Entertainment desk
< December 10	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 12 >

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 11[edit]

Mash[edit]

I would like to know if I really saw a Album Cover in an episode of Mash that was Aerosmith? Thank you. Stacy Boudreaux — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.165.78 (talk) 02:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which episode ? Which scene ? StuRat (talk) 03:49, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely. As I remember MASH was pretty careful about chronological inaccuracies, and the only regular use of music albums as a plot device I can remember is Charles and his collection, and it would hardly suit his music tastes regardless! --jjron (talk) 13:54, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely as a mistake, yes, but perhaps they might have done something like that as an in-joke. StuRat (talk) 18:45, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is that famous song?[edit]

What is the name of that famous song where it was used in a scene of an episode of ALF where ALF was singing in his underwear and same thing with Lizzie McGuire's little brother who also did it in his underwear? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.153.189 (talk) 03:26, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which episode ? Which scene ? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 03:50, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like those were both ripping off Tom Cruise doing that in Risky Business to Old Time Rock and Roll. Did they also wear sunglasses and socks with white briefs and slide on the floor on those socks, as in the movie ? StuRat (talk) 03:52, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ALF sings "Old Time Rock and Roll", but he's wearing a shirt (and sunglasses).[1] Clarityfiend (talk) 04:45, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They don't show ALF from the waist down, as he's a muppet type of thing and his lower half is the hands of his operators. There have been many parodies of the Risky Business scene. Here's one with 4 well-known basketball coaches:[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:41, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought there were a couple times in the series where they'd put a midget in a suit and actually show him running out of the room or some such thing. After having just reviewed a couple clips on YouTube, maybe I'm just remembering the opening sequence when they show ALF in his bed where you can see his legs but he doesn't actually get up and walk or run. Dismas|^(talk) 14:16, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In this you see his legs when he goes out the window [3] (about 55 seconds) but I wonder if there's actually a person in the costume or it's just legs (perhaps a legs handpuppet?). There's also some shots of legs [4] but I presume this is some sort of fan movie. However Michu Meszaros does mention the performer in a costume was used for full body shots involving standing, walking and running scenes and this is also mentioned in ALF (TV series), including the intro where a photo of the famil is taken with a full body shot. As for the original question, most references to ALF underwear seem to refer to underwear featuring ALF. Nil Einne (talk) 16:13, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Muppets have also occasionally had full-body shots, but traditionally they were above-the-waist-only, for practical reasons. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Insight for composing music[edit]

To what have musical composers (of any genre) attributed their insight for their own musical compositions?
—Wavelength (talk) 05:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The sounds of nature seem to have been a major inspiration, as in The Four Seasons (Vivaldi). For more modern music, perhaps relationships are the most important inspiration. StuRat (talk) 18:42, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Elgar said: "There is music in the air, music all around us, the world is full of it and you simply take as much as you require". -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:40, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Many composers are influenced by features of their own cultures, even when they leave their native land at an early age and never return. Frédéric Chopin was strongly influenced by the folk dances and songs of his native Poland, but lived more than half his life in France. Sergei Rachmaninoff was strongly influenced by the bells and chants of the Russian Orthodox Church, but lived a significant part of his life in Germany, Switzerland and the USA. Igor Stravinsky also had strong Russian influences in his music. On the other hand, there is no typical Viennese Gemütlichkeit in any of the "music" Arnold Schoenberg ever wrote. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:49, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since the works of Schoenberg indisputably contain the key elements of what is defined as Music in our article, i.e. "pitch, rhythm, dynamics, and the sonic qualities of timbre and texture", it's hard to see what those scare quotes are doing there – unless they are a cheap shot at twelve-tone music, which I am sure would be beneath you Jack. As for "Gemütlichkeit", I've been living in Vienna for six years and I've experienced precious little of it – "social acceptance" being something that it is nigh on impossible to come by if you're an outsider. --Viennese Waltz 14:43, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear you're still considered an outsider in Vienna. I guess they have good historical reasons to be wary of foreigners, but still ...

