 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2004Madness of Crocodile Dundee
We eventually reached a reasonable understanding of the 'Madness of King George' / 'Madness of George III' issue as related to transpondian understanding. Now the Radio Times (in its 'Movie Trivia' section) is claiming that < Crocodile Dundee > as titled for the UK market was < 'Crocodile' Dundee > for the US market 'in case Americans thought it was actually about a Crocodile called Dundee' (ObPR - why wouldn't *anyone* be tickled at the idea of a crocodile called Dundee?) Anyway, this seemed sufficiently far-fetched until I looked at the posters for the movie on IMDb. http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0090555/posters And blow me (Hi Deej!) there we have one poster with the title naked as nature intended and another with the little guillemots round 'Crocodile'. It's not explicit there (and it's difficult to Google a clear statement) that one poster is for the UK and one for the USA. But the page for the movie does say that < 'Crocodile' Dundee > is the US title. Seriously? -- John Dean Oxford I'm still working on my faux Crocodile Dundee (aren't we all?): "Grab another VB from the eskie for me, sheila!" would be said in (y)America as: "Grab another MGD from the cooler for me, bruce!" Instead of a large knife strapped to my belt is a cellphone - hey, I can call for backup! > Seriously? On the US poster they also removed the Crocodile, so you won't assume it's about a fun-loving reptile who takes a trip to Big Apple. > Now the Radio Times (in its 'Movie Trivia' section) is claiming that > Crocodile Dundee as titled for the UK market was < 'Crocodile' Dundee [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > movie does say that 'Crocodile' Dundee > is the US title. > Seriously? I don't see what is so far-fetched or shocking. If you can imagine that you never heard of the movie, then it would not obvious that "Crocodile Dundee" is the name of a person. It wouldn't make me think that that was the name *of* a crocodile, either -- people don't say "Dog Beethoven." It just sounds incomprehensible, until you know. The quotes are a recognizable indicator meaning "Here's a nickname!" I checked out other likely links at the IMDb page. As you say, there were two logos, and that the quotation marks are on one logo and not on the other. I found these bits: The original Australian version runs about 6 minutes longer than the international version. It includes more character building in the first half. There is also more swearing which was dubbed out of the international version. The international version puts quotation marks around the Crocodile in the title. and The "quotes" around "Crocodile" in the title were added for the American release to ensure people didn't think that Dundee was a crocodile. So, yes, that's what somebody thought the reason was, anyway.  SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux >> Now the Radio Times (in its 'Movie Trivia' section) is claiming that >> Crocodile Dundee as titled for the UK market was < 'Crocodile' Dundee [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > that you never heard of the movie, then it would not obvious that > "Crocodile Dundee" is the name of a person. It's not far-fetched because it's true. It's not shocking, it's just interesting. The point of interest, for me, is the allegation that most English speaking peoples are not put off by 'Crocodile Dundee' as a movie title but that, allegedly, Americans don't have the same capacity for understanding what it's about and / or are not able to discover (as are the Brits) from reviews and media stories what the film is about. It seems staggeringly patronising (though it gives USAns credit fro a) noticing and b) appreciating the significance of quotations marks. -- John Dean Oxford >It's not far-fetched because it's true. It's not shocking, it's just >interesting. The point of interest, for me, is the allegation that most [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >It seems staggeringly patronising (though it gives USAns credit fro a) >noticing and b) appreciating the significance of quotations marks. The title was changed for the American release by the distributor who bought the rights. Movie distributors are not generally well educated and do not keep a staff of experts to vet their written English. They make these decisions based on whatever pops out of their brains at any given moment. If you worked for one of them you wouldn't last long challenging title changes such as this. Remember, these are the morons who gave us "Krakatoa, East of Java". Brian Wickham > Remember, these are the morons who gave us "Krakatoa, East of Java". For readers who cannot watch PBS TV, John Dean's cunning title referred to the British film (of the stage play) The Madness of King George III. For the American market it was retitled The Madness of King George, for fear filmgoers might avoid this because they had not earlier seen The Madness of King George I or II. -- Don Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) Don Phillipson spake thus: > > Remember, these are the morons who gave us "Krakatoa, East of Java". > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > might avoid this because they had not earlier > seen The Madness of King George I or II. Not quite - the play (and the film in the UK) is entitled "The Madness of George III". We know he was a king. SignatureDavid ===== > Don Phillipson spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Not quite - the play (and the film in the UK) is entitled "The > Madness of George III". We know he was a king. It's "The Madness of George III" on stage in the US, as well. (I saw our local theater company's production in 1996.) I can sympathize with the film distributors, as I suspect that the first reflex of most Americans probably would be "sequel number" rather than "dynastic number". I might have gone with "The Madness of George the Third". On the other hand, there's another reason to retitle. While most Americans might not be sure just which one was George III, because of his ties with American history he's the one that would be implied by "King George" to most Americans too young to remember Georges V or VI (and probably some of them as well). I myself couldn't confidently tell you anything about any of the Georges besides III and VI. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |He who will not reason, is a bigot; 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |he who cannot is a fool; and he who Palo Alto, CA 94304 |dares not is a slave. | Sir William Drummond kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > > Don Phillipson spake thus: > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > (and probably some of them as well). I myself couldn't confidently > tell you anything about any of the Georges besides III and VI. You mean you don't remember that George I didn't speak a word of English? (I don't remember if II learned any or not.) Jon Miller > "Evan Kirshenbaum" <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote [ ... ] I myself couldn't confidently > > tell you anything about any of the Georges besides III and VI. > > You mean you don't remember that George I didn't speak a word of English? > (I don't remember if II learned any or not.) I remember that George I didn't speak English. (Hey, he was the king. How could they force him to?) I also remember the story about how George V gave SS Queen Mary her name. George VI I remember quite well. For four years of my life I asked God each school day to bless the fellow. We Americans now have our own family of numbered Georges. They're all surnamed Foreman: <http://www.who2.com/georgeforeman.html>. SignatureBob Lieblich Please not to mention Boy George Robert Lieblich spake thus: > > "Evan Kirshenbaum" <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > quite well. For four years of my life I asked God each school day to > bless the fellow. Pity you didn't enjoin the Almighty to cure his stammer - it might have made him a bit more comfortable in company. SignatureDavid ===== > I remember that George I didn't speak English.(Hey, he was the > king. How could they force him to?) I also remember the story about > how George V gave SS Queen Mary her name. George VI I remember > quite well. For four years of my life I asked God each school day to > bless the fellow. My favorite Royal oddity is Sandringham Time. Who knew that George V sponsored a Waffen SS unit? http://www.hammerland.net/blog1_archive/000216.html >>> Don Phillipson spake thus: >>> [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Jon Miller Well, German was his native and preferred tongue, but he did eventually manage a few words now and then. II *did* learn the tongue and even had the decency to become a naturalised British Citizen, a courtesy avoided by his Father. Though at his wife's deathbed when she urged him to remarry he chose French to reply "Non, j'aurai des maitresses". Like Elvis, he died on the toilet. -- John Dean Oxford >> You mean you don't remember that George I didn't speak a word of >> English? (I don't remember if II learned any or not.) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >deathbed when she urged him to remarry he chose French to reply "Non, >j'aurai des maitresses". Like Elvis, he died on the toilet. I don't know where you got the bit about naturalisation. All descendants of the Electress Sophia were naturalised by statute in 1705; that included the future George I and George II. The terms of the statute covered *all* descendants in perpetuity; it was repealed in 1948, although without retrospective effect, so any descendant of the Electress born before that year is legally British, even if neither nor any of their ancestors have ever set foot in the country. