| Entertainment desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < November 29 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | Current desk > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
November 30 Information
Where can I find a list of highest grossing Rated R movie worldwide?
Box Office Mojo gives me a list about Rated R US domestic only. Rizosome ( talk) 02:21, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Every country has its own film classification standards. What you know as an R rating may be something totally different elsewhere, or may not even exist. So such a list is unlikely to exist. HiLo48 ( talk) 02:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Per HiLo48, the
MPAA only rates films for release in America, so its ratings are only applicable in America. The "R" rating is only meaningful in the U.S. There are other rating agencies (the
British Board of Film Classification for the UK, for example, uses a completely different rating system. --
Jayron
32 11:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- In the United Kingdom, the closest approximation of the R-rating is, I believe, the British Board of Film Classification's "15" rating (although it is not directly comparable). Unfortunately List of highest-grossing films in the United Kingdom does not give the rating of the films listed, but they can be found on the film articles themselves. Hassocks 5489 (Floreat Hova!) 12:42, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Per HiLo48, the
MPAA only rates films for release in America, so its ratings are only applicable in America. The "R" rating is only meaningful in the U.S. There are other rating agencies (the
British Board of Film Classification for the UK, for example, uses a completely different rating system. --
Jayron
32 11:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
I got a clear idea from this single line: Every country has its own film classification standards. Rizosome ( talk) 02:37, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Resolved- @ Rizosome: I wonder whether anyone actually looked for an answer. Just use Google on your heading: highest grossing Rated R movie worldwide. The first two results are our own List of highest-grossing R-rated films and its source https://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/worldwide/all-movies/mpaa-ratings/r-(us). They give the worldwide gross for films rated R in the US. I assume that's what you want. Some of the films are not American but have an American rating. PrimeHunter ( talk) 01:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
@ PrimeHunter: That's the list I am looking for. I didn't know this https://www.the-numbers.com/ site exist. Rizosome ( talk) 00:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
I really, really, really, need your help. Someone had created a NOlympics LA as a separate article. I tried to add sources and make edits that were critical on the article but my edits and sources were no good as two users had pointed out that my edit was biased. Is there is any good sources I can find that were critical of the organization? Well, see for yourself. I need more people to be involved because the organization is known for cause a lot of controversy too. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd ( talk) 06:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- This could all be reduced to a sentence or two in the LA Olympics article. ←
Baseball Bugs
What's up, Doc?
carrots→ 06:39, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, anything else?
SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (
talk) 06:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- I don't see the issue. Of course the powerful groups lobbying for the 2028 Summer Olympics to be held in LA are critical of a group that opposes them, and they have outlets in the media. It is a fight for the public opinion. If they stop being controversial, either they have won the day, or they have given up the fight. --
Lambiam 09:23, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- The "lobbying" for the 2028 Summer Olympics is over. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:50, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- I don't see the issue. Of course the powerful groups lobbying for the 2028 Summer Olympics to be held in LA are critical of a group that opposes them, and they have outlets in the media. It is a fight for the public opinion. If they stop being controversial, either they have won the day, or they have given up the fight. --
Lambiam 09:23, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, anything else?
SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (
talk) 06:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Why Serie A decided to introduce an asymmetrical calendar, similar to Premier League, where teams don't meet each other in second half in exactly same order as in first half, in this year? In any round in first half, teams meeting in this round don't even all meet each other again in same round where the two chosen teams meet in the second half. Now Bundesliga is only "Big Five" football league that still uses the system where teams meet in second half exactly same order as in first half, and only home and away designations are switched. La Liga has used the system since 2018, Ligue 1 since 2015, and Premier League since 1965. This fixture system in boring, and I have thought that Premier League should switch to use the system which Bundesliga uses (symmetrical calendar). Why La Liga and Ligue 1 also switched to asymmetrical calendar, which should not have happened? -- 40bus ( talk) 06:46, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- In the
Serie A article, the change (but not the reason for it) is mentioned, and cited (reference 29) to
this article in Italian. It explains why the decision was made, though I myself do not fully understand the machine translation: how's your Italian? (Mine is nonexistant) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}
90.205.225.31 (
talk) 10:54, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- The claim appears to be that the asymmetrical format allows a greater freedom for scheduling matches throughout the year, in that it does not force the same match on the same day during the second half of the season. Presumably, this allows things like aligning marquee matchups on certain days at certain times to maximize things like TV viewership. --
Jayron
32 14:27, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- To this outsider (not really a fan of any sport), the symmetrical calendar the original poster advocates seems a much more boring set up than the one he (?) is objecting to. --
Khajidha (
talk) 18:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- It is easier to set up, however. For a 12 team league (for example), you would only need to set up an 11-game schedule, then just repeat the same schedule for the second half of the season, simply switching the home team and away teams. Indeed, you only need to create that schedule once, and then just run it every year, forever. That, however, would not necessarily be the best schedule for fan interest. For example, you would want to avoid having too many "rivalry" games of national interest on the same day, and might want to have certain marquee games appear on days when viewership is already likely to be high.
