Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum rules before posting.

Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free registration is required.

If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.

Invelos Forums->Posts by TheMadMartian Page: 1 2 3 ...5  Previous   Next
Message Details
I guess the question that has to be asked is, "What are you trying to capture?  Data that's easy to enter or data that is correct?"

If it is the former then, yea, eliminate everything with the word 'unit' included and be done with it.  But, as mreeder50 points out, you will be eliminating anything labeled 'Main Unit' or '1st Unit', which makes no sense.

If it is the latter then. I'm sorry to say, you might have to do a little work and, on occasion, make an educated guess.

For the record, I think the second option is the better choice, but I honestly don't care about crew credits...I think they are a huge waste of time...so feel free to ignore me. 
Posted:
Topic Replies: 17, Topic Views: 333
It's just easier to link to one of my older posts on this topic.

Note, that is just my opinion based on research I have done.  Some people disagree.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 17, Topic Views: 333
Quoting AiAustria:
Quote:
From my point of view, location crews are not unit crews and therefore valid. But this is still not clarified in the rules - neither this nor the other way.

Agree with this.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 17, Topic Views: 333
10 years later, no way that I am aware of as the disc ID belongs to the child profile and I don't think this qualifies as an alternate disc ID profile.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 15, Topic Views: 1870
According to the rules, the answer is "yes".
Quote:
"For animated films or voice-only roles, use the "Voice" checkbox."
Posted:
Topic Replies: 8, Topic Views: 454
I am going to disagree with you and say that the rules are absolutely clear on this.

For individual film releases the rule is:
Quote:
For DVDs with more than one rating shown (e.g. a DVD which includes an R and Unrated version), use the highest applicable rating with the following scale...

That rule does NOT apply to Box Sets.  We know this because, in the introduction, the rules say that "there are two special cases where the rules need clarifications.  Where you see the icons shown below, refer to the special instructions at the end of this document. These are titled Movie Box sets and TV Series on DVD."

Based on that, for Box Sets, we must refer to the Box Set special instructions:
Quote:
If the Box Set has a rating, use it in the profile. If it does not, use NR as the rating. Exception: If any disc in the set is rated Adult, list the set as Adult

So, based on that rule, the only time a Box Set gets a rating, other than NR, is if the set itself has a rating OR if one of the films is rated Adult.

Again, it seems pretty clear to me.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 35, Topic Views: 1460
Quoting nuoyaxin:
Quote:
I think one factor for a Musical is, that he songs are plot related, almost replacing dialog for 5 minutes. So, things like Blues Brothers are not Musical (although Music could be argued here) and neither is Dirty Dancing (to my knowledge, I have never seen it).

So, if it was me, I would classify as follows:

Dirty Dancing neither
Moulin Rouge! Musical
Walk the Line maybe Music, nit Musical
The Blues Brothers not Musical, but maybe Music
Blues Brothers 2000 not Musical, but maybe Music
Ray Music
The Blues Brothers Double Feature not Musical, but maybe Music
American Dreamz don't know about this one
A Mighty Wind don't know about this one
Footloose neither
The Wedding Singer neither (just a guy singing at weddings doesn't make a Musical)
Sister Act 2: Back in the Habit: don't know about this one

I agree with all of this, though I will add that Sister Act 2 is similar to The Wedding Singer.  The movie is about a choir and the singing is them performing, not replacing dialogue.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 17, Topic Views: 914
If everything Kattonia says is true, then the non-slipcover release should be contributed using the alternate version rules.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 8, Topic Views: 389
Quoting CubbyUps:
Quote:
What about cases where the DVD of the film has all the extras and the bluray is barebones?

I treat it the same way I do sets where the film is on one disc and all the special features are on a separate disc...list them all in the main profile and move on.  I don't need Profiler to list which disc contains the special features, just what the special features are.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 18, Topic Views: 749
Quoting AiAustria:
Quote:
Sorry, did not mean to confuse, just wanted to point out, that a prefix is NOT additional information, but most of the time a limiting factor.

I assumed that my post would be taken in the context of the thread it was posted in.  My mistake.

Quote:
The only example, where the prefix raises the importance, is the personal make-up guy. In all other cases the prefix lowers the importance of the function (additional, assistant, unit, etc.) or completly changes the meaning (still photographer, foley mixer, ...).

This seems like a reasonable statement when you limit it to the prefixes you list.  It is not, however, a reasonable state3ment when we include other types of credits that are out there...Zombie Make-up, Robotic Special Effects, Miniature Special Effects Supervisor, etc.  Those credits, which I have seen, add additional information to the credit without lowering the importance of the function.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 32, Topic Views: 886
There is not enough information in the first post to answer this question.  Did they repackage each season or take the existing seasons and put them in a larger set?

The answer to that question determines how whether or not you use alternate profiles.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 929
Quoting mreeder50:
Quote:
I voted to allow them because an Art Director is an Art Director whether they have a prefix or not.

