", "Paris Is Burning",
"Brother's Keeper", and "A Brief History
of Time", to name a few) have not been nominated.
There are periodic calls to do something about it, but,
basically, the Academy doesn't give a damn about these
categories, and, in fact, is trying to drop the short
film categories. (In the interests of, in the words
of one commentator, "more smoke and dancing girls"
at the Awards ceremony.) Short films received a one-year
reprieve in 1993, but may be dropped from future Award
ceremonies, or perhaps be treated like the scientific
and engineering awards. [Though even in 1993, the winners
were merely announced; they did not get to come up and
accept the awards, or give a thank-you speech.]
Special awards (like those recently given to Audrey
Hepburn and Federico Fellini) are handled specially.
They are chosen by the Academy's board, and they are
not necessarily given every year.
I'm not sure what the procedure is for the special
and scientific awards. I suspect that the Academy has
committees that handle these.
[Thanks to Peter Reiher, reiher@ficus.cs.ucla.edu,
for this.]
11) What are the top ten/twenty grossing films of
all time?
This data can be found at: http://us.imdb.com/Charts/usatopmovies
(for USA box office), http://us.imdb.com/Charts/intltopmovies
(for non-USA box office), and http://us.imdb.com/Charts/worldtopmovies
(for world-wide box-office).
http://mrshowbiz.go.com/reviews/moviereviews/numbers/top100adjusted.html
is a constantly updated list that is adjusted for inflation.
12) How can I find out where a certain movie is playing?
There are many web sites for this, including: http://www.moviefone.com/
http://movies.yahoo.com/showtimes http://movies.excite.com/
In many areas, there is also a phone service to help
you. Call 777-FILM (*) and follow the instructions (you
punch in the first three letters of the film title and
your ZIP code) to find out the theater closest to you
with a particular film, and the remaining show times.
You can also order tickets by credit card through them.
(*) In some areas it's 444-FILM or 222-FILM or possibly
something else.
For something more esoteric (like films that play at
universities, libraries, etc.), you're out of luck unless
you know the distributor and call them.
13) What is a director's cut?
Contracts under the terms of the Hollywood Director's
Guild allow about six weeks for a director to assemble
a cut without studio interference. This is fully edited
and has a synchronized sound track, however, it is usually
not color-corrected nor density-corrected and may not
have the final music and effects track. In more recent
times due to an expanding video aftermarket, the term
director's cut has acquired a popular meaning that implies
a finished final print, different from the theatrical
release, that the director has complete artistic control
over. [muzzle@cs.uq.oz.au]
Bob Morris (morris@sce.carlton.ca) believes the first
widespread use of the term was with the 1989 re-release
of LAWRENCE OF ARABIA.
14) Are there any Web sites for movie scripts?
The following is one WEB site i know of: http://pobox.com/~drew/scripts.htm.
There are probably others. There may be also scripts
at sites with archives related to specific films or
sub-genres. Don't forget that most scripts are copyrighted.
Scripts may be obtainable by stores dealing in movie
materials or books; see the rec.arts.books FAQs on bookstores
for some suggestions.
15) What is Roger Ebert's email address?
As advertised in the CompuServe Roger Ebert Forum as
the "talk to Roger" address, it is 76711.271@compuserve.com.
The Sun Times lists 74774.2267@compuserve.com.
16) Is Jodie Foster gay?
Yes.
17) Is FARGO a true story? Was the "Victim in
the Field" really played by the Artist Formerly
Known as Prince?
No and no. The actor's name is J. Todd Anderson, who
has been a storyboard artist on this and other films
for the Coen brothers. The "symbol" credit
for him was a joke; note that in the credits, the Prince
symbol appears on its side.
[Answer provided by Joshua Kreitzer (j-kreitzer@nwu.edu).]
18) When does a movie break even?
There are multiple answers to that question, and it
differs for every movie, not just because they had different
production costs. Assuming we're talking about genuine
profits (as would be recognized by most of us), and
not the contractual definitions that keep net profit
participants from collecting a cent on even the biggest
grossing films, here are some rules of thumb, and a
few important exceptions.
