Quoting Varrus:

Quote:
Okay, whatever. I accept that that's the rule. I'm not looking to change anything.
I'm just trying to understand why it's the rule as it doesn't make sense to me.
Is it because the credits used only their surnames?
I mean what if it said "Mark Neveldine & Brian Taylor" in the film credit?
Would you then do "Mark Neveldine [Mark Neveldine & Brian Taylor]" in the database?
Of course not, because that would be ridiculous.

I agree with this and don't see why [Neveldine/Taylor] is needed. I voted for option 2 for that reason. 

If the credit said:

Directed By:
Mark Neveldine/Brian Taylor

I doubt people would be picking option 1 (Both with [Mark Neveldin/Brian Taylor] after them). So as for on screen "actual data" the second option seems most appropriate.

Me. Because I don't consider it nonsense, I consider your idea to nonsense, Yves. Different strokes for different folks and you are free to do so. Everytime something like this comes up someonealways makes the comment that this or that is nonsense, without any comprehension of why and wherefores nor do they care, they can only see things one way, they seem to be unable to recognize that despite what the rules say to do, in the end it is different strokes for different folks. The Online is not the final arbiter of YOUR data, you are, it is merely a common starting place.

Skip

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
This, once again, is a case where strict application of rules leads to nonsense. If the rules were, in odd case, opened to documented alternate solutions left to the screeners appreciation, I think the online data would be far more interesting for everybody. How many of us will keep the rules' solution for their local in this case ?

That is exactly how they are in my local and I see no reason why I would change it as this captures both the name as well as the actual credit.

Just as an aside, and I know this won't matter to those that think this makes no sense, from everything I have read, 'Neveldine/Taylor' is how they are professionaly know.

Quoting scotthm:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Would you be of the same opinion if the credit were something like, Directed by The Pang Brothers?

Since "The Pang Brothers" is a corporate credit, and not an individual credit, I would say the current Rule governing crew credits disallows it.  The Rules obviously need more work.

---------------

That's just how they like to be credited when the work together.  How does that make it a corporate credit? 

You did it exactly right, Martian.

Quoting scotthm:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
That's just how they like to be credited when the work together.  How does that make it a corporate credit? 

I meant corporate in a broad sense, meaning that it is a collective credit rather than an individual credit, and thus, I believe, explicitly disallowed by the current Rules.

---------------

The rules say nothing about 'collective credits'.  "They say, List individual credits only, not company name credits."  The Pang Brothers, unless I missed something somewhere, is not a company name credit, it's two individuals credited together.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
The Pang Brothers, unless I missed something somewhere, is not a company name credit, it's two individuals credited together.

I agree that "The Pang Brothers" is probably not a company, but neither is it an individual.  As you say, it's multiple persons credited collectively, and the rules seem to me to disallow that for crew.

---------------

I recently added the Canadian profile for this title to the database.

As per the rules I entered them as option #1. That's also how I voted.

I myself, think it's kind of silly yes, but, it's how it's supposed to be done.