[Data-modeling] Made-for-TV Movies

Wed Apr 30 04:46:10 UTC 2008

Tim makes a good point. Why is the director property attached to
/tv/tv_series_episode? Shouldn't it be attached to /video/? The video had a
director and that information has no relevance to the way that the video was
released. The properties of production and release sound like they should be
modeled on different types.

Faye's initial question seems to be with how actors, directors, producers,
etc. are reciprocated with the form of initial video release. This brings to
mind the other discussion we had today on how to distinguish between the
current software release versus the historical record of a software's
release. If it matters that the actor should be explicitly modeled as a
TV_actor instead of pulling that info from the cast of an episode of Maude,
then Danm and Robert's approach seems to be to make that connection through
a denormalization of the first instance of a video production's release.
Film already has this kind of denormalization (see initial_release_date vs.
release_date).

A alternative approach would be to model a /video_release/ type with
/video_release/release_method and other release properties (e.g.,
/video_release/release_distributor, /video_release/date). This gets pretty
messy if initial release properties are maintained separate from all other
release properties. However, I don't see another way to query for a list of
all companies that distributed "The Princess Bride" in chronological order
while also maintaining an separate reference to the film's initial release
properties.

It appears the existing collection of video release types (e.g., /film/,
/tv/tv_series_episode) include redundant video production properties. If so,
it may be worth considering a revision of those models (*hides under desk*).
I just took a quick look at the film schema and it appears that splitting
historical releases from film production might only affect _release_dates_
and _distributors_. However, many of the production related properties of
the /film/ type might be better associated with a more generic
/video_production/ type that is co-typed with the above mentioned
/video_release/ type. All films might have properties that universal to
films and not to TV series episodes, but I don't think those properties
include director, performances, etc.

Re-mastered versions of video productions (e.g., Star Wars vs. Star Wars
Special Edition) might cause some problems but they could probably be
modeled as separate productions and releases and then linked to the original
productions through a "Re-mastered video" or similar co-type.

-Ed

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Faye Li <faye at metaweb.com> wrote:

> Well, yes, there's a difference between what it is and how it's
> distributed, and when it comes to traditional media, how it's
> distributed doesn't affect what it is. The TV movie category exists (see
> http://freebase.com/view/en/television_movie), and it's not defined as a
> movie that you see on TV. When "No Country For Old Men" finally gets
> aired on CBS three years from now, there will be no confusion between
> that and a Lifetime Original. ;) Just because it's also available on DVD
> or you can watch it online at netflix will not change that.
>
> -- Faye
>
>
> Tim Kientzle wrote:
> > Sounds like there's confusion between "what something is"  (video
> > production?) versus "how it's distributed" (TV, DVD, movie theater,
> > streaming video).  Perhaps we need to add /media/video_production to
> > hold the information common to all types of video (who was in it, who
> > paid for it, who scripted it, who filmed it, who edited it, when it
> > was filmed, when it was released, what book it's based on)?
> >
> >
> > On Apr 29, 2008, at 6:45 PM, Faye Li wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> There are about 200 topics in Freebase that are typed as both /film/
> >> film
> >> and /tv/tv_program, a co-typing that was previously deemed
> >> incompatible.
> >> Bryan Cheung and I looked through a few instances of them, and some
> >> are
> >> clearly mistyped, some are feature-length TV episodes or miniseries
> >> arguably marketed as movies, while others are made-for-TV movies that
> >> qualify for both types.
> >>
> >> So, does the co-typing of /film/film and /tv/tv_program make sense?
> >> Does
> >> it apply to feature-length TV episodes and miniseries in addition to
> >> made-for-TV movies, or only some of the above? Should there emerge a
> >> new
> >> type altogether (/film/tv_movie? /tv/tv_movie?) for it?
> >>
> >> The problem of cotyping is that the two types, for obvious reasons,
> >> have
> >> overlapping properties: producers, actors, etc. I'm not as concerned
> >> about having to enter the same data twice as I am about the type
> >> implication of doing so, where the same actor then gets cotyped as
> >> both
> >> /tv/actor and /film/actor, just for being in a TV movie! Ditto for the
> >> producer. On the other hand, /tv/tv_program has no director property,
> >> which is attached to /tv/tv_series_episode, and /film/film has no TV
> >> channel property that is part of the data about a TV movie. So
> >> without a
> >> new type, both types are needed to capture all the data. And by the
> >> way,
> >> when I say I'm not *as* concerned about having to enter the same data
> >> twice, I mean I am concerned. ;)
> >>
> >> Examples:
> >> 1) The three-hour miniseries "Battlestar Galactica" that was a pilot
> >> to
> >> the new series, co-typed with the unholy combo of /film/film,
> >> /tv/tv_program, and tv/tv_series_episode:
> >> http://freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f80000000009aaffd
> >>
> >> 2) "Love Comes Softly", a Hallmark Channel movie original starring
> >> Katherine Heigl, poster child (the movie, not her) for the new TV
> >> Movie
> >> type if there would be one, currently typed as /film/film:
> >> http://freebase.com/view/en/love_comes_softly
> >>
> >> 3) Too many BBC drama series of "Jane Eyre", such as this one, cotyped
> >> as both /film/film and /tv/tv_program:
> >> http://freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f8000000000c551bf
> >>
> >> -- Faye
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Data-modeling mailing list
> >> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> >> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Data-modeling mailing list
> > Data-modeling at freebase.com
> > http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Data-modeling mailing list
> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freebase.com/pipermail/data-modeling/attachments/20080430/cdd4ebcf/attachment-0001.htm 