5 ms·

Not being a movie buff, I really did not understand the basics of what the goal is here. (There was a problem statement, but it really didn't give the 50,000 fo

Not being a movie buff, I really did not understand the basics of what the goal is here. (There was a problem statement, but it really didn't give the 50,000 foot view.) After having read much of the article, I think I can summarize it. (1) Whose name comes up first when the credits roll matters in some way. Presumably people feel slighted if they don't have the right amount of prominence or something like that. (2) Apparently, despite this being important enough to worry about, and even though there are standardized titles, and even though people have been making movies for well over 100 years, there isn't a consensus or standardized order. Seemingly every film just sort of does something they feel is appropriate. (3) It must be a fair assumption that people who arrange credits do it with purpose, so that if you look at the order they chose, it tells you something meaningful about what the right order is. (4) The goal, then, is to basically computationally reverse engineer what order people have in mind when they put credits on film and produce an ordering that reflects actual practice as accurately as possible. (5) This is a messy process because the data is inconsistent and contradictory, so it is fertile ground for creatively applying algorithms to tease out the meaningful parts.

dylan604 5y ago
(1) is sometimes contractually obligated (2) commonly, once the leads or "above the fold" credits, they list by department with leads listed first, then plebes last. Look at all of the 3D artists. Just a list of names. Above them, are the project managers, above them are directors, producers, etc. *all of the above comes from personal involvement. sometimes asking a direct question of "what goes first" is responded with "I'll get back to you", but never does. "Just do what everyone else does" is common response too. you have to remember that the person doing the credits is pretty much the lowest of jobs. nobody wants to do this job, and it is often assigned to intern level assignments. "take this Word Doc/Excel/.txt, and turn it into a graphic". Every post house I've worked in has always cried "there must be a better way".
- dylan604 5y ago
  Where I stated "above the fold", that totally should be "above the line". This isn't a newspaper. DOH!
utexaspunk 5y ago
I think the primary goal here is to create an exercise for exploring different graph theory concepts, not to actually be useful. You're thinking too much :)
melony 5y ago
Imaginary ego boosts is always better than having to pay them more.
- jacobr1 5y ago
  Is there any evidence that they aren't imaginary? For example, does be listed early in one project, lead to improved likelihood of getting a better placement on the next project (with corresponding higher future pay)? If that is the case, then the perception that one is a "star" or whatever, with credit order, mind correlate with future success. Of course, that correlation might be independent of credit-order placement (such as the actor is actually better in the movie and would be perceived as such even without credit order placement).
  - dylan604 5y ago
    It's almost as if nobody has heard of the term "top billing". It's not any different than deciding whose name goes on the marquee, on the poster, etc
tzs 5y ago
"Cheers" had an interesting solution to a conflict over who should come first, or perhaps more accurately who should not be second. Ted Danson and Shelley Long both wanted top billing. The solution was to have Shelley Long on the upper right of the first screen with names and to have Ted Danson on the lower left of that screen. The credits were the consecutive screen type, not the long scroll type, so the two names appeared at the same time. Long would be read first by someone who read down, and Danson would be read first by someone going left to right. The producers were able to convince both Long and Danson that they were not second. The rest of the main cast each got a screen afterwards with just their name on it. Here's the credits: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS0VQOHX7lM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS0VQOHX7lM When Long left and Kirstie Alley joined the cast as the new female lead and there was now no question than Danson was the star of the show there were no more special screens. Each main cast member got their own screen, with Danson's being the first shown. Here's that version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGdpE8Dsr0U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGdpE8Dsr0U
- nisse72 5y ago
  Known as diagonal billing: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DiagonalBilling https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DiagonalBilling Goes back to at least 1941, according to that page
- dataflow 5y ago
  Is there empirical data on which one is more likely to be read first? I feel like more people would read the top one first than the bottom one, but I don't know.
sigil 5y ago
Post author. You nailed it on 3 - 5. This is about cutting through the noise to discover the emergent conventions, then using them to help first-time filmmakers. For something like 80% of feature film producers it's their first rodeo. 1. Above-the-Line credits (cast, director, producer, other key roles) are contractually negotiated, and a mistake here has definite consequences. That isn't usually the case for all the remaining credits. But people still care that the ordering makes sense and flows well. Chronology, prestige, authorship, and org chart level are all axes you could order on -- but that's already too many ways to reconcile. 2. One of the challenges with standardizing credits order is that roles come and go all the time. I mentioned this in the post, but 18 months ago there was no "COVID Compliance Officer" in end credits. Now it's in nearly all feature films, and we know where it goes. HN might also find it interesting that roles like "Data Center Engineering" and "Deployment Services" have started showing up just in the last few years.
- lsh123 5y ago
  70 departments, 10-20 roles each. Sounds like a common sense/spreadsheet problem to me. You don’t need big data/machine learning/insert the next big thing here for solving this.
  - qw 5y ago
    This is a great way to avoid ego conflicts. Now they can just refer to the software and say they follow best practice.

