Talk:Closing credits

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: Filmmaking This article is supported by the Filmmaking task force. Television This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

In the US, are credits manditory for the broadcasters that air programs? If they wanted to make more money, they could easily eliminate them, so there has to be a reason to air them.

Do they also have to air the full credits on a show, if provided? If so, GSN is in a heap of trouble!

I don't know, but the article asserts that this only happens in the US. I can only vouch for the UK, but many sets of credits are not only split-screened, but they represent an almost picture-in-picture with a number of other image or video streams. TomB123 (talk) 20:59, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

credits are now required by film makers unions. 100 years ago, they weren't and you'll find that with older movies the credits were minimal. Some of the more popular films would put a short credits list at the begining of a film, this was meant as advertising for the director and the main actors so people would know who they are and want to see more of them. Rarely was more than a few names listed. Over the years crew members started asking to be in the credits so they could prove they worked on a film and use it to get more work. It was up to the producer to decide if they allowed it. By the 1970's it became a union rule that all films and TV shows required an end credits sequence and that all union members must be in the credits. There are exceptions for non speaking roles and cameos. The reality is most people who work on a film want their name in the credits and will enforce the union rules. As for costs: it's minimal. You can make the credits pretty small and make them go by quickly and it still fits the unions rules, so if you see a long slow credits crawl its simply the produer (or directors) choice and they could obviously afford it. They often used scrap ends of film or short pieces they wouldn't want to use for important scenes anyway. And of course with modern films being digital, theres no film being wasted at all. Theres far more film (or harddrive space) being wasted on alternate takes and reshoots than will ever be wasted on the credits. A film might use 8 hours or more of filming to get enough material to edit down to a 5 minute scene on screen. As opposed to a 5 minute end credit that only uses 5 minutes of space because it only got shot once.--Omniwolf (talk) 17:07, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This title goes to Aliens Verses Predator at 12 minutes long but is never mentioned anywhere. A google shows up newground saying Lord of the rings, several sites mentioning guesses. I don't know what would count I guess I could upload a film of the credits to youtube? Can someone message me? I don't use wiki that much to edit. But I only ever make serious edits when something is so blindingly wrong. User:ThaMadBadgerUser talk: ThaMadBadger 13:48, 2nd March 2010 (GMT)

So you're saying that the closing credits could be over no sooner the last piano chord of "I'd do anything for love (But I won't do that)" ends (full version of the song, that is)? --Marce 13:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Watching the DVD extended LotR now, the end credits are 26 mins for "fellowship". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.7.127.253 (talk) 00:12, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004) has 11 minutes long ending credits. Gyurika (talk) 20:18, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What movie was the first to feature the extended closing credit sequence that we see today, eg showing everybody from the caterer to hairdresser? Butcam 08:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone asked George Lucas about it during the making of one of the Star Wars movies, and Lucas replied that it began with a young director who thought it would be nice to give credit to everyone, and play some music as well, so that moviegoers wouldn't have to leave the cinema amid silence. That young director was Lucas himself, and the movie was American Graffiti. I don't have a citation, though, but I read it in a bookstore in a glossy "Star Wars" book. --Kjoonlee 10:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been a while since I checked back here for an answer, so thanks for that. I'll see if I can dig up a source. Butcam (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The sesame street image is, IMO, not a good illustration for this article, partly because of the blurry and illegible text (looks like two frames on top of eachother), but also because the image containts so many things that bring focus away from the actual text (which should be the most important thing), so it's hard to know what to look for. Maybe a standard black/white roll from some movie would be better? 84.217.140.70 17:59, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know that in some comedy movies and TV shows, made-up names are stuck into the credits just for extra fun. I can't think of any specific examples right now, though.

^ virtually every one of the "ZAZ" productions (Zucker + Abrahams + Zucker, such as "Airplane" and "Naked Gun") -- and also the Monty Python films. Those are the most notorious, methinks. 199.214.26.180 22:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@199.214.26.180 - Also Mel Brooks movies, National Lampoon movies... Niccast (talk) 00:37, 27 January 2019 (UTC)niccast[reply]

The way this article is written, it's just one long trivia section, with much personal experience (i.e., original research), that mostly reflects American usage (where media has long been international, even within the USA). There's material worth saving here, but not much. Statements such as "not firmly established" are just fluff.

The article should start with a definition, then it should go directly to an explanation of WHY credits are handled the way they are, (and how they relate to opening credits, fer the love of #$*(%*#%). That is: explain it's a combination of contractual agreements with unions and individual actors, as well as artistic considerations. Including the closing credits for the extended edition of "Lord of the Rings" is a perfect example of how this article focuses on trivia, rather than purpose or cause. If editors aren't familiar with the contractual requirements -- then learn about them. Don't make statements such as "obviously does not include", "tend to be quite long", and "making it impossible for anyone to read". That's fluff suitable for high school essays, but not for an encyclopedia.

67.169.126.106 (talk) 22:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The credit squeeze section could do to mention BBC and ITV in the UK. Digifiend (talk) 08:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the article needs rewrite. This article needs to be written by someone with both film and contract experience. This article makes it sound as though the format and contents of credits are artistic decisions, whereas they are often dictated by contract or pragmatics. (The

Billing (film)

article does better at this.)

Emphasizing contract will also do away with the several ways of phrasing "closing credits do tend to be quite long, and to list literally every single person who had been in or who had worked on the production" -- which contradict, and all of which are to some extent wrong. (E.g., extras usually aren't mentioned both because there may not be a contract with them and because they might be too numerous to mention.)

It's hard to avoid watching opening credits, and consequently they are used as lead-ins to the show, many people don't watch credits at all, since they generally have little artistic relationship to the feature. I.e., they have about the same relation to a feature that the Title page with copyright information has to a book. Piano non troppo (talk) 03:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with need for rewrite. To add to what's been said above, the first sentence of sections "After closing credits" and "Photo montage" both contain the word 'it'. But it ;) is unclear in both these sentences what 'it' refers to. Just above those, the last sentence of the 'Notable exceptions...' paragraph reads: "Ens credits are also never aired at the end of movies." ...I assume that 'Ens' is supposed to be 'End' (minor, just a typo), but I'm also left to infer that this factoid specifically refers to Spain - I don't think that's totally clear (major, I think it would be better to say 'end of Spanish movies'). Niccast (talk) 22:11, 26 January 2019 (UTC)niccast[reply]

I really think that this page needs an order on how the credits are ordered. I am making a mini-movie for YouTube and I want to make a good looking closing credits. Thanks! --71.236.186.24 (talk) 04:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The usage of Outro is under discussion, see talk:outro -- 65.94.171.225 (talk) 07:25, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Credit crunching is mentioned, but not a crunch box.

See question number four.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:56, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I found out that Disney Channel had recently went back to using traditional end credits without tag scenes for their animated shows (e.g. Elena of Avalor, Tangled: The Series, etc.). When did this happen?

It would be helpful to know why clsong credits on TV are so often placed against black backgrounds nowadays, as opposed to the past where they always had pictorial backgrounds, or at least some kind of wallpaper behind the text. Obviously credit squeezing is a factor, but that doesn't explain why they can't be different colours. Lee M (talk) 03:08, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]