[WikiEN-l] Conventions and movie vs. film

[Daniel Ehrenberg]

--- Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
> james duffy wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2003-05-01 at 09:35, The Cunctator wrote:
> >> > We actually did have a big discussion about
> this and film ended up 
> >> being
> >> > nixed because of the problem of digital videa
> replacing actual film 
> >> as the
> >> > medium for "films". Thus, "movie".
> >
> > If that is the case, then surely 'movie', a word
> linked with the 
> > silent world of moving pictures, should be
> replaced on wiki by 'talkie'.
> >
> > And if the Cunctator's assertion is correct, then
> we need to change 
> > it. Non-Americans do not generally use the word
> 'movie'. It is a word 
> > only occasionally used outside the US and usually
> applied to heavily 
> > Americanised Hollywood-ised blockbusters; Bruce
> Willis saves the 
> > world, gets the girl and wisecracks his way to the
> conclusion, with 
> > the promise of 5 sequels and billions of dollars
> of merchandising to 
> > come. In fact 'movie' is used internationally in
> relation to 'film' 
> > the way 'fast food' is used in relation to
> 'cuisine'. Stuff by Quentin 
> > Tarantino is often described as 'film' whereas
> something with Arnie, 
> > Sly or that genre is invariably a 'movie'. And
> anyone ever heard of a 
> > 'movie noir'?
> 
> In which case a disambiguator of '(movie)' is
> totally appropriate
> for the works of which you're contemptuous, eh?  In
> fact, people
> could tell from the use of '(film)' vs '(movie)' in
> the article
> title whether it's one that you approve of, and thus
> know how
> to evaluate the worthiness of the article before
> reading it.
> 
> But seriously, there are a hundred ways that I could
> look down
> my nose at, say, Ireland and the Irish, yet you
> don't see me spewing
> those out at every opportunity.  So cool it with the
> cultural
> superiority guff - nobody is actually interested in
> your opinion
> on what kind of material they should admire.
> 
> Of course, you're welcome to try to convince people
> to
> disambiguate with '(film)', but let me give you a
> hint - they'll
> be a lot easier to convince if you treat them with
> respect.
> 
> Stan

This whole debate is pointless. Who cares if we use
movie or film. Neither one is ambiguous. Neither is
really that "uncultured". It doesn't matter. Just make
redirects from one to another (since some use movie
and others film) or else pick one and adopt it as a
standard. Pick a number 1 or 2. One of them is movie,
the other film. It really doesn't matter which one is
used. Will one of them detract from our goal of
creating an encyclopedia? Just think of that when
debating these pointless issues.
-LittleDan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com