Sports marketing is a complex business, and has only become moreso in recent decades. The old models of simplified scheduling are not necessarily the best ones for maximizing profitability. --
Jayron
32 18:16, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- In addition to the factors mentioned above, it would seem to me that a symmetrical calendar would be extremely vunerable to the effects of postponements due to inclement weather, conflicting fixtures of cup and other competitions, and further factors that are significant influences in the calendar of, for example, the English Premier and other leagues (with which I am most familiar). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}
90.205.225.31 (
talk) 23:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Symmetrical calendar is my favourite fixture system, and it's easy to found out that the match is make-up of a postponed match in symmetrical calendar from the infromation that it doesn't follow the order of matches of the other half of the season, and it's also very easy to determine the original playing round of the postponed match from the anomaly in the team's schedule, where the team doesn't meet its opponent in the postponed match after the opponent which it met in the round before the date of the postponed match in other half of the season. -- 40bus ( talk) 11:03, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- In addition to the factors mentioned above, it would seem to me that a symmetrical calendar would be extremely vunerable to the effects of postponements due to inclement weather, conflicting fixtures of cup and other competitions, and further factors that are significant influences in the calendar of, for example, the English Premier and other leagues (with which I am most familiar). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}
90.205.225.31 (
talk) 23:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- It is easier to set up, however. For a 12 team league (for example), you would only need to set up an 11-game schedule, then just repeat the same schedule for the second half of the season, simply switching the home team and away teams. Indeed, you only need to create that schedule once, and then just run it every year, forever. That, however, would not necessarily be the best schedule for fan interest. For example, you would want to avoid having too many "rivalry" games of national interest on the same day, and might want to have certain marquee games appear on days when viewership is already likely to be high.
Sports marketing is a complex business, and has only become moreso in recent decades. The old models of simplified scheduling are not necessarily the best ones for maximizing profitability. --
Jayron
32 18:16, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- To this outsider (not really a fan of any sport), the symmetrical calendar the original poster advocates seems a much more boring set up than the one he (?) is objecting to. --
Khajidha (
talk) 18:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- The claim appears to be that the asymmetrical format allows a greater freedom for scheduling matches throughout the year, in that it does not force the same match on the same day during the second half of the season. Presumably, this allows things like aligning marquee matchups on certain days at certain times to maximize things like TV viewership. --
Jayron
32 14:27, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Weird thought: wouldn't you have to reverse the sequence of games for it to be symmetrical? A vs B, C vs D, E vs F, F vs E, D vs C, B vs A would be symmetrical, but the original poster seems to be talking about A vs B, C vs D, E vs F, A vs B, C vs D, E vs F. -- Khajidha ( talk) 21:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
| Entertainment desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < November 29 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | Current desk > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
November 30 Information
Where can I find a list of highest grossing Rated R movie worldwide?
Box Office Mojo gives me a list about Rated R US domestic only. Rizosome ( talk) 02:21, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Every country has its own film classification standards. What you know as an R rating may be something totally different elsewhere, or may not even exist. So such a list is unlikely to exist. HiLo48 ( talk) 02:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Per HiLo48, the
MPAA only rates films for release in America, so its ratings are only applicable in America. The "R" rating is only meaningful in the U.S. There are other rating agencies (the
British Board of Film Classification for the UK, for example, uses a completely different rating system. --
Jayron
32 11:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- In the United Kingdom, the closest approximation of the R-rating is, I believe, the British Board of Film Classification's "15" rating (although it is not directly comparable). Unfortunately List of highest-grossing films in the United Kingdom does not give the rating of the films listed, but they can be found on the film articles themselves. Hassocks 5489 (Floreat Hova!) 12:42, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Per HiLo48, the
MPAA only rates films for release in America, so its ratings are only applicable in America. The "R" rating is only meaningful in the U.S. There are other rating agencies (the
British Board of Film Classification for the UK, for example, uses a completely different rating system. --
Jayron
32 11:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
I got a clear idea from this single line: Every country has its own film classification standards. Rizosome ( talk) 02:37, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Resolved- @ Rizosome: I wonder whether anyone actually looked for an answer. Just use Google on your heading: highest grossing Rated R movie worldwide. The first two results are our own List of highest-grossing R-rated films and its source https://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/worldwide/all-movies/mpaa-ratings/r-(us). They give the worldwide gross for films rated R in the US. I assume that's what you want. Some of the films are not American but have an American rating. PrimeHunter ( talk) 01:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
@ PrimeHunter: That's the list I am looking for. I didn't know this https://www.the-numbers.com/ site exist. Rizosome ( talk) 00:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
I really, really, really, need your help. Someone had created a NOlympics LA as a separate article. I tried to add sources and make edits that were critical on the article but my edits and sources were no good as two users had pointed out that my edit was biased. Is there is any good sources I can find that were critical of the organization? Well, see for yourself. I need more people to be involved because the organization is known for cause a lot of controversy too. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd ( talk) 06:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- This could all be reduced to a sentence or two in the LA Olympics article. ←
Baseball Bugs
What's up, Doc?
carrots→ 06:39, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, anything else?
SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (
talk) 06:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- I don't see the issue. Of course the powerful groups lobbying for the 2028 Summer Olympics to be held in LA are critical of a group that opposes them, and they have outlets in the media. It is a fight for the public opinion. If they stop being controversial, either they have won the day, or they have given up the fight. --
Lambiam 09:23, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- The "lobbying" for the 2028 Summer Olympics is over. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:50, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- I don't see the issue. Of course the powerful groups lobbying for the 2028 Summer Olympics to be held in LA are critical of a group that opposes them, and they have outlets in the media. It is a fight for the public opinion. If they stop being controversial, either they have won the day, or they have given up the fight. --
Lambiam 09:23, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, anything else?
SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (
talk) 06:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Why Serie A decided to introduce an asymmetrical calendar, similar to Premier League, where teams don't meet each other in second half in exactly same order as in first half, in this year? In any round in first half, teams meeting in this round don't even all meet each other again in same round where the two chosen teams meet in the second half. Now Bundesliga is only "Big Five" football league that still uses the system where teams meet in second half exactly same order as in first half, and only home and away designations are switched. La Liga has used the system since 2018, Ligue 1 since 2015, and Premier League since 1965. This fixture system in boring, and I have thought that Premier League should switch to use the system which Bundesliga uses (symmetrical calendar). Why La Liga and Ligue 1 also switched to asymmetrical calendar, which should not have happened? -- 40bus ( talk) 06:46, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- In the
Serie A article, the change (but not the reason for it) is mentioned, and cited (reference 29) to
this article in Italian. It explains why the decision was made, though I myself do not fully understand the machine translation: how's your Italian? (Mine is nonexistant) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}
90.205.225.31 (
talk) 10:54, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- The claim appears to be that the asymmetrical format allows a greater freedom for scheduling matches throughout the year, in that it does not force the same match on the same day during the second half of the season. Presumably, this allows things like aligning marquee matchups on certain days at certain times to maximize things like TV viewership. --
Jayron
32 14:27, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- To this outsider (not really a fan of any sport), the symmetrical calendar the original poster advocates seems a much more boring set up than the one he (?) is objecting to. --
Khajidha (
talk) 18:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- It is easier to set up, however. For a 12 team league (for example), you would only need to set up an 11-game schedule, then just repeat the same schedule for the second half of the season, simply switching the home team and away teams. Indeed, you only need to create that schedule once, and then just run it every year, forever. That, however, would not necessarily be the best schedule for fan interest. For example, you would want to avoid having too many "rivalry" games of national interest on the same day, and might want to have certain marquee games appear on days when viewership is already likely to be high.
Sports marketing is a complex business, and has only become moreso in recent decades. The old models of simplified scheduling are not necessarily the best ones for maximizing profitability. --
Jayron
32 18:16, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- In addition to the factors mentioned above, it would seem to me that a symmetrical calendar would be extremely vunerable to the effects of postponements due to inclement weather, conflicting fixtures of cup and other competitions, and further factors that are significant influences in the calendar of, for example, the English Premier and other leagues (with which I am most familiar). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}
90.205.225.31 (
talk) 23:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Symmetrical calendar is my favourite fixture system, and it's easy to found out that the match is make-up of a postponed match in symmetrical calendar from the infromation that it doesn't follow the order of matches of the other half of the season, and it's also very easy to determine the original playing round of the postponed match from the anomaly in the team's schedule, where the team doesn't meet its opponent in the postponed match after the opponent which it met in the round before the date of the postponed match in other half of the season. -- 40bus ( talk) 11:03, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- In addition to the factors mentioned above, it would seem to me that a symmetrical calendar would be extremely vunerable to the effects of postponements due to inclement weather, conflicting fixtures of cup and other competitions, and further factors that are significant influences in the calendar of, for example, the English Premier and other leagues (with which I am most familiar). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}
90.205.225.31 (
talk) 23:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- It is easier to set up, however. For a 12 team league (for example), you would only need to set up an 11-game schedule, then just repeat the same schedule for the second half of the season, simply switching the home team and away teams. Indeed, you only need to create that schedule once, and then just run it every year, forever. That, however, would not necessarily be the best schedule for fan interest. For example, you would want to avoid having too many "rivalry" games of national interest on the same day, and might want to have certain marquee games appear on days when viewership is already likely to be high.
Sports marketing is a complex business, and has only become moreso in recent decades. The old models of simplified scheduling are not necessarily the best ones for maximizing profitability. --
Jayron
32 18:16, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- To this outsider (not really a fan of any sport), the symmetrical calendar the original poster advocates seems a much more boring set up than the one he (?) is objecting to. --
Khajidha (
talk) 18:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- The claim appears to be that the asymmetrical format allows a greater freedom for scheduling matches throughout the year, in that it does not force the same match on the same day during the second half of the season. Presumably, this allows things like aligning marquee matchups on certain days at certain times to maximize things like TV viewership. --
Jayron
32 14:27, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Weird thought: wouldn't you have to reverse the sequence of games for it to be symmetrical? A vs B, C vs D, E vs F, F vs E, D vs C, B vs A would be symmetrical, but the original poster seems to be talking about A vs B, C vs D, E vs F, A vs B, C vs D, E vs F. -- Khajidha ( talk) 21:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)