First off, we're talking about major Hollywood films
that are distributed by the studio that made them. That's
important, because the distributor takes a big cut off
the gross. If the distributor is the same studio as
produced the film, then, from an outsider's point of
view, it all ends up in the same pockets in the end.
If the film was produced by someone else, then you have
to lop off the distribution fee before determining if
the film was profitable. Also, let's ignore for the
moment co-productions, and certainly ignore low budget
independent films.
The capsule answer, as a rough rule of thumb - if a
film's domestic gross equals its negative cost, it will
be profitable. Thus, for example, if we accept a negative
cost for "Titanic" of $200 million, a US/Canada
gross of $200 million would probably lead to a profit.
Now let's talk about why this is a reasonable rule
of thumb, then why it sometimes isn't.
Films make their money from three basic sources - domestic
gross (counting only the US and Canada), foreign gross
(box office receipts from everywhere else), and other
sources. The largest component of the latter is video,
but cable, pay-per-view, and broadcast sales are also
often significant, and lesser revenue streams like in-flight
movies, rentals to colleges and art houses, and others
also chip in. For certain films, merchandising adds
hugely to this figure. For others, it adds nothing.
Still speaking roughly, the current breakdown is that
these three revenue sources are approximately equal.
Not quite. In the last couple of years, foreign box
office has slightly exceeded domestic, for example.
And there are many exceptions, which I'll get to later.
But for rough calculations, equality is around right.
There are other important considerations. First, the
costs usually bandied about for making films are the
negative costs. The negative cost of a film is the price
paid from the moment the project was thought of to the
instant that the studio owns one complete, finished
negative of the movie. There are still big bucks to
pay for a major Hollywood release, however. The biggest
bucks are for advertising and distribution, with a significant
cost to make all the prints. (If you put out 2000 prints,
a not-uncommon run for a big film nowadays, at, say,
$10,000 a print, you can see it adds up.) Advertising
and distribution varies quite a lot. People used to
assume that the total print and advertising costs for
a big film were approximately equal to its negative
cost, but $100 million plus negative costs blew that
estimate out of the water. I doubt if anyone ever spent
$100 million advertising a single film. For a large
scale film, $50 million for prints, adevertising, and
other distribution costs (like shipping 2000 really
heavy sets of boxes containing the prints all over the
country) is not an unreasonable estimate.
A second consideration is that theaters take a share
of the gross. Again, things are complex. The short rule
of thumb is that the theaters take half. But the way
the contracts actually work, the theaters' cut is on
a sliding scale, with the studio taking a much larger
percentage in early weeks, and the theaters gradually
getting more and more as the run continues. Thus, the
attendance pattern of a film makes a big difference.
So far, "The Lost World" and "Men in
Black" have grossed in the same general ballpark,
something like $250 million. However, "The Lost
World" made a vast amount of money in its first
week, and dropped off quickly, while "Men in Black"
did very well its first week, but has held audiences
longer. The distributor thus ended up with more of the
gross from "The Lost World" than from "Men
in Black." Assuming you're not a professional or
obsessive, live with the 50% estimate.
A third factor. For many big films, there are gross
profit participants. These folks, typically the really
heavy hitters like Steven Spielberg, Harrison Ford,
and Michael Crichton, get a percentage of all money
collected by the distributor. In some cases, the contracts
allow the distributors to deduct certain costs off the
top, in others they don't. The dollars that go to gross
profit participants cannot fairly be considered as contributing
towards the studio's recoupment or eventual profit,
since they don't get those dollars. In some cases, like
"The Lost World," we're talking serious chunks
of revenue, perhaps 20% total or more. Let's not worry
about that, for the moment, but don't forget it completely.
A fourth factor. Foreign theaters keep a larger percentage
of the profits than US theaters. So, while the foreign
gross is slightly larger than the domestic gross (averaged
over all films), the domestic box office still returns
more dollars to the studios. Also, the distribution
costs mentioned above only covered US distribution.
You'll need to advertise it in other countries, too,
and perhaps even come up with ad campaigns customized
to each country. More costs. Overall, let's just factor
everything here together and say that studios end up
with 50% of the foreign gross. Not too accurate, perhaps,
but we'll balance it against an inaccuracy in the opposite
direction from other sources.
