posted
Comment: On the IMDb trivia page about the movie "AI: Artificial Intelligence," a piece of information piqued my interest. Allegedly, the film was going to just be "AI," but a focus group/public poll/something revealed that people thought it was "A1," and so they changed it to the longer title so people wouldn't think it was a movie about steak sauce. This was found on http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212720/trivia - I don't know if it's true or not, but it sounds like something you can't make up. Can you help out?
Posts: 36029 | From: Admin | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
this sounds very plausible.....artists,writers,movie producers often will "dumb down" their work in some ways to make sure it can appeal to a wider audience....I mean remember the days when music records would almost NEVER come with lyrics printed in the sleeve? ....also if the movie title had stayed AI you could almost expect some grumbling or perhaps a lawsuit from the steak sauce people since "I" is also Roman for the number 1
-------------------- Why do we drive in parkways and park in driveways? Posts: 24 | From: New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I could believe everything except the part about people thinking it's a steak sauce. "A1" is a sufficiently generic term that people wouldn't immediately leap to the "movie about steak sauce" conclusion, I would hope.
posted
The first time I heard the term AI it was artificial insemination , with reference to my neigbor's cattle. The full name make the film's title a bit more appealing now.
-------------------- I like free speech. It lets me know who the idiots are. Posts: 407 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ImSteve: this sounds very plausible.....artists,writers,movie producers often will "dumb down" their work in some ways to make sure it can appeal to a wider audience....I mean remember the days when music records would almost NEVER come with lyrics printed in the sleeve?
How is printing the lyrics considered dumbing it down?
Posts: 86 | From: Georgia | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ImSteve: this sounds very plausible.....artists,writers,movie producers often will "dumb down" their work in some ways to make sure it can appeal to a wider audience....I mean remember the days when music records would almost NEVER come with lyrics printed in the sleeve?
How is printing the lyrics considered dumbing it down?
I was going to ask that same question.
(And I own over 300 LPs, 200 cassettes and about 100 CDs...only 10 of my CDs and about 60 of my records actually have the lyrics included.) So I don't think whatever argument you're trying to make is a strong one to begin with.
-------------------- "There is no constitutional right to sleep with endangered reptiles." -- Carl Hiaasen Won't somebody please think of the adults! Posts: 8254 | From: Florida | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ImSteve: this sounds very plausible.....artists,writers,movie producers often will "dumb down" their work in some ways to make sure it can appeal to a wider audience....I mean remember the days when music records would almost NEVER come with lyrics printed in the sleeve?
How is printing the lyrics considered dumbing it down?
I was going to ask that same question.
(And I own over 300 LPs, 200 cassettes and about 100 CDs...only 10 of my CDs and about 60 of my records actually have the lyrics included.) So I don't think whatever argument you're trying to make is a strong one to begin with.
DUMBING DOWN....when an artist or writer has to make sure that the product they are putting out is able to appeal to the lowest common denominator of a public that might come into contact with it
examples... lyrics included with recorded music..this was not a popular trend until the late 70's and as far as Im concerned kind of devalued music as an art form in some ways..we dont believe people buying this are smart enough to figure it out so we'll spell it out for you kind of thing...
how many times have you said "Gee the book was alot better than the movie"?...this is because to make a movie strictly based on some books would fly over the average joes head so they "dumb it down" to make the movie more marketable and this inevitably leads to films that have little to do with the books they are based on..notice how art films all almost never blockbusters even though they may be heralded to be great movies..average movie goer guy/gal doesnt care...explosions and car chases are what fills the theater seats
I remember when the movie E.T. came out....I recall hearing people saying the name of the movie as ET (a 2 letter word)..point is with millions of bucks at stake movies have to make sure that with word of mouth people are saying the name of the movie correctly...I can easily see AI being spoken of as being A1 so they came up with a longer title to kind of spell it out for you "Artificial Intelligence"
dumbing down isnt something that just happens in movies and music...watch the news and you will see it happening before your eye
-------------------- Why do we drive in parkways and park in driveways? Posts: 24 | From: New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:DUMBING DOWN....when an artist or writer has to make sure that the product they are putting out is able to appeal to the lowest common denominator of a public that might come into contact with it
examples... lyrics included with recorded music..this was not a popular trend until the late 70's and as far as Im concerned kind of devalued music as an art form in some ways..we dont believe people buying this are smart enough to figure it out so we'll spell it out for you kind of thing...
Well, the Beatles' Sgt. Pepper was the first album to include lyrics, so I guess you can credit them with appealing to the lowest common denominator and the "dumbing down" of popular music.
