Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2009 April 26

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Entertainment desk
< April 25 << Mar | April | May >> April 27 >
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 26[edit]

Harry Potter Name Question[edit]

In the movie Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, which is called Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone in many places, did they film seperate scenes for the UK and US editions so that the character's said Philospher's Stone and Sorcerer's Stone, respectively? Or did they just dub them for the two countries?

--Nick4404 yada yada yada What have I done? 03:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the article states "Owing to the film's title difference in America and the United Kingdom, all scenes that mention the stone had to be filmed twice, once with the actors saying "philosopher's" and the second with them saying "sorcerer's". ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 03:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So, technically, they're not just the same film with different titles, but slightly different films. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:15, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I remember correctly, they didn't use the phrase "sorcerer's stone"/"philosopher's stone" very much, presumably to avoid having to reshoot too much. I think there were at most 4 mentions in dialogue, plus the phrase was seen once in writing, and of course the main title of the film. I believe the dialogue more frequently just referred to "the stone" to avoid the need for extensive reshoots. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
...and just for the record the movie is called Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone in pretty much every place. It's only the US that has the alternative title. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Music Visualization[edit]

I stumbled across a very literal type of music visualization a while ago. Popular (especially highly complex songs) were represented visually with, for example, a different colour for every instrument.

It showed each note being played, in real-time, with the horizontal length of the note representing the time-length and the vertical height representing the pitch. It provided an obvious visual representation of the notes of the song for people who didn't have a very good ear picking out musical patterns. Classical music was commonly used.

What type of music visualization is this? I'm sure I've seen it on Youtube, and I'd like to remember its name so I can find more.NByz (talk) 08:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly random guess: The Music Animation Machine by Stephen Malinowski and Lisa Turetsky. Mentioned in the article on synesthesia in art, but not in the articles on music visualization and visual music. ---Sluzzelin talk 08:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This type of visualization is also referred to as "piano roll visualization", see also the article on graphic notation. ---Sluzzelin talk 10:01, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is it this? Vimescarrot (talk) 17:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My god man, well done. That's exactly the one I remember. Thank you!NByz (talk) 05:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The same piece of music was used in a similar (but different) way in the original Fantasia. -- JackofOz (talk) 13:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robin Cook[edit]

Out of the 29 novels that Robin Cook has written so far, which would you recommend?? I am a high school student interested in science, and my teacher recommended this author to me. I ran a search on him on Wikipedia, and it tells me he has written 29 novels. 29 is too large a number to choose from, and I would like some advice or recommendations on which of those 29 are the best or the most interesting to read. Thanks. Johnnyboi7 (talk) 10:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See reesponse over at the Humanities desk, where you crossposted this question. Tempshill (talk) 15:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]