| Author |
Message |
| Registered: June 8, 2007 |  Posts: 151 |
| | Posted: | | | | The CLT shows a number with Titles and another with Profiles. which one should we go by.
Casablanca: Ultimate Collector's Edition - 883929-037148
Credited as S. K. Sakall
S. K. Sakall = 3/41
S. Z. Sakall - 15/27 five of which are from Casablanca
Should we go by Title or Profile or just leave it what it is credited as. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 868 |
| | Posted: | | | | As far as i undertsood we should always go for titles.
If some actor appears in 5 smaller films which may not have a worldwide dvd release credited as John Doe and he appears in a big hollywood films (perhaps even in a minor role) credited as John H. Doe, which is release everywhere than going by titles his common name (correctly) would be John Doe, if going by profile it maybe John H. Doe even though he's only creited like this once.
Paul |
|
| Registered: April 3, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,998 |
| |
| Registered: December 16, 2007 | | Posts: 926 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting paulb_99: Quote:
As far as i undertsood we should always go for titles.
If some actor appears in 5 smaller films which may not have a worldwide dvd release credited as John Doe and he appears in a big hollywood films (perhaps even in a minor role) credited as John H. Doe, which is release everywhere than going by titles his common name (correctly) would be John Doe, if going by profile it maybe John H. Doe even though he's only creited like this once.
Paul Well, it's 153/406 for John Doe in CLU  |
|
| Registered: March 19, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | Personally I would use Titles, for the reason Paul mentioned. |
|
| Registered: May 9, 2007 | | Posts: 254 |
| | Posted: | | | | I use titles myself. But I, and others that I know, try to go through the list of titles and identify exactly how many of them are unique titles. Often, foreign releases of the same film get counted as seperate titles due to spelling or language changes made to the title. The draw back to this is that sometimes doing this gives a different result than just using the CLT's reported number of titles. So there is the potential for some inconsistency in contributions from people who use different methods. Ultimately, it would remove this possibility by just using the CLT's reported number, or even just using the number of profiles. Anyway, just my two cents. It's still an imperfect system because its not clearly defined how to use it. | | | | "I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world because they'd never expect it." - Jack Handey | | | | Last edited: by Broven |
|
| Registered: June 21, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,621 |
| | Posted: | | | | I usually go with titles, but everything has an exception.
For example, I was doing a Halloween 3 audit the other day, and since I have 2 copies of this fillm (the old R1 Goodtimes, and the crappy cropped/edited R2 with commentary and 5.1). Anyway, I watch R1 and get a full cast and crew list, thne I verify againstt he r2 disc to make sure they are the same, they are.
Anyway, I must've already copied cast and crew to the R2 and not submitted them, and there's like 3 names out of 15-20 and 2 of those are wrong (Jon not Jonathan, etc.) Then one completely stumps me, as the existing R2 says Nancy Lomis is in the flick. She's not in the credits, so I do research and find Nacy Kyes from the credits is Nancy Loomis. Then the fun thing, the CLT results.
Loomis - 17 titles/110 profiles
Kyes - 28 titles/87 profiles
So Kyes looks like the common name, but, Nancy has been in 9 movies according to imdb, and of those 9, 6 were as Loomis, only 3 as Kyes. Plus her most famous role (in the first Halloween), is Loomis.
I happen to own 4 of the movies where she is credited as Loomis so I can verify those as correct.
In this case I used Loomis as the common and Kyes as the credited as, it just makes more sense to me (esp. since Nancy is retired and hasn't had a credit that's a non-documentary about Halloween since 1992).
Both are up for vote now. 9 yeah to no nays on the R1, and no one else appears to own the crappy R2 disc. Wish I wouldv'e visited dvdcompare before ordering that, I wouldn't own it either. The 5.1 is nice sounding, but it's cut and cropped.
Anyone know how to re-format a PAL audio track to sync up to a NTSC video? If it can be done, then this disc could prove useful for something. | | | | Last edited: by bigdaddyhorse |
|
| Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | @ bigdaddyhorse: If it is possible to load that PAL audio track into a programme like Audacity (an audio editing programme), you could perhaps use that to correct the speed. Back on topic: in my view the best option would be to use Original Titles. That should take care of the foreign releases problem. |
|
| Registered: May 9, 2007 | | Posts: 254 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting dee1959jay: Quote:
Back on topic: in my view the best option would be to use Original Titles. That should take care of the foreign releases problem. I agree. But that's also the more difficult option to determine and I know a lot of contributors don't bother. It's not bad when there are only 20 profiles, it can take some time when there are 200 (especially when the foreign names are not obvious). My thinking was, that since what we choose for common name is somewhat unimportant (it's the proper linking of roles that matters) then it might be easier to just have the official rule say to use the total number of profiles from the CLT. It's a very easy to find number after all. Anyway, just something to think about I guess. | | | | "I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world because they'd never expect it." - Jack Handey |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Actually with the (fairly new) rule for Original Title it wouldn't work anyway. As you have to take the original title from the credits.... you still won't be getting the "actual" original title in some cases. I have seen times where a DVD will use 1 AKA title on the cover art (title field) and another AKA title on the credits (original title field) so you still don't get the original title at all. I will admit I mostly see this on low budget horror titles... but I am sure that is not the only time it happens. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | Oh, I'm sure there are more cases like that. Nevertheless I still think it's the best option available as things stand now. But of course, your mileage may very... |
|