Entertainment desk
< April 13	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 15 >

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.

April 14

Black people

I shall start off by stating that this q is not intended to be racist. Moving on with the actual question: Why does it seem that for most films, there must be at least one black man in it? Is it a rule all filmmakers must follow? Also, why is it that for most horror movies, the black guy, followed by the Asian guy, if any, gets killed first? I have never seen a horror movie in which the black guy alone survives. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See tokenism. --Xuxl (talk) 07:36, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And the South Park character Token Black. StuRat (talk) 07:41, 14 April 2013 (UTC)sk[reply]

In the first case, some filmmakers might feel the need to include minorities to avoid charges of racism. This also happens on TV, where every PBS show seems to have a quota to fill, with one black, one Hispanic, and one kid in a wheelchair.

In the second case, that probably is racism, where they start by killing off "somebody that nobody cares about". Now it's become a bit of a joke, so they might make fun of it in the Scary Movie series, etc. StuRat (talk) 07:40, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At least it's not something as minor as the color of their shirts. Dismas|^(talk) 09:07, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OP, wouldn't it be rather odd to show general groups of people that did not contain blacks, if they're reflecting a pluralistic society in which blacks are as normal a part of the social landscape as motor cars and office buildings? If they deliberately excluded all blacks, that would be a racist action. Would you be asking a question in that case? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 09:35, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacks make up 12.6% (1/8) of the population of the United States. Since you are oddly fascinated with Black men, we'll concentrate on that 1/16 of the population. For movies set in the United States, you would expect every 16th character to be a Black man. I have not done a study on this, and my exposure to contemporary movies is slight enough that I'll leave it to others to decide whether Black men and women are over- or underrepresented these days in movies set in America. Then we can move on to whether one in six characters is Hispanic or one in 21 is Asian, etc.. -Rrius (talk) 11:35, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have read in the past that, especially since the 1970s, black people have made up a growing proportion of the US film-going and viewing audience. Attracting those customers, rather than discouraging them, must be an important factor to movie companies seeking revenue. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:39, 14 April 2013c (UTC)

i think they just don't want to seem racist, or maybe they think more african-americans will buy the movie. also, i don't think saying "black people" is racist, just slightly rude. maybe "black people in movies" would cause less people to assume your a racist. tough i wouldn't anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.114.248.114 (talk) 07:08, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're giving the movie makers a classic lose-lose option. Namely, if they don't show any blacks, that would invite accusations of racism. But when they do show blacks, it's not because they're not racists but because they don't want to seem racist. Like, wtf? Time for a rethink, methinks. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 08:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

70.114 did not say the first part of what you are attributing to him. --Viennese Waltz 15:39, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really as simple as roughly 1 person in 16 should be a black man for any given movie, though. A movie set in Athol, Massachusetts would be different than one set in Detroit, Michigan, for example. So too would a movie about astronauts be different than one about farmworkers, in terms of racial or ethnic makeup, if the filmmaker was going to adhere strictly to current demographic figures. In terms of movies where a black person is the last man standing, Night of the Living Dead almost qualifies; Ben alone survives the night in the house, though he is shot by the sheriff's posse who mistake him for a zombie the following morning. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 15:26, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, there was a bit of a fuss recently about a TV detective series called Midsomer Murders. This is about murders in sleepy English villages in the fictional county of Midsomer, but is plainly based on Somerset. When challenged about the lack of ethnic diversity in the programme, the producer said that it was a "bastion of Englishness" (suggesting that only white people could be English). Although reinstated after an apology, he left soon afterwards and his replacement has since introduced some non-white actors into the cast.[1] In the real Somerset, 97% of the population describe themselves as "White British".[2] Alansplodge (talk) 23:48, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, my mother watches that series. Who will be introduced crassly as the token black? μηδείς (talk) 01:38, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The linked newspaper article only gives details of one of them, who is Chinese from Hong Kong. Alansplodge (talk) 12:39, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It may be "plainly based on Somerset", but it's an imaginary fictional place, so the writers and producers are entirely at liberty to make whatever assumptions they like. No rational person has any reason to believe that it reflects reality in any way. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:47, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's fictional. No small town is that unlucky. It's in the same tradition of Miss Marple, Jessica Fletcher et al, who have the impossibly bad luck of having a close friend murdered every week, yet they also have the the impossibly good luck of an unending supply of them. After some point, wouldn't they be sleuthily thinking to themselves, "Hmm, my close friends are forever being murdered. The common factor in all of these dreadful events is me. Obviously I'm the murderer, and just as obviously I have severe short-term memory loss. I'd better make an appointment to see my doctor, then hand myself in to the police". -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:23, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghmyrtle - You're quite right; however, there is a perceived need to make the intended audience, a multi-cultural one, able to identify with the story by including people of different ethnicities. Whether you agree with that or not, that view exists. I assume that producer's defence was that real English villages, (such as those found in Somerset) have few if any non-white people living in them. What he actually said used the language also used by white supremacists suggesting that non-white people can be British but not English, which implies a pure English bloodline. This is dangerous nonsense in my book, and I believe that he was right to be taken to task over it.