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com". >>> You mean you don't remember that George I didn't speak a word of >>> English? (I don't remember if II learned any or not.) [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > the Electress born before that year is legally British, even if > neither nor any of their ancestors have ever set foot in the country. My understanding of the Sophia Naturalization Act of 1705 is that gave her descendants the right to *claim* British Citizenship. It did not make them de facto British Citizens. Ernst Augustus of Hanover made such a claim after WW2 and had the devil of a job establishing his right to make such a claim (Attorney-General -v- HRH Prince Ernest Augustus of Hanover [1957] 1 All ER 49), something which would not have applied had it been an automatic entitlement. -- John Dean Oxford > > Remember, these are the morons who gave us "Krakatoa, East of Java". > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > might avoid this because they had not earlier > seen The Madness of King George I or II. Almost. The play had one title everywhere, the film had the other title everywhere. The play was "The Madness of George III," no "King." The film was "The Madness of King George." SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux Donna Richoux spake thus: > > > Remember, these are the morons who gave us "Krakatoa, East of Java". > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > everywhere. The play was "The Madness of George III," no "King." The > film was "The Madness of King George." You may be right - I can't find any reference to the play's title being used for the film in the UK. But IMDB does have a reference to "The Madness of George III" being used in Australia. SignatureDavid ===== > Almost. The play had one title everywhere, the film had the other title > everywhere. The play was "The Madness of George III," no "King." The > film was "The Madness of King George." I wonder what the French title was? > For readers who cannot watch PBS TV, John > Dean's cunning title referred to the British film (of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > might avoid this because they had not earlier > seen The Madness of King George I or II. I note that Brannaugh movie poster is "Henry V by William Shakespeare". http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097499/posters >> For readers who cannot watch PBS TV, John >> Dean's cunning title referred to the British film (of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I note that Brannaugh movie poster is "Henry V by William > Shakespeare". Well, I know Ken wouldn't stoop so low as to believe there are people who would avoid it because they hadn't seen the first four 'Henry' movies. So perhaps it was his way of making a stand against those who believe Shakespeare was written by Oxford. Or Marlowe or Bacon or E.R.I or whoever. Or he didn't want people to assume he'd adapted the Anonymous 'THE FAMOVS VICTORIES of HENRY THE FIFTH'. Or just produced a modern version of the old tale with a script by Matt Damon and Ben Affleck or Joe Eszterhas. Of course, Olivier wanted to call his version <The Chronicle History of King Henry the Fift with his Battell at Agincourt in France> and see where *that* got him -- John Dean Oxford > >> Now the Radio Times (in its 'Movie Trivia' section) is claiming that > >> Crocodile Dundee as titled for the UK market was < 'Crocodile' Dundee [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > title but that, allegedly, Americans don't have the same capacity for > understanding what it's about Note, one of those items I quoted was about about Australia vs. all other international use. >and / or are not able to discover (as are the > Brits) from reviews and media stories what the film is about. > It seems staggeringly patronising (though it gives USAns credit fro a) > noticing and b) appreciating the significance of quotations marks. I have a vague recollection of this, of thinking, "Oh, that's what they mean, "'Crocodile' Dundee. A guy's name." It was such a quick thought I don't think I put it in words. Just recognition. So I am personally grateful to whoever thought of this extra step. I think what's patronising is to label any effort to make something clear as 'being patronising." We Americans are a practical people. If we see some simple way to avoid trouble down the road, and maximize understanding, do you think we should avoid taking such an action because somebody somewhere might think that somebody was "patronising" somebody? You guys would rather be incomprehensible than hurt someone's pride? Punctuation is there to serve. I really don't think any American is going to get into a tizzy nor a huff over some extra quotation marks. Even if they heard that these marks were put there specially for their benefit because they're believed to be utter morons. Whether or not it was Mencken who said, "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public," Americans cheerfully accept this low estimate of their fellow-citizens' ability (exempting themselves personally, of course). Don't you put nicknames in quotation marks, too? "Gloomy Gus" Hamlet? Henry "the Stud" VIII? SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux An American living in the Netherlands >>>> Now