Entertainment desk
< December 26	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 28 >

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.

December 27[edit]

Cheering in the cinema in the USA?[edit]

Hi,

I've read in several articles that when a new movie is shown on the cinema, the audience in the US is quite reactive. For example, they will cheer if there's something expected (like Samuel L Jackson saying "motherf*cker" or Arnold saying "I'll be back") or if an important character dies. Is it true? Does that happen during the premieres only or at any time? I sometimes feel like cheering in the cinema (specially if I watch a Star Wars movie but I would feel so awkward to do it! Ericdec85 (talk) 09:18, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've only ever been to regular showings, not premieres and the like, and I've witnessed applause at the end of a really good mvoie. It's kind of a shared experience, such as laughter. But in terms of cheering, if you would feel awkward, just wait and see what the crowd does. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:45, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(US here) I've been to a few midnight showings of big name franchises and there has been cheering/clapping/etc. at the end of all of them. There tends to be less the longer the film has been out. For example, I wouldn't expect to hear/see any clapping after I see Rogue One on Wednesday. †dismas†|^(talk) 21:45, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Feminists have decried audiences shouting misogynistic slogans at movies (e.g. "kill the bitch!" in Fatal Attraction and whooping at the rape scene in The Accused) though I'm not sure that's how widespread that is. jnestorius^(talk) 21:58, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rogue One[edit]

In Star Wars: Rogue One, why does the Galactic Empire store its Death Star blueprints on VHS tapes? Don't they have anything more technologically advanced in terms of data storage? 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:F88D:DE34:7772:8E5B (talk) 10:10, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No they don't, obviously. Ericdec85 (talk) 10:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What storage device did they use in the original movie? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:48, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One must remember that the events all took place "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away." Though some of the protagonists appear humanlike, they cannot possibly have any connection with humanity, so their scientific and technological development is bound to have differed in many details from our own. One might also consider that the Empire is (amongst other things) a large bureaucracy, and if human experience is anything to go by, large non-commercial organisations such as governmental bureaucracies tend to have outdated IT systems because of their inertial resistance to change and reluctance to spending budget on non-imperative improvements. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.12.85.142 (talk) 13:41, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least, it seems like they skimped on the storm troopers' blaster training, as most of them couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In a real world context, you must remember that the first film dates back to 1977 and therefore reflects the technology of that period - and how the writers of that period thought it might develop. As more recent films have been set in a period before the original, they clearly cannot show technology which is more advanced. Wymspen (talk) 15:39, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If a tape was shown in the first one, they would be obligated by continuity to show a tape in this one also. And by the way, it could happen to be a very advanced kind of tape in that universe, even if it looks like a VHS tape to us. Kind of like when they would sometimes use a salt-shaker as a bio-scanner in the original Star Trek. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:42, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This thing? It's nothing like a VHS cassette. I'm not sure it's a tape cassette at all. The "reels" are too close together for the amount of "tape" shown. The pattern seems to be raised from the surface, not a window to the inside. Maybe it's the Death Star logo. (I haven't seen the movie.) -- BenRG (talk) 21:41, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it is tape, note that in the real world tape is still the cheapest way of backing up huge quantities of data. Google restored Gmail accounts from tape after a bug corrupted them in 2011. (Also, semi trucks full of hard drives are still faster than the Internet.) -- BenRG (talk) 21:56, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So it could be that they're doing this just because of cost? 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:F88D:DE34:7772:8E5B (talk) 02:51, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you say that like it's a bad thing. I don't mean cheapest as in "buy the bargain-basement product and then regret it later". I mean cheapest as in "after considering the total cost of all options, this one is the most economical". Using tapes for backup is sensible if you've got a lot of data. -- BenRG (talk) 07:09, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, I say it like they had other options but chose to use VHS tapes for economic reasons (as opposed to simply not having any more advanced options). 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:F88D:DE34:7772:8E5B (talk) 11:51, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, though, when the Rebel Alliance copies the data, they copy it onto what looks like a mini-optical disk of some kind -- but then, they don't need as much storage capacity, because they only need the info on the Death Star and not all of the other stuff that might be on the same tape. 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:F88D:DE34:7772:8E5B (talk) 11:56, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the best-selling RPG video game[edit]