@JackofOz - It is supposed to be a county and the murders take place in a number of small towns and villages within it. Even so, our article on the programme states that the murder rate in Midsomer has been calculated to be double that of London! Alansplodge (talk) 17:35, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever worn MCM, Beanpole, Hazzys or other Korean fashion brands?

I wonder how many wikipedians know Korean fashion brands. If you guys anwser this question, It is gonna helpful to editing fashion in south korea. --Minzi Yuk (talk) 08:24, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What Wikipedians wear (if anything) is completely irrelevant to editing articles. If you wish to improve Fashion in South Korea (and, boy, does it need help), you need to find reliable sources to help you expand the article. Check out some of the links at WikiProject Fashion to get a sense of what to aim for. Matt Deres (talk) 12:47, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Something I wanted to voice out too, but couldn't quite word it. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:09, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If a "hazzy" is a haz-mat suit, it may become the thing "everyone is wearing". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:27, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lyrics for song Pink Shampoo

Pink Shampoo:

Momma get my ribbons Lay them out with care Match them to my eyes of blue and Pink Shampoo my hair

Fill the tub with bubbles I in such a stew ... . ... Something Pink Shampoo (maybe don't forget the Pink Shampoo)

. he'll ask the question Quick the french cologne, I kinda think that he is right on the brink I can feel it now in every bone so

repeat of 1st lyric

I cannot locate this song anywhere and would like the complete lyrics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CheyenneAnnie (talk • contribs) 14:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, it seems to have no presence on the internet whatsoever. Alansplodge (talk) 16:50, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is attributed to Connie Haines, I just can't find the lyrics. μηδείς (talk) 22:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Bad" Habits in Stage Fencing?

Hi all.

I have seen, that some other people have asked questions about fencing before, so I wanted to try my best, there is a question, which bothers me. I am a longtime practioner of japanese kenjutsu and want to start stage fencing (I am a big fan of cinematic sword fights). I own a very old Russian book about stage fencing, "Sceniceskoe fechtovanie" from Professor I. E. Koch (first published in 1948). Interesting is, that the author - Professor Koch - writes "you can get very bad habits in theatrical swordplay". The author does not elaborate, which "bad habits" you are going to get. I have seen, that in Italian books about stage combat, they mention that "stage combat arts may lead to adopt habits" (they are also not elaborating the issue). My question is: what bad habits are these authors talking about? Is it dangerous to learn stage combat?