Most of the albums I have that include lyrics are from singer-songwriters (Joni Mitchell, John Denver, Jackson Browne, Bruce Springsteen, Kris Kristofferson) whose music focused more on the lyrics than the technical aspects of their playing. Thus it would make sense for them to include the printed lyrics as an important part of their album as an art form, like poetry.
I have not bought a new CD in years that had the lyrics included. If anything, I'd say many artists have abandoned this practice. Downloading music is so popular now that cover art or liner notes aren't even important any more, much less lyrics. If anything, I think the absence of lyrics, liner notes, and cover art devalues music as an art form. I enjoy my albums not just for the music but for the package as a whole. I think young people don't appreciate music in the same way the Baby Boomers did, because they aren't presented with the music packaged as an art form with a cover, pictures, and lyrics included.
(And I should refrain from mentioning the irony of you desparaging the "dumbing down" of the public while your posts don't include and capital letters or proper punctuation )
-------------------- "There is no constitutional right to sleep with endangered reptiles." -- Carl Hiaasen Won't somebody please think of the adults! Posts: 8254 | From: Florida | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
On the matter of test audiences: Bill Hicks once said that Basic Instinct would have included a lesbian sex scene, but that the test audience didn't like it.
I have to agree with ol' Bill here: if he and I had been on that test audience, Michael Douglas would have been a frustrated bloke in a pub somewhere, swearing to all his friends that yes, he originally had a part in the movie, too.
Posts: 142 | From: Netherlands | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ImSteve: I can easily see AI being spoken of as being A1 so they came up with a longer title to kind of spell it out for you "Artificial Intelligence"
But the truth is, "AI" is not in the common parlance. I have a masters in Comp. Sci so it's a very familar term to me. But ask my mom what it means, and you're likely to get a blank stare.
It's not "dumbing down" when you're explaining a term that isn't in common usage. For example, if I were to comprehend an article dealing with the world of "gamers", you'd have to define lots of terms for me that would seem unnecessary to gamers, since I am not, and have never been, a "gamer" (at least in the popular sense of the word -- I love playing games, but am not into the role playing/LAN party/etc games that define 'gamer' now).
Don't forget that "I" means "1" in Roman numerals, as well, so people could legitimately think it was "A one". Just like most people say "Mac OS Ecks" instead of "Mac OS Ten", which is proper.
posted
I found this post on MrCranky.com from June 2001 where it's claimed that test audiences were confused. (I wasn't able to find a direct link to the original article.) I also found this article by Jeffery Wells that states Today Show reporter Matt Lauer thought that the title was "A1" and not "A.I." Brian
-------------------- "Dear Big Foot Smellers: Please don't quote me on some of this information." John F. Winston Posts: 1707 | From: Camarillo, CA | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rehcsif Mit: Don't forget that "I" means "1" in Roman numerals, as well, so people could legitimately think it was "A one". Just like most people say "Mac OS Ecks" instead of "Mac OS Ten", which is proper.
-Tim
If they want people to stop doing so, they need to stop enumerating as in "Mac OS X 10.3", which would be ten ten dot 3, eh?
Kabouter ...will it be followed by OSXI?...
-------------------- "You're no help," he told the lime. This was unfair. It was only a lime; there was nothing special about it at all. It was doing the best it could. Posts: 200 | From: Dallas, TX | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Don't forget that "I" means "1" in Roman numerals, as well, so people could legitimately think it was "A one". Just like most people say "Mac OS Ecks" instead of "Mac OS Ten", which is proper.
As far as Apple is concerned, Both are right. I have heard Jobs say in various Keynotes both therms interchangebly but in this contect.
If he is reffering to the entire series of platformes, he generalizes using the "ecks" series.
If he referrs to a specifiic versioon, its OS 10. whatever"
-------------------- W.W.F.S.M.D? But this image of Bush as some sort of Snidely Whiplash tying the fair maiden to the railroad tracks is beyond the pale. - Joe Bentley Posts: 2311 | From: Minnnesota | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I think Apple is changing on this. When OS X was first announced (I was at one of the satellite announcment conferences) they made a big deal that it was OS "TEN" not OS "ECKS". I think that's been softened now.
quote:lyrics included with recorded music..this was not a popular trend until the late 70's and as far as Im concerned kind of devalued music as an art form in some ways..we dont believe people buying this are smart enough to figure it out so we'll spell it out for you kind of thing...