dylan604 5y ago

(1) is sometimes contractually obligated (2) commonly, once the leads or "above the fold" credits, they list by department with leads listed first, then plebes last. Look at all of the 3D artists. Just a list of names. Above them, are the project managers, above them are directors, producers, etc. *all of the above comes from personal involvement. sometimes asking a direct question of "what goes first" is responded with "I'll get back to you", but never does. "Just do what everyone else does" is common response too. you have to remember that the person doing the credits is pretty much the lowest of jobs. nobody wants to do this job, and it is often assigned to intern level assignments. "take this Word Doc/Excel/.txt, and turn it into a graphic". Every post house I've worked in has always cried "there must be a better way".

dylan604 5y ago
Where I stated "above the fold", that totally should be "above the line". This isn't a newspaper. DOH!

utexaspunk 5y ago

I think the primary goal here is to create an exercise for exploring different graph theory concepts, not to actually be useful. You're thinking too much :)

melony 5y ago

Imaginary ego boosts is always better than having to pay them more.

jacobr1 5y ago
Is there any evidence that they aren't imaginary? For example, does be listed early in one project, lead to improved likelihood of getting a better placement on the next project (with corresponding higher future pay)? If that is the case, then the perception that one is a "star" or whatever, with credit order, mind correlate with future success. Of course, that correlation might be independent of credit-order placement (such as the actor is actually better in the movie and would be perceived as such even without credit order placement).
- dylan604 5y ago
  It's almost as if nobody has heard of the term "top billing". It's not any different than deciding whose name goes on the marquee, on the poster, etc

tzs 5y ago

"Cheers" had an interesting solution to a conflict over who should come first, or perhaps more accurately who should not be second. Ted Danson and Shelley Long both wanted top billing. The solution was to have Shelley Long on the upper right of the first screen with names and to have Ted Danson on the lower left of that screen. The credits were the consecutive screen type, not the long scroll type, so the two names appeared at the same time. Long would be read first by someone who read down, and Danson would be read first by someone going left to right. The producers were able to convince both Long and Danson that they were not second. The rest of the main cast each got a screen afterwards with just their name on it. Here's the credits: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS0VQOHX7lM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS0VQOHX7lM When Long left and Kirstie Alley joined the cast as the new female lead and there was now no question than Danson was the star of the show there were no more special screens. Each main cast member got their own screen, with Danson's being the first shown. Here's that version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGdpE8Dsr0U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGdpE8Dsr0U

nisse72 5y ago
Known as diagonal billing: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DiagonalBilling https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DiagonalBilling Goes back to at least 1941, according to that page
dataflow 5y ago
Is there empirical data on which one is more likely to be read first? I feel like more people would read the top one first than the bottom one, but I don't know.

sigil 5y ago

Post author. You nailed it on 3 - 5. This is about cutting through the noise to discover the emergent conventions, then using them to help first-time filmmakers. For something like 80% of feature film producers it's their first rodeo. 1. Above-the-Line credits (cast, director, producer, other key roles) are contractually negotiated, and a mistake here has definite consequences. That isn't usually the case for all the remaining credits. But people still care that the ordering makes sense and flows well. Chronology, prestige, authorship, and org chart level are all axes you could order on -- but that's already too many ways to reconcile. 2. One of the challenges with standardizing credits order is that roles come and go all the time. I mentioned this in the post, but 18 months ago there was no "COVID Compliance Officer" in end credits. Now it's in nearly all feature films, and we know where it goes. HN might also find it interesting that roles like "Data Center Engineering" and "Deployment Services" have started showing up just in the last few years.

lsh123 5y ago
70 departments, 10-20 roles each. Sounds like a common sense/spreadsheet problem to me. You don’t need big data/machine learning/insert the next big thing here for solving this.
- qw 5y ago
  This is a great way to avoid ego conflicts. Now they can just refer to the software and say they follow best practice.