Seems you don't know me very well, Herr Waltz. I would happily spend the rest of my days taking cheap (and expensive) shots at 12-tone music, if only someone would pay me for the effort. Since they don't, I prefer to just ignore it most of the time. Actually, Arnold did write some lovely music - Gurre-Lieder is fantastic, and his Pelleas und Melisande hits the spot too, but then he went badly, badly wrong, and never recovered. Technical definitions of music are one thing, but I've always been inspired by Beethoven's comment to a fellow composer whose opera he had just sat through: I quite liked your opera. I'm thinking of setting it to music. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Colbert report 2011 12 08[edit]

In last Thursday's Colbert Report, Stephen introduced 3 jokes candies: Junior Mintingitis (pun of Meningitis), M&Mbolism (pun of Embolism), and goobers. What disease is goobers parodying? 99.245.35.136 (talk) 19:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not a disease, per se, but goober is a word which has meanings including a ball of spit or snot: [5]. And I would guess "gingivitis" and "botulism" were meant in the Junior Mints and M&M cases. StuRat (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Meningitis and embolism sound more obvious. And maybe the third is not supposed to sound like anything. The humour is that you expect there to be another joke, and there isn't. Adam Bishop (talk) 20:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rule of three (writing)#Comedy - establish a pattern, break the pattern. (Wow, look at how many Rules of three there are) 68.60.252.82 (talk) 22:15, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, guys. 99.245.35.136 (talk) 02:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

aside

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

It's worth mentioning that Goobers is an actual brand of candy. So part of the joke, presumably, is that Colbert didn't have to "morbidify" the name to make it sound unsavory. Deor (talk) 11:00, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that it took six people to realize this fact is incredibly sad. here's a hint OP, the first two are parodying Junior Mints and M&Ms, which are also candies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.145.88.147 (talk) 02:46, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that much was already obvious. I'm just wondering whatever became of Crunchy Frog and Anthrax Ripple. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that it was so obvious to us to not require stating, but perhaps it wasn't as obvious to the OP, so maybe we should have. StuRat (talk) 05:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right. Too bad the drive-by didn't display your level of politeness. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of interest Bugs, which "drive-by" are you referring to – the OP, or 209? And by the way, I do wish you would stop talking about editors who choose not to open accounts as second class citizens – they're not. --Viennese Waltz 14:20, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He must have meant 209, as the OP was completely polite. But I agree: you can't really call an editor a "drive-by" and in the same breath comment on their lack of politeness (!). It's a little like a parent telling their children to "stop fucking swearing". -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:09, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, 209, who took an unwarranted shot at everyone who had tried to answer the question. Typical drive-by behavior. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is nonsense. There are dozens, perhaps hundreds of editors with accounts who exhibit precisely the same behaviour. Despite having been told about this many times, I guess you won't ever learn the simple truth that editors who choose not to create accounts are no different from those who do. --Viennese Waltz 08:31, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your response indicates you believe quite the opposite - that registered users are second-class, and that drive-bys are to be kissed-up-to. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. All editors are equal. Besides, if you'd bothered to look at the contributions history for that IP address, you would have seen that it has a long list of contributions going back to 2006, well before you started using your account. Of course, there's no way of knowing whether it's always the same person making the edits, which makes your position all the more untenable. How do you know that the same person isn't editing from multiple computers? --Viennese Waltz 09:27, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some are more equal than others. According to you, IP's are to be worshipped and registered users are to be trashed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Absolute rubbish, Bugsy. What you always do is take the bad behaviour of one IP on one occasion and magically, mysteriously conclude from this that all IPs are permanently beneath contempt, and spare no time in telling us all of your bigotry and prejudices. You never make such ludicrous and unsustainable and unreasonable and illogical extrapolations when it comes to the bad behaviour of one registered user on one occasion. Why would that be? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 10:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong on all counts. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:39, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I call it as I see it. You tell me where I'm wrong. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 10:41, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'd be interested to hear that as well, rather than your usual method of refusing to address criticisms aimed at you, while making ill-founded attacks on other editors. --Viennese Waltz 10:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where was Jack wrong? That's easy. He was wrong in every sentence in his previous statement. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:48, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a diff where you have complained about the "drive-by" behaviour of a registered user. And while you're about it, you could respond to my point that 209* above has a long contribution history and is not, therefore, what you charmingly refer to as a "drive-by". --Viennese Waltz 10:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]