the Radio Times (in its 'Movie Trivia' section) is claiming >>>> that Crocodile Dundee as titled for the UK market was < [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I think what's patronising is to label any effort to make something > clear as 'being patronising." I think it's rather patronising of you to suggest that... > Don't you put nicknames in quotation marks, too? "Gloomy Gus" Hamlet? > Henry "the Stud" VIII? We didn't put them in Crocodile Dundee. Americans don't use them in Buffalo Bill Cody or Wild Bill Hickock or Calamity Jane. Not in writing about them, not in titling movies after them. Nor, for that matter, Mickey Blue Eyes. -- John Dean Oxford > We didn't put them in Crocodile Dundee. Americans don't use them in Buffalo > Bill Cody or Wild Bill Hickock or Calamity Jane. Not in writing about them, > not in titling movies after them. Nor, for that matter, Mickey Blue Eyes. I thought about Buffalo Bill, too. The guy in the movie wasn't Crocodile Nick, or Crocodile Joe. Crocodile Joe would have needed no explanation. Maybe it was written as 'Buffalo' Bill at the very beginning. But we'll probably never know. The "Making of America" collection doesn't have anything before the 1870s, when he is already described as famous and a great man. I don't know about you, but I think of Dundee as being a *place* before I think of it as a surname. I don't think I've ever heard of anyone else named Dundee, although it's not totally farfetched... Just a little test: "john duncan" 31,000 "john dunlop" 5,840 "john dundee" 320 Well, anyway, it's a style decision and I don't want anyone to think I'm rooting for the quotation marks. They didn't have to be there. I just don't think it was very remarkable that they *were*. It is *interesting* when movie titles are modified for the sake of clarity and cultural references -- can't we leave it at that? SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux >>We didn't put them in Crocodile Dundee. Americans don't use them in Buffalo >>Bill Cody or Wild Bill Hickock or Calamity Jane. Not in writing about them, [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > named Dundee, although it's not totally farfetched... Just a little > test: You never heard of "Bonnie Dundee"? Well, all right, that isn't really a surname, I suppose. > > I don't know about you, but I think of Dundee as being a *place* before > > I think of it as a surname. I don't think I've ever heard of anyone else [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Well, all right, that isn't really a surname, I suppose. No, I never heard the phrease, or if I did, it had no more significance than, say, "bonnie Aberdeen." I see now who it refers to, John Graham of Claverhouse, Viscount Dundee, and what he did -- thank you. I'm sure you heard more about the Jacobite rebellion, growing up in England, than Americans ever did. SignatureBest - Donna Richoux >>>I don't know about you, but I think of Dundee as being a *place* before >>>I think of it as a surname. I don't think I've ever heard of anyone else [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > heard more about the Jacobite rebellion, growing up in England, than > Americans ever did. I thought you might have heard the song: http://www.rampantscotland.com/songs/blsongs_dundee.htm SignatureFrances Kemmish Production Manager East Coast Youth Ballet www.byramartscenter.com [ . . . ] > You never heard of "Bonnie Dundee"? > Well, all right, that isn't really a surname, I suppose. I know where there's a current telephone directory that has a residential listing for a Bonnie Dundee. I think it's best to not say which directory that is. > > We didn't put them in Crocodile Dundee. Americans don't use them in Buffalo > > Bill Cody or Wild Bill Hickock or Calamity Jane. Not in writing about them, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > doesn't have anything before the 1870s, when he is already described > as famous and a great man. Which says something about a guy who was born in 1846. (As Tom Lehrer remarked, "It's a sobering thought, for instance, that when Mozart was my age, he had been dead for three years.") I'm pretty sure I've seen it with marks, but looking at posters for his show, it appears to not have been set off, but that would have been after he became famous, as well. However, I note that there's a difference here. His name is often given as William F. "Buffalo Bill" Cody (Often with parentheses instead of quotation marks.) The analogue with the movie would be Nick "Crocodile" Dundee On the other hand, when it's given as "Buffalo Bill Cody", it doesn't seem to have punctuation. Looking at Amazon, I find one book _Buffalo Bill's Wild West_ that reprints (on page 231) pictures from an 1894 _Cosmopolitan_ article entitled "Famous Hunting Parties of the Plains, by 'Buffalo Bill'". SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |If we have to re-invent the wheel, 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |can we at least make it round this Palo Alto, CA 94304 |time? kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >> We didn't put them in Crocodile Dundee. Americans don't use them in >> Buffalo Bill Cody or Wild Bill Hickock or Calamity Jane. Not in [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > *interesting* when movie titles are modified for the sake of clarity > and cultural references -- can't we leave it at that? Hokay BTW, I recommend Charlton Heston in 'Major Dundee'. Class movie. BTBTW, anyone know why Ali's trainer changed his name from Angelo Merena? -- John Dean Oxford > >> Now the Radio Times (in its 'Movie Trivia' section) is claiming that > >> Crocodile Dundee as titled for the UK market was < 'Crocodile' Dundee [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > understanding what it's about and / or are not able to discover (as are the > Brits) from reviews and media stories what the film is about. More interesting than that we elected Dubya? Or invaded Iraq to eliminate WMD? Seems to me it just fits into the same stereotype of Americans. Which, by the way, I don't find interesting. > It seems staggeringly patronising (though it gives USAns credit fro a) > noticing and b) appreciating the significance of quotations marks. Indicating that those who came up with the idea don't understand their market. Have a "nice" day. Jon Miller > We eventually reached a reasonable understanding of the 'Madness of King > George' / 'Madness of George III' issue as related to transpondian [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > movie does say that < 'Crocodile' Dundee > is the US title. > Seriously? What a disappointment. I thought there was a poster on the site for the film "Naked as Nature Intended". SignatureFrances Kemmish Production Manager East Coast Youth Ballet www.byramartscenter.com Frances Kemmish filted: >> And blow me (Hi Deej!) there we have one poster with the title naked as >> nature intended and another with the little guillemots round 'Crocodile'. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >What a disappointment. I thought there was a poster on the site for the >film "Naked as Nature Intended". From another newsgroup: "I actually wonder how many people will go to see 28 Days Later under the assumption that it's a sequel to the Sandra Bullock film of similar title"....r >> And blow me (Hi Deej!) there we have one poster with the title naked >> as nature intended and another with the little guillemots round >> 'Crocodile'. >> > > What a disappointment. I thought there was a poster on the site for > the film "Naked as Nature Intended". I'm sorry, Frances, that must have taken the savour out of your hot chocolate nightcap. Here ya go: http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B000050YHJ.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg -- John Dean Oxford >>>And blow me (Hi Deej!) there we have one poster with the title naked >>>as nature intended and another with the little guillemots round [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B000050YHJ.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg Thanks John; just in time for my late evening gin and tonic. SignatureFrances Kemmish Production Manager East Coast Youth Ballet www.byramartscenter.com >>>>And blow me (Hi Deej!) there we have one poster with the title naked >>>>as nature intended and another with the little guillemots round [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Thanks John; just in time for my late evening gin and tonic. That 'salvation' on the poster reminds me of a joke about a lady from the Salvation Army donating her services, with the punch-line "We cater for the needy, not for the greedy". You can guess the rest. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England ... > And blow me (Hi Deej!) there we have one poster with the title naked as > nature intended and another with the little guillemots round 'Crocodile'. ... Known as "murres" in the American release. SignatureJerry Friedman > "John Dean" <john-dean@frag.lineone.net> wrote > > > And blow me (Hi Deej!) there we have one poster with the title naked as > > nature intended and another with the little guillemots round 'Crocodile'. > Known as "murres" in the American release. How aukward. In alt.usage.english, Donna Richoux wrote: >How aukward. Puffin 'ell! SignatureMickwick > In alt.usage.english, Donna Richoux wrote: > > >How aukward. > > Puffin 'ell! Whose tern is it next? On 29 Jan 2004, Donna Richoux wrote >> In alt.usage.english, Donna Richoux wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Whose tern is it next? Al Batross's. SignatureCheers, Harvey Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 21 years. (for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs) Harvey Van Sickle filted: >On 29 Jan 2004, Donna Richoux wrote > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Al Batross's. Don't make me have to curl you!...r > Harvey Van Sickle filted: > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Don't make me have to curl you!...r Wanna spoon, Bill? >Harvey Van Sickle filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Don't make me have to curl you!...r It's about time for Woody Wordpecker to have his say. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England Another Australian film which had its name changed for the American market was "Evil Angels", which became "A Cry in the Dark", so as not to offend the religious right. It even happens with films that originated in America. "In Bed With Madonna" retained that title in Australia but became the less risque "Truth or Dare" in the USA. Going in the other direction, the US film "The Longest Yard" became "The Mean Machine" in Australia (and elsewhere) because the Gridiron term was thought to be too obscure, and "Airplane" became "Flying High" for reasons which entirely escape me. Maybe they thought that the American word was inferior to the Australian "aeroplane". And then, of course, there's "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone". > Going in the other direction, the US film "The Longest Yard" became > "The Mean Machine" in Australia (and elsewhere) because the Gridiron > term was thought to be too obscure, Nobody would want to see a feature film about back yards -- the TV shows have milked the topic dry. The word 'yard' is less-strongly identified with distance since we have used metres for quite a while now. > and "Airplane" became "Flying > High" for reasons which entirely escape me. Maybe they thought that > the American word was inferior to the Australian "aeroplane". I think that one was because it is an improvement: the original title simply sounds boring. They might have called it 'Aeroplane' if it had been called 'Jell-O' in the US. -- Regards John >> Going in the other direction, the US film "The Longest Yard" became >> "The Mean Machine" in Australia (and elsewhere) because the Gridiron [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >simply sounds boring. They might have called it 'Aeroplane' if it had >been called 'Jell-O' in the US. The original title was boring on purpose, though. It was a spoof even down to its title. Blockbusters of the period tended to have really lame one-word descriptive titles: *Airport*, *Earthquake*, *Hotel*, even *Jaws*. Although certainly most associated with that Seventies genre of three-hour oeuvres with Ernest Borgnine in them, this approach to titles still gets the occasional airing. Got a high-concept movie about a nasty space critter? *Alien*! Tornado hunters? *Twister*! A virus epidemic? *Outbreak*! Even *Titanic* could be claimed to qualify. -- Ross Howard Ross Howard filted: >>> and "Airplane" became "Flying >>> High" for reasons which entirely escape me. Maybe they thought that [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >lame one-word descriptive titles: *Airport*, *Earthquake*, *Hotel*, >even *Jaws*. The title, as confirmed by IMDb, was "Airplane!"...note the exclamation point...this was a nod to classic thrillers like "Them!" (about giant ants) or "Sssssss!" (about snakes) with one-word exclamated titles...turning a scary word into an exclamation is supposed to make it scarier...treating a bland word like "airplane" the same way is supposed to be funny, although maybe an acrophobe wouldn't get the humor.... A 1937 B-comedy called "Sh! The Octopus" is the subject of a running joke over at alt.movies.silent...there's nothing exclaimworthy about the movie (for that matter, there's no actual octopus in it)....r > Ross Howard filted: > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > point...this was a nod to classic thrillers like "Them!" (about giant ants) or > "Sssssss!" (about snakes) with one-word exclamated titles... If we're talking about the 1973 movie with a mad scientist turning men into cobras, then I believe the title was non-exclamated: "Sssssss". > turning a scary word > into an exclamation is supposed to make it scarier...treating a bland word like > "airplane" the same way is supposed to be funny, although maybe an acrophobe > wouldn't get the humor.... The exclamation point was also an homage to "Zero Hour!", the 1957 movie that Zucker/Abrahams/Zucker used as the basis for "Airplane!": http://slate.msn.com/id/2090376/ The film owes much to Zero Hour! (1957), an airborne- disaster film the ZAZ boys discovered on late-night TV and plundered for lines, shots, and the titular exclamation point they plundered so much, in fact, that Paramount had to buy the rights to the original. Z/A/Z continued their exclamatory ways with "Police Squad!" and "Top Secret!", and Abrahams on his own was responsible for "Hot Shots!" and the ill-advised "Jane Austen's Mafia!"... > And blow me (Hi Deej!) Is it too late to RSVP? SignatureDena Jo Delete "delete.this.for.email" for email. >> And blow me (Hi Deej!) > >Is it too late to RSVP? "The connection you are requesting timed out. Please try again later." Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England >> And blow me (Hi Deej!) > > Is it too late to RSVP? You know how to RSVP doncha Steve? ... SignatureJohn Dean Oxford |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.