Talk:Girl in Gold Boots
|WikiProject Television / Episode coverage||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Film||(Rated Start-class)|
Exact title; editing error
Two questions: isn't the movie title "Girl in Gold Boots" (no "The"?) Two, is the emphasis on the editing error appropriate when it may not be present in all cuts of the film? Sure, it's present in the MST3K version, but that doesn't mean it's part of every single print of the movie. -- Antaeus Feldspar 15:43, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- The title is indeed just Girl in Gold Boots, according to the screen title, IMDb, Best Brains (as said by Pearl and shown on the reel she beans hunchback Observer with), and the Rhino DVD. The only significant source that adds the "The" is mst3kinfo.com. I've taken the liberty to move this article to the The-less title.
- As for the edit issue, it's an excellent question. (I like how you added controversial information to the article and then raised a question about it on the Talk pg — very Wiki!) I've added this movie to my list to scan for suspicious BBI editing. It may be a while, because the original is still fairly expensive to buy through Amazon and Half.com, and isn't yet available through Netflix.
I revised the text about Buz's "teleportation" in the diner, because (A) it looks more like an ordinary film skip (i.e., repair cut to remove damaged film), common to many old film prints, than a deliberate edit, and (B) just because it's hilariously taken advantage of by MST3K doesn't make it "one of the worst editing errors in the history of modern film". (The "some consider" qualifier isn't very encyclopedic, as anyone can believe what they want in the absence of solid info.) It would be a good idea to review an uncut DVD or VHS print to see if the cut is there as well. If it is, it's probably still just a skip, likely due to aging celluloid, rather than a foolish edit. If it isn't, then either Best Brains used a different print (which I've seen before; e.g., with The Screaming Skull), or they deliberately manufactured an effect that looks like a skip. The latter is something I'm researching in general, but I haven't yet found solid evidence of BBI unfairly mangling any films just to add riffs. — Jeff Q (talk) 04:00, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- UPDATE: Netflix now has a non-MSTied Girl in Gold Boots available, if anyone wants to watch it to check out the "teleportation" scene and for general updating of this article. I plan to get to it sometime in the next month myself. — Jeff Q (talk) 10:30, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- UPDATE: I examined the non-MSTied GiGB print (from Geneni Film Distributing Company), and found that it did not have the "teleportation" skip in it. However, the MST3K print had some footage just before that moment missing from the GF print. Specifically, the diner scene starts earlier in MST3K, then skips, whereas the GF DVD starts with Buz approaching the table and sitting down. This and other similar variations in scenes, in which each print has some footage missing from the other, makes this look like another Screaming Skull, where two different restorations produced different cuts and skips. It doesn't definitively rule out BBI mischief, but it doesn't really support that theory, either. Much like Santa Claus Conquers the Martians, there are some scenes that are trimmed or cut from MST3K that add some useful story info when viewed (like Buz's presence at the party and his subsequent suspicion of Leo's intentions toward Michele, his introduction to Leo's drug biz, etc.), but nothing that BBI uses to mock its continuity. — Jeff Q (talk) 1 July 2005 05:59 (UTC)
Yes this is a subjective description: Deeming factors are its sloppy direction and script, sleazy actors/characters, lack of intelligent plot, and a general pointlessness. . Yet, many people on imdb state these things. I hope we can agree on some reasons why the film is bad. // Fred-Chess 17:02, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
- From Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Bulletin boards and posts to Usenet:
- Posts to bulletin boards and Usenet, or messages left on blogs, are never acceptable as primary or secondary sources. This is because we have no way of knowing who has written or posted them.
- (Bold emphasis theirs.) IMDb bulletin board comments are not acceptable sources. No attempt is made by IMDb (or any other BBS service) to ensure that a reasonably accurate view of the topic is being displayed on a bulletin board. The factual information about a film may be considered reliable (although that isn't always the case, just as the New York Times isn't always reliable) because IMDb has an editorial board that reviews such information before it is added. That's why we consider such sources reliable, and why we don't do original research ourselves.
- As far as how many people saw which version of Girl in Gold Boots, until someone provides its box office results and contrasts them with MST3K's ratings during repeated showings of this episode, all we should say is "many", not "most", and not "probably its widest exposure". I don't understand the need to be more specific than we have factual information for. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- Because articles are almost always improved by providing information on why they are notable, answering the question "why does Wikipedia even have an article on this movie?" No information has been provided to indicate that it was notable in any way before Mystery Science Theater 3000; the closest it came was being another film by a director some of whose other films, like The Astro-Zombies, have been cult classics. It seems needless to me to tamper with a sentence that says "this is what the film is notable for" in order to reflect a belief that the film may have been notable in some other way except that no evidence has been presented yet to suggest that it actually was, just that it hasn't been ruled out. -- Antaeus Feldspar 20:16, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- I agree completely that providing information on why a topic is notable is an excellent improvement to any article. My concern is about speculation. Personally, I believe Antaeus is right that GiGB is mostly notable for its MST3K appearance. But there is just as much information provided about its notability before MST3K than there is after; i.e., essentially none. The sole facts in this article so far are what are derived from the film's IMDb entry and from watching two prints of the film, one of which is the MST3K version. Anyone is welcome to demonstrate the notability increase by citing statistics that show its relative notability before and after its MSTing, but just asserting it doesn't make it a fact. All we can say at the moment is "many" discovered the film through its MST3K version. If people want to say more than that, they should do what any conscientious Wikipedia editor is obligated to do — check facts and cite reliable sources. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 23:34, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Weird cut in DVD
I haven't seen the MST3k version, but there was some weird cut in my DVD version, that I noticed when I watched it. Not in a diner scene though, as far as I remember. (Entheta 00:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC))
- I took quite a few notes on the non-MST3K DVD I watched. If you could be more specific about what scene you're referring to, Entheta, I may have more information about it. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 03:58, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- I haven't rewatched the entire movie, and I don't know where the "teleportation scene" is, but the thing I found weird is about 23 minutes into the DVD. They're in a diner, they leave, then they're at a beach together with a fourth guy who as far as i can remember is never introduced. (Entheta 19:09, 29 December 2005 (UTC))
- Sorry about the delay in responding, Entheta. I must have been distracted for a few days until your updated posting fell off my watchlist. The "teleportation" scene (around 28 minutes into the MST3K episode) is in the diner. The Geneni Film print doesn't have the film skip that makes Buz look like he teleports into the booth. Both the MST3K and GF prints proceed onto a buggy joyride on the beach. (In between, the GF print has an odd 7-second partial scene where Buz checks out Critter's bike, that didn't make it into the MST3K version.) I'd bet you're thinking of the buggy owner. Although GF's print has about 17 seconds more of the buggy ride (preceding the MST3K portion), it doesn't reveal anything more about who this guy is or how the travellers ran into him. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:47, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry to enter the topic 4 years late, but the "odd 7-second partial scene where Buz checks out Critter's bike", is definitely IN the mst3k version. Crow even puts in a riff about a "kitchen blender" (?). If one were to- just hypothetically- cut the movie into ten parts and post it on a website, the scene would be about 2min 36seconds into part 4.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 23:13, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
This is totally off topic, but I just must respond on the peculiarities that Entheta with whom I wrote the article sv:Scientologi on Swedish Wikipedia, is now writing about Girl in Gold Boots, just as I have. Coincidence, or do share mutual interests?! :-) Fred-Chess 20:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)