what is the best-selling classical RPG video game excluding action-RPG, strategy-RPG, ect?--2001:B07:6463:31EE:EDCB:F295:A8E7:E6D9 (talk) 12:53, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a tricky question to answer because the RPG genre is so huge that my definition of "classical RPG" might differ from yours. Check out List of best-selling video games. You can sort the list by sales and find the first game that meets your definition. Hope that helps! RedLinkJ (talk) 18:34, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I mean only RGB and not mixed generes(action-RPG, Strategy-RPG,etc).--2001:B07:6463:31EE:EDCB:F295:A8E7:E6D9 (talk) 19:05, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your response demonstrates my point above perfectly; I'm not even sure what an RGB RPG is. Since your question seems to have different restraints and qualifiers, I doubt you'll find a definitive source that answers your question precisely. Your best bet would be to Google your question and see what you can find. RedLinkJ (talk) 20:30, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with RedLinkJ that it's unclear what distinguishes a role-playing video game from any other video game with a player character. But the answer you want may be Pokemon (>47 million copies of RGBY and >289 million copies of all games sold, according to this page). -- BenRG (talk) 23:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

error, no only RGB but only RPG--2001:B07:6463:31EE:9DA:7B4A:415C:5BE7 (talk) 16:50, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Time signature names[edit]

How would you name a time signature whose beat is a dotted note that is divided in half (and the half is in turn divided in thirds)?? I believe the most common time signature of this kind is 12/16; in theory 18/16 and 24/16 are equally valid time signatures to give this description to. I want an answer in a category like "simple" or "compound". Georgia guy (talk) 16:01, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgia guy: Occasionally this desk attracts musical composition questions of a technical nature specific to these detailed formats. This is a Reference desk for "Entertainment" not a forum for music theory. I would suggest searching for such composition forums on the internet that answer such questions. Many of these types of questions go unanswered here. Good luck. Maineartists (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Its relation to Wikipedia is that I think it would be nice for Wikipedia to include the answer to this question somewhere. Georgia guy (talk) 17:19, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgia guy: It seems WP Time Signature really covers everything already. Best. Maineartists (talk) 17:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For clarification, this is what I mean:

A simple time signature has the main beat divided into 2 equal parts and an undotted note as the beat. A compound time signature has the main beat divided into 3 equal parts and a dotted beat. But 12/16 (and 18/16 and 24/16 as well under the assumption that they're popular enough) is a time signature that when played at a standard tempo has a dotted quarter note beat that can be divided into 2 dotted eighth notes. It doesn't match either of the above definitions. What can we call it?? Georgia guy (talk) 18:19, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgia guy:I'm trying to be kind here. I know what you're asking, but your terminology is way off base. To be as simple as I can: it doesn't matter what you do within a measure of a time signature, so please forget trying to describe the logistics of subdivision. I also remember your previous post here: [1] that went unanswered due to misleading and confusing terms that were non-musical at best. To answer your question once and for all, there are only 7 types of time signatures: simple, compound, complex, mixed, additive, fractional and irrational meter. That's it. Yours falls under "compound" since it is a subdivision of 8 (16) and merely extends the number of notes within the measure by 4: 12, 18, 24. That's it: "compound". Once again: all your questions regarding "Time Signatures" can be answered here: Time Signatures. Best. Maineartists (talk) 18:43, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it matter what it is called, as long as it adds up correctly? Beethoven is an extreme case, writing 3/2 in the Diabelli Variations (Var. XX) even when there are clearly two dotted-half beats to the bar and it "should" theoretically be 6/4. All of these distinctions tend to be theoretical hair-splitting that merge in practice. Double sharp (talk) 15:57, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia guy, since you have asked a lot of these kinds of questions over the past few years, I really should make it clear that a lot of things theoreticians come up with are simply not what happens in musical practice.

