| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,245 |
| | Posted: | | | | I was wondering if auction data (where a person's name is attached to the costume) is ok to verify an uncredited actor?
What about call sheets? |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 6,741 |
| | Posted: | | | | Is that uncredited person anyone important? If so, one should be able to spot him or her in the movie (especially if one knows what that person was wearing).
If it's no one important why care for the entry? | | | Karsten
DVD Collectors Online
 |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,245 |
| | Posted: | | | | Not all uncredited people are deemed important, ie famous. Some are just character actors who mainly appear in TV series and perhaps a few movies.
Sometimes they will be wearing masks or heavy makeup/makeup effects, so identity by face would be impossible, so only what is on the outfit would be the only way to identify them or by call sheets. |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'd say "No", and that for a simple reason.
It happens quite often that scenes are not used in the finished movie (Deleted Scenes), the fact that the name of John Doe is written into the costume only proves that John Doe was on the payroll, not that he actually appears in the movie. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,850 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CubbyUps: Quote:
I was wondering if auction data (where a person's name is attached to the costume) is ok to verify an uncredited actor?
What about call sheets? You may add uncredited if you've personally identified them by viewing the film (and timestamps in your documentation would be helpful), or if they were previously documented in another profile of the same film.  --------------- |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,245 |
| | Posted: | | | | Yes I know what the rules says.
But I have seen many profiles with uncredited cast being approved with nothing more than links to databases or other sites.
And they were approved.
I would think that a studio would know whom acted in a certain episode via the call sheets as well as the costumes used by what actor.
Let's say that thee is a vampire movie where they have heavy makeup effects. Several of these actors were uncredited, but sites show either that they were listed on a call sheet or that there was an official auction run on behalf of the studio where that actors name is sewn into the costume and/or mask used for the vampire effect.
So of course if you watch the movie you can't identify them because they are hidden behind all that makeup. So the only way to identify them is thru other means.
If not ok then fine. |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,850 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CubbyUps: Quote:
Yes I know what the rules says.
But I have seen many profiles with uncredited cast being approved with nothing more than links to databases or other sites. Of that I have no doubt. The screeners often approve data by popular vote rather than by what the rules seem to say. Quote:
So of course if you watch the movie you can't identify them because they are hidden behind all that makeup. So the only way to identify them is thru other means. I'm of the opinion that not everyone who appears in a film needs to be entered (and that's not to say they cannot be entered), because they aren't really "actors". Take this scene for example:  I couldn't care less about who any of these people are, unless they have some specific role elsewhere in the film. As for actors in heavy makeup, or that are otherwise unseen (e.g. voice only parts), I think documentation from two or more reliable sources should be acceptable if the role can be confirmed as being in the film. --------------- |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,245 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'm not talking about crowd shots such as what you posted.
Most of these would be for a tv series in which they play a creature/alien and you can clearly see the creature/alien face but I can't see whom the actor is.
Sometimes they stand right next to the major stars and sometimes they are in the background somewhere. But in all cases you can see their face.
So if I linked to data regarding the auction/call sheets and perhaps another database or an actors website that would be good enough? |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,850 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CubbyUps: Quote:
So if I linked to data regarding the auction/call sheets and perhaps another database or an actors website that would be good enough? I think that if "you have personally identified the cast by viewing the film" then it would be acceptable. Documenting how you "know" the actor is who you say they are is desirable, and if those sources convince you then I believe that's what you should submit. --------------- |
|
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 8,733 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CubbyUps: Quote:
So if I linked to data regarding the auction/call sheets and perhaps another database or an actors website that would be good enough? Sure it would. |
|
| Registered: August 23, 2008 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 1,656 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CubbyUps: Quote:
So if I linked to data regarding the auction/call sheets and perhaps another database or an actors website that would be good enough? For me, absolutely. I don't care if someone is covered in make up or in a crowd in the background, if they are in the movie, they are in the movie and if it can be proven, go for it. You'd have my vote. | | | Reviewer, HorrorTalk.com
"I also refuse to document CLT results and I pay my bills to avoid going to court." - Sam, keeping it real, yo. |
|
| Registered: June 21, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,621 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CubbyUps: Quote:
But I have seen many profiles with uncredited cast being approved with nothing more than links to databases or other sites.
And they were approved.
This all depends on the site linked. If it's the actor's homepage that says they were in said movie, then hell yeah, it's a good link. I also consider screenshots at avelyman to be pretty solid proof of uncredited! A link to imdb saying they are in... = not a good link! Call sheet seems like it could be a good extra proof, but would have to have other proof along with it to show those sceens were filmed and used. I have a buddy who does some extra work, he's been on call sheets but never credited and rarely seen. He swears he's in End of Days, but I have never been able to spot him and leave him off my local list becuase of it.  | | | | Last edited: by bigdaddyhorse |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Alien Redrum: Quote:
if they are in the movie, they are in the movie and if it can be proven, go for it. You'd have my vote. And exactly this is the problem. The fact that a certain piece of costume has a name attached to it does neither prove that the costume is to be seen in the movie, nor that (if it is to be seen) in that specific scene the actor is actually in it, it might just have been a stuntman. The other problem is "verification". A proof for me is something that I can verify myself. The statement that someone owns a costume with a name attached to it, is nothing I can verify. While I would believe CubbyUps and several others that the given info is correct, there are several others which I wouldn't even believe the date if I don't have a calendar at hands to recheck. And before the question "Why should someone lie?" arises again. A counterquestion: If it's made so easy to get away with it, why shouldn't he/she? It's a fact that people lie, they do so for several reasons, why would anyone expect this database to be better than the rest of the world? The moment I lost the confidence in the contributing masses was the moment I did my first full audit of my collection. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 | | | | Last edited: by Lewis_Prothero |
|
| Registered: August 23, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,656 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Silence_of_Lambs: Quote:
Quoting Alien Redrum:
Quote:
if they are in the movie, they are in the movie and if it can be proven, go for it. You'd have my vote.
And exactly this is the problem.
The fact that a certain piece of costume has a name attached to it does neither prove that the costume is to be seen in the movie, nor that (if it is to be seen) in that specific scene the actor is actually in it, it might just have been a stuntman.
The other problem is "verification".
A proof for me is something that I can verify myself. The statement that someone owns a costume with a name attached to it, is nothing I can verify.
While I would believe CubbyUps and several others that the given info is correct, there are several others which I wouldn't even believe the date if I don't have a calendar at hands to recheck.
And before the question "Why should someone lie?" arises again. A counterquestion: If it's made so easy to get away with it, why shouldn't he/she?
It's a fact that people lie, they do so for several reasons, why would anyone expect this database to be better than the rest of the world?
The moment I lost the confidence in the contributing masses was the moment I did my first full audit of my collection. I will quote CubbyUps again (bolding mine): Quote:
So if I linked to data regarding the auction/call sheets and perhaps another database or an actors website that would be good enough? That is enough for me. I don't require DNA tests. If a call sheet and a link to the actor's website is provided, I'm satisfied. | | | Reviewer, HorrorTalk.com
"I also refuse to document CLT results and I pay my bills to avoid going to court." - Sam, keeping it real, yo. |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,733 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Alien Redrum: Quote:
I don't require DNA tests. And luckily, Invelos doesn't either. |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting Alien Redrum:
Quote:
I don't require DNA tests.
And luckily, Invelos doesn't either. Neither do I. I request a personal identification, which is completely rule conform. If the actor behind a mask isn't identifiable so be it. I'd always go with reasonable sources too (best two), but the fact remains that this is currently not rule-conform. I guess that's why CubbyUps started his proposal in the Rules-forum. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|