Umm, the printing (or non-printing) of song lyrics had nothing to do with "dumbing down" the product. The reason that pop album sleeves didn't typically include printed lyrics until the late 1960s was because prior to then, the record labels considered the practice tantamount to giving their product away for free. It took an act with the clout of the Beatles to break that tradition and, as a by-product, to demonstrate to the labels that printed lyrics actually enhanced record sales.
quote:Originally posted by ImSteve: DUMBING DOWN....when an artist or writer has to make sure that the product they are putting out is able to appeal to the lowest common denominator of a public that might come into contact with it
examples... lyrics included with recorded music..this was not a popular trend until the late 70's and as far as Im concerned kind of devalued music as an art form in some ways..we dont believe people buying this are smart enough to figure it out so we'll spell it out for you kind of thing...
how many times have you said "Gee the book was alot better than the movie"?...this is because to make a movie strictly based on some books would fly over the average joes head so they "dumb it down" to make the movie more marketable and this inevitably leads to films that have little to do with the books they are based on..notice how art films all almost never blockbusters even though they may be heralded to be great movies..average movie goer guy/gal doesnt care...explosions and car chases are what fills the theater seats
I remember when the movie E.T. came out....I recall hearing people saying the name of the movie as ET (a 2 letter word)..point is with millions of bucks at stake movies have to make sure that with word of mouth people are saying the name of the movie correctly...I can easily see AI being spoken of as being A1 so they came up with a longer title to kind of spell it out for you "Artificial Intelligence"
dumbing down isnt something that just happens in movies and music...watch the news and you will see it happening before your eye
I think the fashion for including printed lyrics with a record started in the 60s when it became fashionable for singers to (a) mumble the words to impress us how full of angst they are (b)drown out the words with loud music (c) deliberately use lots of jargon, "in" phrases, and even meaningless phrases, to try to make us think the song must have some deep meaning that's not there; so that if not for the lyric sheet no-one would have a clue what the words were. In fact I suspect in many cases it was a ploy to MAKE kids have to buy the record to show off to the other kids by singing the correct words.
The book is (nearly) always better than the movie, and the movie always distorts and simplifies the book, because if you made a film showing EVERYTHING that happened in an average novel, it would be about 24 hours long.
I remember when the film "10" came out I saw it advertised on the board in front of a cinema as "IO" (obviously they only had letters not figures to make up the names of films) and I thought it was about Greek mythology, or maybe a SF flick set on a moon of Jupiter.
Posts: 670 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: this is because to make a movie strictly based on some books would fly over the average joes head
I doubt that very much. Cinema and books are two different mediums. Directly translating books doesnt work very often becasue books requre your imagine to get the events going in your mind,. Everyone has their own interpretation of what goes on in a book. Films are largly visual. Its the interpretation of a few people. Their are two different mediums. You cannt get the same enjoyments out of a book as you can from a movie.
Often times movies have to take considerations - the attention span of the audience - the time span of a 2 hour move vs a 300 page book - elements of a book that just doesnt work - the audience's reaction. Movies are entertainment moneymakers. You loose money if you dont sell the movie properly. Having a perfect adaptation isnt enough. Movies have to have things that the audience wants. Books are different. Most people will buy a book if it gets a decent review and they end up liking the author and keep buing books. Movies have to be sold all over again - they have losts more components.
Moves and books just are too different. If you want to cpompare the two, your bound to be dissapointed.
-------------------- W.W.F.S.M.D? But this image of Bush as some sort of Snidely Whiplash tying the fair maiden to the railroad tracks is beyond the pale. - Joe Bentley Posts: 2311 | From: Minnnesota | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Psihala: (*Anyone remember Mac Finder version 1.0 ...? Anyone...?)
I do!
Do I win a prize?
MacLloyd
A prize... er, um.... yes, a prize... think, Psihala.... think.... (!)...
Ah! I've got one!
Here's an MP3 of my original 1984 mac, booting up off the external 400k drive from the original 'Getting Started' disk... and a screen shot of the 'About the finder' screen...
Ah, the memories...
~Psihala (*yes, the external 400k has always sounded like that... and it's the original one when I got the computer...)
quote:Originally posted by snopes: The reason that pop album sleeves didn't typically include printed lyrics until the late 1960s was because prior to then, the record labels considered the practice tantamount to giving their product away for free.
How is printing lyrics tantamount to giving their product away for free? Lindi
-------------------- A woman's dress should be like a barbed-wire fence: serving its purpose without obstructing the view. -Sophia Loren Posts: 1835 | From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Around here A1 would and Mobile Phone provider. But frankly I have to say even knowing and using Roman on a almost daily basis I never read the Title in any other way than it was ment to be.
-------------------- FAMILY(n): Where the term insane is a RELATIVE term //Threadkiller: Watch this line.....it might be the last on this topic........ Posts: 2146 | From: Austria | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
To worse examples of dunbing down for the American audience. The Madness of George III- shortend to The Madness of King George. So American audiences don't think they are missing the first two parts of the trilogy. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone- Changed to Sorcerer's Stone.