My favourite example of this is that, if you asked me if alla breve 2/2 should be twice as fast as common time 4/4, I would say: no, absolutely not, it should only be a few notches faster on the metronome, and this is how I think most classical musicians would answer (as opposed to the usual simplified online theoretician's answer that it ought to be twice as fast). As an example, I'd play Allegretto 4/4 at around = 144, but Allegretto 2/2 at only one notch higher, = 152. Double sharp (talk) 16:07, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

- What is going on here? Double sharp and Georgia guy - with all due respect: are you related? or the same username? Double sharp Allegretto is "moderately fast (112–120 bpm)" [2]. Where in the world are you getting 144 and 152? That is "Allegro", my friend. Second, 2/2 and 4/4 have nothing to do with tempo but beats per measure. Furthermore, Variation XX by Beethoven is in 6/4 not 3/2 in all scores that I have researched. Last, if you truly believe "alla breve" should be a few notches faster on the metronome, and that most classical musicians would answer likewise, you are sorely mistaken. "Alla Breve" is merely "Cut Time" and has nothing to do with change of tempo; only the beat on which you conduct. Please listen to the audio Example here: [3] and notice there is absolutely no difference in tempo between 2/2 and 4/4 but merely notation and how it should be conducted. Again, this discussion has nothing to do with "Entertainment" and should be continued on the Time Signature Talk Page Best. Maineartists (talk) 21:19, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - No, we're not the same person at all. This is what I thought was the reference desk for music (or more properly, that music is one of the specific subjects this reference desk is for talking about.) Georgia guy (talk) 21:38, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Maineartists: No, I am really serious, and can back it up, notwithstanding the suggestion of sockpuppetry that was very much not appreciated and not true. We even have Beethoven's word to back it up: he marked the Allegretto movement of his 7th symphony as

= 76 in 2/4. (Even Allegretto vivace in the 8th symphony in 2/4 is only three notches faster at

= 88.) I realise that the usual meaning of these markings has changed since but a proper understanding is quite necessarily for at least the music of the Classical period. The finale of Mozart's Piano Concerto KV 453 is also Allegretto, and alternating solo and tutti, but is in alla breve 2/2 and hence it must be at

= 76, or if you like

= 152. This kind of concerto finale is common in Mozart, even in works that merely imitate the concerto form of alternating solo and "tutti", such as in the Piano Sonata KV 333, the Piano Trio KV 502, and the Piano Quartet KV 493, and clearly they must all be at about the same speed; otherwise the sixteenth notes that later appear are impossible to execute gracefully.

Most crucially, the finale of the Piano Trio in E major KV 542 is exactly the same sort of finale, but Mozart marks it in 4/4 (not 2/2) and Allegro instead. The movement is absolutely convincing at

= 152 and suggests that the only difference is that alla breve, by encouraging you to feel the music in two instead of four, encourages a slightly faster speed. Indeed, there are a few pieces where one of the Classical period composers appears to not have been certain about this: the opening movement of Schubert's Piano Sonata D 850 is 2/2 Allegro in the autograph but 4/4 Allegro vivace in the first edition (prepared in the composer's lifetime), again fully supporting the idea that a half note in alla breve is actually only just a little faster than a half note in common time, not twice as fast. (I shall be very, very surprised if you can sit through a performance of any of these Allegretto finales at a speed as slow as

= 120 without falling asleep, or if you think anyone could possibly play them with their brilliant sixteenth-note passagework at

= 120, which would be an absurd Prestissimo!)

Also, the Henle Urtext edition gives Variation XX as 3/2, with an editorial 6/4 in parentheses - presumably because the mismatch would be too distracting to modern musicians. Double sharp (talk) 03:03, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]