You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In movies, characters that don't have names are handled by the <unnamed> element. This proposal is to consider a different element to handle characters that may have a stronger role, but still don't actually have a name.
As an example from the movie Vertigo.
<role>
<actor><gn>Lee</gn><fn>Patrick</fn></actor>
<character>
<unnamed>Car Owner Mistaken For Madeleine</unnamed>
</character>
</role>
In this case Lee Patrick is playing a person with lines, but no given name.
But consider this example from the movie Toy Soldiers.
In this case, Denholt Elliot also plays a person with lines, but no given name. However, the role has much more dialogue, interactions with multiple characters in multiple scenes, but the character doesn't have a name. The title of Headmaster is a designation of the character's job role, with is different from other unnamed roles like "Bystander" (Reservoir Dogs/1992), "Geek" (Heathers/1988) or "Man on Street" (Gremlins/1984).
The proposal is to create a new element called <designation/> that is structurally identical to <unnamed/> that represents a more involved character that just unfortunately doesn't have a name.
The question is, is there a distinction between the labeling of these two roles? Both are characters without names, but only one of them is more likely to be addressed by their designation. IE, it's likely that somebody could say, "Talk to the Bailiff", compared to someone saying "Talk to the Man in Bar".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In movies, characters that don't have names are handled by the
<unnamed>
element. This proposal is to consider a different element to handle characters that may have a stronger role, but still don't actually have a name.As an example from the movie Vertigo.
In this case Lee Patrick is playing a person with lines, but no given name.
But consider this example from the movie Toy Soldiers.
In this case, Denholt Elliot also plays a person with lines, but no given name. However, the role has much more dialogue, interactions with multiple characters in multiple scenes, but the character doesn't have a name. The title of Headmaster is a designation of the character's job role, with is different from other unnamed roles like "Bystander" (Reservoir Dogs/1992), "Geek" (Heathers/1988) or "Man on Street" (Gremlins/1984).
The proposal is to create a new element called
<designation/>
that is structurally identical to<unnamed/>
that represents a more involved character that just unfortunately doesn't have a name.Consider these two examples from A Few Good Men.
The question is, is there a distinction between the labeling of these two roles? Both are characters without names, but only one of them is more likely to be addressed by their designation. IE, it's likely that somebody could say, "Talk to the Bailiff", compared to someone saying "Talk to the Man in Bar".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: