December 26

Which Coldplay songs appear in video games of the music genre (Guitar Hero, Rock Band, etc.) Thanks!Nicholasprado (talk) 00:46, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In My Place appears in Guitar Hero 5. You would get a result much faster by going through our Guitar Hero and Rock Band articles (each of which has a "List of songs in..." spin-off article) and using the Find (Ctrl + F) function of your browser to search for "Coldplay". A comprehensive list does not exist in one place on WP, your other bet is Google. Zunaid 23:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1. Does Peter_Hinwood of the Rocky Horror Picture Show have a website? 2. Does the musical or play of RHPS ever come to Vancouver or Seattle area? 3. Does the movie have a 35 anniversary on blu-ray? Venustar84 (talk) 03:12, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy yuletide!

Yes, there is a 35th anniversary Blu-Ray that was released in 2010. http://www.rockyhorror.com/news/pr_bluray.php. It appears to be available at Amazon still. RudolfRed (talk) 03:58, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After reading the article and doing a quick Google search, it doesn't appear as Hinwood A) has a web site, B) needs one, or C) wants one. Seems he's just happy being an antiques dealer in England. Dismas|^(talk) 04:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does the musical or play of Rocky horror picture show ever come to Vancouver or Seattle area? Venustar84 (talk) 06:36, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to ask the same question twice in a brief period. I found some shows from a few months ago by using Google, so perhaps there will be more shows again in the future. RudolfRed (talk) 07:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hi, how can one watch a movie with its screenplay displayed at the bottom, like we usually watch with its subtitle? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.120.141.254 (talk) 09:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You would have to have a copy of the screenplay as a text file. Then, you can make a subtitle file out of it and watch the film with this subtitle file, as is possible with some video programs. --Viennese Waltz 09:25, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another way would be to enable closed captioning, if available. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:39, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a written form of audio description. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:58, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen

I have a question: could modern sports fencing still be used in a real duel with sharp swords or is it too different from the original fencing? I am asking this question because nobody was ever able to answer it for me. I am a sports fencer and it would be interesting to know the limitations of the modern sport.--83.77.53.192 (talk) 12:48, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The sport of Fencing is to sword use in warfare as the sport of cricket is to sword use in warfare, in the sense that you're holding an object which is fairly long; and that's about it. In actual combat use, sword-on-sword contact almost never happens; the specific way you use a sword, and the kinds of swords you use, in actual "trying to kill someone" fighting looks absolutely nothing like fencing. This article (read #4, and also follow the link in that section) does a pretty good job of explaining it. --Jayron32 14:30, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fencing swords were developed for dueling in a different style of combat in a different time than heavy war swords. Only the point of a foil is sharp and side-to-side contact does not degrade its ability to stab. The comments section of the page Jayron linked to points out various misconceptions in the article about misconceptions. There are a number of historical fencing manuals available online that you can compare your modern technique to - and learn offhand weapons such as the cloak. See also Classical fencing and History of fencing. Rmhermen (talk) 18:27, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen

Thank you very much for your responses. Thank you for the links. So it seems that the modern sport has actually little to do with the actual art of combat. Are there still connections to the dueling with the rapier?

Kind Regards--83.77.53.192 (talk) 19:56, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in our articles on Academic fencing and Dueling scars. Alansplodge (talk) 23:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Am I the only one who finds the films of the Harry Potter series thoroughly underwhelming? They are so overtly abbreviated and deficient that it almost seems as though they were made with the sole intent of getting fans to watch them as a means to no end -- with no real objective in terms of making a video version of the actual books. I mean, if you take the film Moneyball, for instance, the point seems to have been to bring the book to life in an accurate fashion -- in essence, to make the movie a version of the book, but just in audio/visual format -- whereas the series of Harry Potter films seems just so outrageously self-fulfilling. I mean, if I hadn't read the books, I don't really think I'd be following what's even going on. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 18:08, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I watched some of the earlier films in the series with people who had not read the books - and they had no problems. Perhaps the later longer books had more omitted though. Rmhermen (talk) 18:49, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the first one but never felt drawn to see any of the later ones, so you're not the only underwhelmed one. I've never read any of the books, so I had no yardstick. But comparisons between films and the books they're based on are always difficult, and I've read very few of the books that the films I've seen have been based on. Film exists as a genre in its own right and stands or falls on its own merits.

But if you've asked this question to complain about the fact that you chose to sit through the entire series hoping they'd improve, but they never did, and you now feel you've wasted your time and possibly money, this is the wrong place for such a rant. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 19:12, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just wondering how the filmmakers could get away with making a film that leaves out so many details that it amounts to numerous plot holes. The fact that Harry can see 12 Grimmauld Place in the HP5 film when the location hadn't been revealed to him by the secret keeper (Dumbledore) as it was explained in the book sort of makes the films, well, just a bit silly relative to the books, and almost noncanonical. I mean, if Rowling was involved in these "officially" produced films, how could she go ahead with this...or is it just that making accurate films out of something as vast as the HP series would have ended up in 20 or more 2 hour films? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 19:49, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or 2 or more 20-hour films(*). Something's gotta give when you transform a creative work to a different medium. How successfully they manage the transition is where the art resides. Obviously, the film series has been fantastically successful, and vast numbers of adoring fans have been prepared to overlook all manner of inconsistencies and plot holes. That you're less impressed says more about you and your expectations than anything else. The producers? - they're not listening; they're too busy rolling around their money bins all day. "Getting away with" stuff is what movie-makers do - whatever it takes to maximise the number of people seeing the movie.

(*) Not as wild an idea as it may sound. War and Peace (film series) has been screened in a single 8-hour sitting (including 3 intermissions), which I've sat through and lived to tell the tale. Likewise, I can well imagine someone watching the entire Harry Potter film series in a single marathon sitting. But one surely wouldn't invest such time solely in order to pick holes in the production. Would one? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I watched all the movies and enjoyed them well enough, though I naturally missed out on some of the background stuff. I've never read any of the books and don't have any particular plan to. In contrast, when I watched the first Lord of the Rings film,it drove me to get the books and read them all. Take of that what you will. Many fantasy books are so crammed with details that making a faithful movie would be a bore, as many are finding out with The Hobbit. Matt Deres (talk) 15:51, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]