Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2014 February 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.

February 27

Disney

can someone name the movie of each of the top 20? I know some, but not all. (19 for instance...just on 15 now..)Lihaas (talk) 05:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I think these are right, but #8 has me stumped:

20 Cinderella

19 Lilo & Stitch

18 The Hunchback of Notre Dame

17 Pocahontas

16 Mulan

15 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs

14 Treasure Planet

13 Bambi

12 The Little Mermaid

11 Mulan

10 Treasure Planet

9 Tangled

8 The Princess and the Frog

7 Hercules

6 Tarzan

5 Beauty and the Beast

4 Tangled

3 The Fox and the Hound

2 The Lion King

1 Dumbo

Clarityfiend (talk) 11:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I haven't re-watched it uet, but thatd be frickin amaizing. ;)Lihaas (talk) 15:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Clarityfiend earned their mouse-ears today. :-) StuRat (talk) 18:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Trope in TV interviews

There's this trope in TV interviews that I'm seeing a lot more regularly than I used to. It happens when an interviewee is talking straight to camera and suddenly there's a jump cut and the interviewee is no longer looking straight at the camera but off to the left or right of it. But there's no interruption in what they're saying, which just carries on as though nothing has happened. Clearly this is something that must have been done at the editing stage, since there is typically just one camera present at an interview. I guess the interviewee is asked to say the same thing twice, with the camera at different angles to them, and then the interview is edited together in this way. Often the camera shots are hand-held or deliberately shaky as well.

Who pioneered this style of interview, and why? It seems to be trying to get away from the formal interview style, to give a kind of verité look and feel to an interview, maybe something a bit edgy, a bit different. --Viennese Waltz 16:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

It sounds like a variety of "noddies " which was when only one camera was used.The interviewer would be filmed afterwards nodding,listening intently,smiling etc and this was later edited into to the continuous shot of the interviewee talking to make it visually more interesting.What you describe can be done by filming simultaneously with two or more normally three cameras and the director cutting from one camera view to another live.A handheld camera could be one of the ones used easily.Hotclaws (talk) 18:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

The cost and weight of cameras is going down, especially with digital cameras, so it's a lot easier now to just bring two cameras. One can be in fixed positions, to eliminate the need for an extra camera operator. StuRat (talk) 19:00, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

User:Centpacrr sat for an interview in connection with the Philadelphia Flyers a few years ago. It may have been only one camera, but he could probably give you some inside dope on how the interview was done. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:58, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Often, cutting to a pre-taped (B-roll) "reaction shot" like the interviewer nodding means something the interviewee said was trimmed and spliced (usually just for time). Without the break, you'd see their face and lips abruptly change. Better to kill two birds with one stone and also make the interviewer appear interested. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:14, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies, my question however was specifically about the type of cutaway shot in which the gaze of the interviewee shifts from one edit to the next. Any answers that don't address this specific issue are not relevant, thanks again though. --Viennese Waltz 20:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I figure it's the same concept, without the subtlety. Listen carefully to the audio; the difference in volume, rhythm or inflection can be exceptionally small if done well. Aside from that, no clue why they'd want to do it. Do you have an example video? InedibleHulk (talk) 20:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I have always supposed that the editor has cut out a section from the interviewee's speech and has wanted to avoid the "jump" in the video that this would create. This used to be done by splicing in a noddy. However, with multiple cameras, it becomes possible to also do this by switching from one angle to another so the slight jump in the person's position is disguised by the change in camera angle. If the cuts are sufficiently rapid this may be preferable to frequent noddies. I suspect the speech isn't as continuous as it sounds. Thincat (talk) 00:40, 2 March 2014 (UTC)