I agree with this.  For me, the prefix does not detract from the credit, it just adds additional information.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 32, Topic Views: 886
Personally, I like it just the way it is.  When I purchase a specific release, I do so based on the Blu-ray.  The DVD, much like the digital copy, is just a bonus and I do not profile it.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 18, Topic Views: 749
Unfortunately, this is not an easy question to answer.  Per the rules, because it is a set "where multiple complete TV seasons/series (each with distinct UPC/EAN) are packaged together, the Box-set rules are applied, treating each season/series like a single film - applying the TV Series rules for its individual profile."

Per the Box Set Rules, you can only create child profiles for bonus discs if they apply to the entire set.  If they are only for a specific season, then they can't be profiled.

However, if they can be profiled, you can't profile the box, just each individual disc and they would be attached to the main box parent profile.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 2, Topic Views: 225
The answer to this question depends on what your definition of 'feature film' is.  While I might consider a TV movie, a feature film, I would not consider a one hour episode, from an anthology series, a feature film.  But that's just me.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 6, Topic Views: 580
Quoting Merrik:
Quote:
I would agree that this would fall under these parts of the rules. Thanks for putting them here Kathy. The rules really don't tell us to use the title from the front cover, not the back cover, period at all really. There's many instances where we refer to different areas to get the title we end up entering.

I have to disagree, this is not covered by any of the rules that Kathy listed as there is no possessive nor is there a period, dash, or other symbol on the cover.

Subtitles are not specifically covered by the rules, though most people seem to be handling them the same way they would an episode descriptor.  For the record, I am fine with that.  It would, however, be nice if it were added to the rules.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 17, Topic Views: 1590
It seems that these discs are being used in multiple sets.  In order to not mess up the previous set, you need to create an alternate version of the profile for your set.  The instructions, and rules, can be found here.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 2, Topic Views: 445
Quoting Merrik:
Quote:
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
I think it really depends on who owns the title and is voting.  I hate to admit it, but I've gotten the sense over the years, whether right or wrong, that most people just vote yes unless it's something they blatantly know is wrong.


100% agree, without question.

Indeed, that has been the trend for quite a few years now.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 41, Topic Views: 1245
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
So it sounds like there isn't a perfect way to always distinguish the theatrical release studio and production company from the film credits?

No, there is no perfect way so, if memory serves, it was decided, way back during the Intervocative days, to just copy them in the order they are presented in the credits.  The main reason was for ease of entry as the average user won't want to research, nor do they really care about, the corporate structure of film studios.

Quote:
What about a Disney film which may state Walt Disney Pictures presents?  Walt Disney Pictures is considered a production company where as Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures is considered the distributor.

This is actually a good example for the above.  Until recently, most...if not all...films produced by Disney were distributed by a variation of Buena Vista Distribution.  Some users argued, successfully I might add, that because it wasn't a 'studio', it couldn't be entered.  So, again, for ease of entry, and to end the bickering, it was agreed upon to just enter them as listed.

Is it perfect?  No.  Does it convey the information?  I think so.  I mean, honestly, how many people really care that films produced by Twentieth Century Fox are actually released by Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation? 
Posted:
Topic Replies: 41, Topic Views: 1245
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
In most cases the theatrical release studio can be found toward the very end of the film credits near the MPAA certificate number.

Actually, in most cases, the theatrical release studio can be found in the opening credits, followed by the word 'presents'.  For example, "Twentieth Century Fox presents".

What is found towards the very end of the film credits, near the MPAA certificate number, is the copyright holder which may, or may not, be the same as the theatrical release studio.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 41, Topic Views: 1245
Quoting scooterberwyn:
Quote:
Because the Contribution Rules specify that we are to "use the title from the front cover," I vote for "Kong Skull Island" without the colon.  If we allow punctuation that isn't there to be added, then why a colon and not a hyphen or some other mark?

Perhaps that section of the Rules needs to be changed, but until it is, the rules should be followed as is. If we don't, what's the point of having them?

The rules say to "use" the title from the front cover, not "copy" the title from the front cover.  It is a long standing practice to add the colon for subtitles.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 17, Topic Views: 1590
I would go with the published release date.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 6, Topic Views: 583
Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:
Quote:
I don't think that's really the salient information in most cases. Would listing Star Wars, which was made by American and British people for a primarily American and British audience as Tunisian really mean much? I think who it was made by and for are the important info here, not where they shot.

It depends on your point of view and the movie in question.  Lord of the Rings was made by a New Zealand company, in New Zealand, for a global audience.  It has an American and New Zealand CoO because New Line had editorial control.  That information, for me, is useless.  What's important, to me, is that it was shot in New Zealand.

In my opinion, in todays global film making economy, the CoO of the production company becomes less and less important...assuming it ever was.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 14, Topic Views: 1343
For ease of use, I would say to just allow the CoO to be based on all of the companies involved...it's how IMDb seems to do it.

For me, it's useless information anyway, so why make it more complicated than it needs to be?  In my opinion, it is far more interesting to know where the movie was filmed, rather than where the production company is based.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 14, Topic Views: 1343
Quoting AiAustria:
Quote:
Because it is a boxset. The fact, that the children are optional, does not affect the fact, that it is a box set.

Except the rules specifically state that they are to be entered as a normal profile.  That being the case, Box Set rules do not apply.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 13, Topic Views: 1365
Invelos Forums->Posts by TheMadMartian Page: 1 2 3 ...5  Previous   Next