-------------------- All the world's a face, And all the men and women merely acne. Posts: 673 | From: Glasgow, Scotland | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone- Changed to Sorcerer's Stone.
I didn't even understand why this one was done. Is there anything special about the word sorcerer or was this just a marketing decision? (Even the "dumbing down" reason doesn't seem to apply here.)
Posts: 4922 | From: Kyoto, Japan | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Richard W
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: To worse examples of dunbing down for the American audience. The Madness of George III- shortend to The Madness of King George. So American audiences don't think they are missing the first two parts of the trilogy.
quote:Nicholas Hytner, the film's director, admitted that the claim is "not totally untrue" ... perhaps there is a little bit of truth to this one.
)
Actually I think that one of the examples given on snopes's page is an example of dumbing down for a US audience:
quote:Similarly, the 1997 UK film Mrs. Brown, about the relationship between Queen Victoria and John Brown, was advertised under the name Her Majesty, Mrs. Brown in America, where the name "Mrs. Brown" would not readily have been recognized as a reference to Queen Victoria.
Mrs. Brown wouldn't have been readily recognised as a reference to Queen Victoria here either, before the film. It might have been used in Victorian satire but it wasn't current. I thought the idea behind the title was the incongruity of calling a film about Queen Victoria "Mrs. Brown", so adding "Her Majesty" does miss the point a bit.
Posts: 8725 | From: Ipswich - the UK's 9th Best Place to Sleep! | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone- Changed to Sorcerer's Stone.
I didn't even understand why this one was done. Is there anything special about the word sorcerer or was this just a marketing decision? (Even the "dumbing down" reason doesn't seem to apply here.)
I'm equally stumped on this one. The only thing I can think is that with witches and wizards they didn't want to confuse the audience more with introducing philosophers.
-------------------- All the world's a face, And all the men and women merely acne. Posts: 673 | From: Glasgow, Scotland | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
According to what I have read, "Philosopher's Stone" was changed to Sorceror's Stone" for the book and subsequent movie because the American distributors thought American readers might see the original title and think the book too boring to bother with. "Sorceror's Stone" seemed more exciting to them.
-------------------- "Silly customer, you cannot hurt a Twinkie." -Apu (The Simpsons) Posts: 2026 | From: 10 miles South of Boston | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
Revolution 9
The Red and the Green Stamps
posted
quote:Originally posted by diddy:
quote: this is because to make a movie strictly based on some books would fly over the average joes head
I doubt that very much. Cinema and books are two different mediums. Directly translating books doesnt work very often becasue books requre your imagine to get the events going in your mind,. Everyone has their own interpretation of what goes on in a book. Films are largly visual. Its the interpretation of a few people. Their are two different mediums. You cannt get the same enjoyments out of a book as you can from a movie.
Often times movies have to take considerations - the attention span of the audience - the time span of a 2 hour move vs a 300 page book - elements of a book that just doesnt work - the audience's reaction. Movies are entertainment moneymakers. You loose money if you dont sell the movie properly. Having a perfect adaptation isnt enough. Movies have to have things that the audience wants. Books are different. Most people will buy a book if it gets a decent review and they end up liking the author and keep buing books. Movies have to be sold all over again - they have losts more components.
Moves and books just are too different. If you want to cpompare the two, your bound to be dissapointed.
I would agree with that, and I'd like to add that part of the reason the film is rarely as good as the book version is exactly because it has to be the interpretation of a the director etc, as opposed to the individual interpretations of everyone who saw the film. A good example would be the film version of Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four". I'm a big Orwell fan, have been since high school, and when I first saw the film version I was disappointed by it, it was a well made film and for the most part hadn't butchered the plot as far as I could see, other than obvious instances of having to change parts that simply wouldn't have worked in the film, or that would have made it too long, but for the most par it didn't match up to the way I had imagined the book. The characters didn't look or sound much like I had imagined them, particularly Winston and O'Brien, certain bits of dialogue were acted out differently to how I had imagined them, that sort of thing. Of course it's bound to happen, there's no way even the best director can make his film match the interpretations that everyone who read the book have in their minds. Really that's the reason I'm usually not too keen on seeing the film of a book if I've already read the book, because it almost always makes me disappointed when I see the film and it wasn't how I imagined it. So yes, I'd say that that's the reason that films of books are usually a disappointment, rather than them being "dumbed down" and patronising to the viewer, I mean in the case of "Nineteen Eighty-Four" I don't think there was any dumbing down at all going on, certainly there were parts removed and scenes moved around, but as been said the film just wouldn't work otherwise.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[dunce]](graemlins/dunce.gif)
)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