Thank you for your responses

I wish you all the best--92.107.220.241 (talk) 15:39, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A pure guess, but I would think they mean that if you do stage fencing then you will learn all sorts of things that are bad practice in real combat/sport fencing. -- SGBailey (talk) 16:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SGBailey is correct. The flourishes - wide arm swings - spins - and grandiose swashbuckling that are so dramatic for an audience won't work at all in any of the disciplines (foil, epee or sabre} in a real fending meet. There are lots of great fencing films out there and I am sure that everyone will have there faves but I can recommend Scaramouche (1952 film). It has several marvelous fending sequences in it and one of the most grandiose ever filmed features towards the end of the film. MarnetteD | Talk 00:49, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your responses. I remember Scaramouche, I think it is a wonderful movie! Does that mean, that you train techniques in stage fencing, that lead to bad habits (the flourishes), that could be very dangerous in real combat? Are there more bad habits? How much "real" fencing is there in stage fencing?--92.107.220.241 (talk) 08:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, other types of staged combat are even worse. If you are an actor in a Hollywood movie involving gun play, you might get the impression that nobody can hit you while you do somersaults, or that standing up tall and bare-chested (except for a bandolier), without a helmet, is safer than hiding behind obstacles while wearing body armor. Take those "combat skills" into real combat, and your brains will quickly be splattered. StuRat (talk) 00:08, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This may be too late (it took a couple days to shake the name from my memory banks) but just in case the IP comes back look for books by William Hobbs (choreographer) especially Stage Combat : "The Action to the Word". He has been arranging stage and screen sword fights for years. His works may have more info for you than we have been able to give. MarnetteD | Talk 04:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The worst habit to pick up is rather obvious - the habit of trying to hit the sword instead of the other person. It's like telling an NBA star to practice by trying to miss the basket. Matt Deres (talk) 02:16, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky & Bullwinkle episode structure

I've found a couple of references saying that, beginning with season 3 (September 1961), each Rocky & Bullwinkle show has three or four chapters of a continuing Moose & Squirrel story, vs two in the previous seasons. Did the series get a longer time-slot?

But on DVD (and on Netflix streaming) season 3 has the same structure as before:

Moose & Squirrel segment
Fractured Fairy Tales / Aesop & Son
Bullwinkle's Corner / Mister Know-It-All / Fan Club
Peabody's Improbable History / Dudley Do-Right
Moose & Squirrel segment

Did the DVD packaging re-arrange things? If so, should I expect to see some of the inner segments repeated in later episodes? —Tamfang (talk) 20:05, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't give you an authoritative answer, but I only recall there typically being 2 of the "Moose and Squirrel" segments per show, and only half an hour (minus commercials) per show. There was hardly room for three and still have time for something else. I'm curious to know what those sources are. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:46, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't that be "Moose and skvirl" ? :-) StuRat (talk) 08:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one. —Tamfang (talk) 04:23, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know I am getting here late but FWIW here is some info that might help. After the shows original three season run it aired in various forms in syndication for years. These were often reedited and could contain segments from any of the three years worth of episodes. At least one of those reworkings was an hour long show (for some reason it sticks in my head that this was an early evening air time but I could be wrong) which did indeed contain four parts of a given "Moose and skvirl" (heehee good one Stu) story interspersed with the other segments. The thing to remember is that syndication in those years was very much a local thing. By that I mean that the way the show aired in my city could be completely different from what happened in other states. That could help explain why you will find widely varying info on the net. The DVDs do have the episodes as they aired way back in the early 60s - better known as my childhood :-) MarnetteD | Talk 18:12, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In reruns after that third season, it was repackaged as something called The Bullwinkle Show, and it brought all kinds of different stuff in, so anything's possible. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:13, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Identify Japanese Ghost Movie

Can anyone give the one-word name of a three-part Japanese art film with various ghost tales, one of which involves a man with a character-tattooed face and another with a drowned (I believe) boy? Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 22:20, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you're thinking of Kwaidan. It's been a while since I've seen it, and I don't offhand recall a drowned boy, but the "Hoichi the Earless" segment definitely has the tattooed gent (actually, the characters are brushed on, not tattooed, as I recall; the failure to put them on his ears is the reason for Hoichi's earlessness). Deor (talk) 00:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's it. Had I had a more accurate description I would have gotten it from google. Thanks.

Resolved