41 Messages
•
700 Points
Between "artist" and "person"
Hello. A few days ago I had an... talk? discussion? nevermind, an exhange of ideas with IMDb's staff about the credits of singers and bands in music videos. From my point of view, I told them, there is a thick line between "artist" and "person"; i.e., Michael Jackson. When Michael filmed "Thriller", "Billie Jean", etc., he is "Michael Jackson" as artist, not as person. Otherwise is when Michael did could interviews for the media or documentaries as "This Is It", where he besides to sing he talked about himself, her music, how he prepared concerts, his thoughts about a specific theme, and others things. The point is that in a music video (filmed on studio or a live concert) a singer/music band are just singing, no more. Singing and acting as singers, in deed. They are in their job, in their musical carrier, and therefore credit them as "Self", to me, is wrong. I think Self is an appreciation reserved when any artist talks and exposes (never said better) himself/herself/themselves as person, beyond the singing. I commented it to the IMDb's staff thinking that this would improve their policies, and IMDb suggested to me expose it in the community to know the opinion of the people. It seemed to me a good idea to know at first if my way of thinking is right or wrong. After all, I have nothing to lose for questioning it. What do you think about it?
gromit82
Champion
•
7.4K Messages
•
276K Points
1 year ago
Chockys: I think I understand your point in general, but if so I think IMDb has already handled part of this in the way you want.
For many of Michael Jackson's music videos, such as "Thriller", "Billie Jean", and others, he appeared in a fictional, scripted scenario and thus was acting rather than appearing as himself. However, if you look at his IMDb page at https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001391/ you will see that his music videos are almost all listed in the "Actor" section of his page rather than the "Self" section. (Not necessarily every one of his videos, but almost all of them.) He is listed as playing a character named "Michael Jackson", not listed as appearing as "Self".
In fact, even in videos such as "Rock With You" (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X-Mrc2l1d0 ), he is listed as playing the character "Michael Jackson", even though that particular video has no real "acting" involved nor any fictional scenario.
***
On the other hand, suppose that Michael Jackson, or any other singer, appeared in a music video which consisted solely of actual concert footage presented in nonfictional documentary style. If we decided that the singer should not have that in the "Actor" section of his page, should it appear in the "Self" section? Absolutely yes. "Self" appearances apply to all nonfictional appearances in film, television, etc. where the person can be clearly seen. It doesn't matter whether the person talks about their life and career in that appearance.
Suppose there had been a Grammy Awards telecast where Jackson was merely shown sitting in the front row of the audience but never said a word -- that would be definitely eligible as a "Self" appearance by IMDb standards. Similarly, if Jackson had given a performance on the Grammy Awards where all he did was sing one of his songs but did not speak any other words, that would be just as much a "Self" appearance. A person shouldn't need to "talk and expose himself/herself/themselves as person, beyond the singing" to get a "Self" credit on IMDb. If we started to impose that as a future policy, we would probably have to delete a lot of data on IMDb that is correct under the current policy.
2
eboy
2.5K Messages
•
69.2K Points
1 year ago
There are obviously many ”borderline” cases with music videos, since e.g. some music videos are more-or-less shot live on stage (e.g. Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen etc). Meaning, that they’re taken from the actual concert.
But we still have to see the bigger picture and IMDb has set the guidelines where the people in music videos are ”acting”. It’s a good compromise.
1