A fifth factor. There are distribution costs associated
with the other, non-box-office revenue streams. It costs
something to stamp out a videocassette, and to ship
it to the store, and to advertise it. Some of the other
revenue streams have lesser costs (like selling to cable),
some have significant ones. For airline screenings,
you typically have to recut the film, for example. Let's
again assign a 50% return of gross here. It's probably
a bit higher, but we'll balance that against our earlier
overestimation of foreign returns.
Finally, as a general rule the domestic box office
is the engine that drives the other revenues. There
are many exceptions, but foreign gross and video sales
(and other revenue streams) are largely predictable
given domestic gross.
OK, let's review the bidding. The studio spent the
negative cost plus maybe $50 million on prints and advertising.
Speaking roughly, they'll get 50% of each of the three
reveune streams. Roughly, again, that means that for
a $200 million negative cost film, they need to have
around $250 million roll in various doors before they've
really shown a profit. Thus, if the film makes $500
million domestic, it's shown a profit before any other
revenues are considered.
For a bare profit, that $200 million film then has
to return $85 million or so in domestic box office.
(Since that would translate to another $170 million
in money from other sources.) $85 million + $170 million
= $255 million, slightly above the $250 million negative
plus advertising plus distribution cost we'd estimated.
But, remember, we're only getting half the money, so
for an $85 million domestic return, we need a $170 million
gross. That's not quite its negative cost, but it's
in the ballpark. If you assume they'd have to spend
more on advertising such a big film, or you're going
to strike a whole lot more prints, the revenue requirement
goes up a bit.
This is already an obscenely long posting, so I won't
go into the exceptions in detail. But action films will
do better overseas, dramas not so well, films with local
tie-ins to major foreign markets (Japan, UK, Germany,
France) may do significantly better there, children's
films (especially animated ones) will kick butt on video,
and comedies based on dialog will bomb outside English-speaking
countries. There are many other exceptions - Disney
would be ill-advised to predict any revenues on "Kundun"
from China, for example. Sometimes, for completely unpredictable
reasons, a film does a whole lot better in some foreign
market than in the US or anywhere else.
Actually applying this all to "Titanic" gets
complicated, unless you are willing to accept all the
rules of thumb and ignore all the exceptions. For example,
"Titanic" was a co-production of two studios,
one of which had a cap on its share of production costs,
and owns only the US gross. The other had no cap, and
has all other rights. So the right thing to do, really,
is to figure the two studios' profits separately.
Also, Cameron is one of those heavy hitters I mentioned
earlier. He undoubtedly started the exercise with large
gross profit participation. However, due to his severe
budget overruns, it's possible (but not certain) that
he traded back or lost some of his gross points.
And what about merchandising? Will every parent in
America buy his kid a Titanic toy that sinks in the
bathtub while an internal waterproof music box plays
"Nearer My God To Thee," leading to a merchandising
bonanza? Who knows?
Bottom line, if "Titanic" grosses less than
$100 million in the US, folks lose a lot of money. If
it grosses more than $200 million, folks get a lot of
money. In between, it's variable, highly dependent on
whether "Titanic" proves to be one of the
exceptions, and generally too close for outsiders like
us to call.
[Thanks to Peter Reiher (reiher@cs.ucla.edu) for providing
this.]
19) Why aren't there more G-rated movies released?
[This was originally a response to someone complaining
about the bad language added to THE IRON GIANT which
made it PG. If anyone wants to write a more concise
or general response on this, please do.]
As many people have pointed out, no matter how much
parents say they *want* G-rated films, they just don't
take their children to them (unless the film is from
Disney). The IMDB lists 32 theatrical films in 1999
rated G, including THE BUENA VISTA SOCIAL CLUB, THE
WINSLOW BOY and THE STRAIGHT STORY. The successful ones
were TOY STORY 2 and TARZAN--both Disney.
And I wouldn't trust the rating too much. I think that
THE IRON GIANT is much better--from every standpoint--for
a very young child to watch than THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE
DAME, in spite of the latter's "G" rating.
(Which, by the way, is something that made everyone
ask, "What was the MPAA thinking?!!")
