Entertainment desk
< October 4	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 6 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 5

James Bond theme song

A 1924 movie by Buster Keaton ,Sherlock Jr. has the James Bond theme song in it. Why is this not mentioned the article about the James Bond theme song? 98.114.129.240 (talk) 01:03, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which theme song are you referring to? As far as I know, every James Bond movies uses a different one. If you think something should be added to an article, be bold. RudolfRed (talk) 01:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The OP is referring to the James Bond Theme. Dismas|^(talk) 01:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A movie from 1924 would have been silent, and its producers likely did not possess a time machine with which to obtain a score written in the 60's. The likely explanation is you are watching a modern re-release of the 1924 movie to which a recent score has been added. μηδείς (talk) 02:03, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go. This reviewer of the Club Foot Orchestra's 1990s score for the film mentions the anachronistic James Bond theme, as do the two commenters.[1] Clarityfiend (talk) 03:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the OP's question (or at least put in my two cents), it's not a particularly significant score, so I don't think it should be mentioned. Clarityfiend (talk) 15:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown film

You all were so helpful a couple of days ago, I figured I'd try my luck once more. I'm trying to recall a film I saw about 20 years ago; maybe longer. It was about a man who recruited two youngsters to facilitate his get-rich-quick scheme. His plan was broken down in to 5 "Phases". I don't remember exactly what they were, but it basically involved the kids stealing a large amount of money. Being juveniles, they did a limited amount of time. After they were released, they apologized and returned the money, making themselves heroes in the community. The man, meanwhile, had made a fortune for the three of them from the initial investment. At the end of the film, he takes them to see their new yacht, the name of which is "Phase VI". Joefromrandb (talk) 06:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's a great Sci-Fi film about ants taking over the world from the 1970's called Phase IV, but it doesn't sound like the prequel to your film. Can you give a setting and a time frame? It sounds like a Walter Matthau vehicle. μηδείς (talk) 01:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely nothing sci-fi about this film. I wish I could give you more, but I don't remember much. The "Phases" were stages of the man's plan. (I don't think it was Walter Matthau, but it was so long ago I could be wrong.) I remember the man saying that "anything over $5000 is grand theft", and there was no extra penalty no matter how much was stolen. During the robbery, the kids smiled and waved, knowing they were on camera. After the robbery, as the intention was to get caught, the kids were throwing money to the crowds in a very public place, possibly an amusement park. I don't know if that helps at all. Joefromrandb (talk) 02:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's also very reminiscent of the sort of movie Alec Guinness did, which would have dated to around the 50's or 60's. Or maybe Dick Van Dyke. Do you get the impression it was a new film 20 years ago? (PS., the plot sounds very vaguely familiar.) μηδείς (talk) 02:28, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My best guess would put the film at about 30-40 years old. I highly doubt it was Dick van Dyke. Alec Guiness is a possibility, but that would likely make the film even older. Joefromrandb (talk) 14:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds more like a 70's plot than an 80's movie. Googling 70's children thieves movie doesn't help. The only suggestion I have at this point is trying to remember an identifying characteristic like a landmark or a cameo appearance. μηδείς (talk) 19:19, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did a keyword search on IMDB and Google using all of the specific elements you mention but I found nothing that fits your description. Was this an American film? Direct to video? Was it two boys, two girls or a boy and a girl? Any additional info would help, Joefromrandb. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have also done multiple searches, to no avail. To my knowledge, it was an American film. I'm fairly sure it was before the direct-to-video days, but it certainly may have been a made-for-television movie. The characters were a middle-aged man and two teenaged boys. Joefromrandb (talk) 01:58, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the Steve Wilkos show

Are these situations with the shows "guests" or "contestants" "Real"? And is Steve really showing anger is it or is it all put on? In cases where accused child molesters/pedophiles fail lie detector tests, why aren't some cops on stand-by to take the scums from the show to the police station? I am NOT a student of criminal justice or law, so this is a question that has puzzled me. Venustar84 (talk) 20:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware of this show, but if a polygraph test conducted on a TV program could result in a police charge, that would be the quintessence of trial by media and a travesty of justice. I don't think even the USA justice system has sunk quite that low yet. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect such shows are fake, with the worst of the bunch being Jerry Springer. The scenes of people fighting just seem so repetitive, they have to be staged, and by somebody not all that creative. Just as in a sitcom, I can detect a formula at work, with the fight scheduled for the same time in each episode. StuRat (talk) 01:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Polygraph tests are only admissible in 19 states, and only by stipulation (i.e., with no one objecting), and at the judge's discretion in federal cases. They are basically useless to the prosecution except to provide testimony to impeach. μηδείς (talk) 01:27, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then if the fights are fake; why is there a phone number to come on the show? Venustar84 (talk) 14:05, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Money. RNealK (talk) 03:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are real people, not actors (as you can tell by how bad they are at it), but are either paid to fight, or just do it to get on TV. Some people will do just about anything to be on TV (and, ironically, some celebs will do just about anything to avoid being on TV). StuRat (talk) 12:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pro wrestler Jamie Dundee has played Springer characters. Once he was pimping his sister and another time he was in the KKK. Take that how you will.

As for the phone number, you call it and the producers decide whether you'd work. It's not an instant win. Just like applying for one of those "twelve people in a house" shows. Gotta fit the mold (or at least pretend). Wilkos seemed more legit than Springer, from what I remember. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]