Skip the point is, it's the OLD MGM movies that have credits without hyphens, and there were plenty of them out there when the original thread was created. You created it, you specifically listed the non-hyphen version as not allowed despite knowing about valid credits with it and now you're complaining about people doing it that way? Give me a break.

Why on earth should we change that now? All those profiles have been added with the hyphens in the past, and in fact I've seen non-hyphen contributions voted down and rejected because of the thread. If you intend to change it now it would cause a lot of confusion, a lot of updated and probably some ping-pong battles.

You really have to make up your mind what you want. You've been the one creating the studio thread thing which makes us go away from as credited. But you're ranting about people not including studios as credited more and more. So what do you want? Purely as credited, or common studio names? Perhaps we should create a poll on that and see what the community prefers and update the rules accordingly. The current situation is just a mess with people basing their decision on a studio thread that other claim to be out of date.

Eventually, Martin. I had this argument and lost it, there are those that believe AS CREDITED for Studios is just as important as it is for Cast and Crew.

@ Hydrox you are arguing with the wrong person. I told you to PM the person that controls the thread.

Skip <shrugs>

Thanks, James.

Skip

Awwwww poor martin. I used to update the information in the Studios thread all the time , Martin. As things came up and adjustments had to be made. That's why it is a user maintained thread, Dan maintains the Case type thread for the same reason, as things come up.

Skip

Quoting GSyren:

Quote:
Ok, I'm confused.

If the thread is updated with "As credited" data, why do we need a reference thread at all?
Why don't we just say "Enter studios as credited"?

Not a bad point?
But credited at the beginning of the film, the end credits, the cover??

Quoting Berak:

Quote:
Quoting richierich:

Quote:
Quoting GSyren:

Quote:
Ok, I'm confused.

If the thread is updated with "As credited" data, why do we need a reference thread at all?
Why don't we just say "Enter studios as credited"?

Not a bad point?
But credited at the beginning of the film, the end credits, the cover??

Shouldn't we credit the studios as they appear in the opening credits?!? Have I been this wrong for so long? 

That is how I do it.  I have asked around and have found that most people do it that way as well.  The studio thread should be used as reference material when the credits are not clear or there is only a logo.  It should not be used as the definitive source for studio names.

They are all based on ON Screen Credits, Martin. So it is really quite easy to interpret.

Skip

Quoting Berak:

Quote:
Shouldn't we credit the studios as they appear in the opening credits?!? Have I been this wrong for so long? 

I've always supported to take the credits in the following order from the DVD: first studios credited in text form in the opening credits, second studios credited in the copyright notes in the end credits, then studios from logos shown before the film (as long as they are integrated into the film title e.g. don't have their own runtime as for example the Dolby logos), then maybe logos shown after the film (again if integrated into the title), and as last the DVD distributor taken from the cover.

Of course studios which are credited more than one time (e.g. logo and text) should only be credited once. I would also allow modification in the form of "studio films" or "studio productions" when the credit is "xy presents a studio production". Such modifications have to be documented in the contribution notes of course.

I'm sure there is room for discussion where to take the DVD distributor from. Should we take it from label logo on the case or the copyright note in the small print?