It's in some ways a vicious circle. If parents can't/don't
trust the ratings, they are forced to preview all the
films. Since it's too expensive to do this in the theaters,
they wait for the videos, then preview it one night
and show it the next.
I'm not sure what the "cut-off" age between
G and PG is, but most children below that age probably
don't have a long enough attention span or social skills
for a theater, which is another reason parents prefer
videos.
*If* the MPAA were at least consistent, G-rated films
*might* have a better chance in the theaters, but as
long as something like THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME gets
a G, they won't be trusted. (And their ratings at the
other end of the scale are equally bizarre.)
For that matter, consider BABE: no bad language, but
Babe's mother gets carted off to the slaughterhouse
at the beginning in a scene that could easily be very
scary for young children. And then there's the mad dog....
(BABE, by the way, is one of the few non-Disney G-rated
films that has been successful.)
With the new policy of requiring ads to carry explanations
of why a film got a "PG", "PG-13",
or "R" rating, there may be some improvement.
======================================================================
PART TWO: Frequent Topics and other things we just
thought you might like to know. First a few general
notes... The readership of rec.arts.movies is in the
whole very knowledgeable about a wide range of movies.
However, it is my informal assessment that science fiction
and fantasy movies are discussed and analyzed far beyond
their popularity in most of the rest of the world. This
is neither good nor bad, and the reason for it seems
fairly obvious to me. The readership of this group reflects
the broader readership of USENET. This latter population
is top heavy with computer scientists and other forms
of science scholars. There is a correlation (though
not necessarily a causal relationship) between being
in one of these professions, and an interest in science
fiction and fantasy. Okay, enough of that. Now, here
are some things which come up often, and, while you
are free to discuss them, you should be forewarned that
some long-time readers may get fairly fed-up with you.
PART THREE: Frequently discussed topics:
1) PRODUCT PLACEMENTS IN MOVIES. In many films, the
film company will get paid by some companies to use
their products. Some readers object to this as a fairly
manipulative and distracting presence. Others do not
object, commenting that people really do use name-brand
products, so using them in films makes sense. Many have
commented on the pack of Marlboro cigarettes in DEAD
AGAIN, saying this was the best product placement they
had ever seen.
Other information: There are several lists revolving
around film that are kept by netters. These frequently
come up.
One major project is a list of votes/ratings of a plethora
of movies. This list is maintained by Colin Needham
(cn@imdb.com), and votes can be cast through the Internet
Movie Data Base.
The rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews are archived as
part of the IMDB.
Bob Niland (rjn@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM) has several articles
on Laser Disc technology and availability available
from his archives. You may request any of these at any
time. Recent copies are also available for anonymous
ftp on: princeton.edu (128.112.128.1, directory pub/Video/Niland)
and bobcat.bbn.com (128.89.2.103), wsmr-simtel20.army.mil
(192.88.110.20).
Lastly, there are a series of movie trivia contests.
Some of these even offer prizes! The initial contest
postings generally include information on how to enter.
The important point is that you should never post answers,
but should send them e-mail.
====================================================================
(Contributions for addition to this FAQL gratefully
appreciated. Suggestions for things *I* should write
to add to this FAQL are not so gratefully appreciated.)
============================================================================
Copyright Notice
This FAQ is not to be reproduced for commercial use
unless the party reproducing the FAQ agrees to the following:
1) They will contact the FAQ maintainer to obtain the
latest version for their collection. 2) They will provide
the FAQ maintainer with information on what collection
the copy of the FAQ is in, and how that collection may
be obtained. 3) They will agree, in writing, that the
FAQ will be included in the collection without modification,
and that acknowledgements of contributors (if any) to
the FAQ remain in the FAQ. 4) They will agree, in writing,
that the collection including the FAQ will be distributed
on either a non-profit basis, or have some percentage
of profit donated to a non-profit literacy program.
Project Gutenberg counts.
Information contained in the FAQ is compiled from many
sources. No guarantees are made as to its accuracy.
To support this, this FAQ is Compilation Copyright
2000 by Evelyn C. Leeper (the FAQ maintainer Send corrections/additions
to the FAQ Maintainer: eleeper@jagon.lucent.com (Evelyn
C. Leeper) Last Update September 24 2000 @ 03:08 AM
|
