Quoting Gamemaster:

Quote:
Quoting Hotm@iler:

Quote:
Just curious about the two above (Tom and Jerry, both of 1940).
Are we really using BY's of fictional characters, in this case even cartoon characters?
Let alone that these fictional characters are the real credits of a movie?

Could really be that I missed something, but I really was under the assumption that we only are using real living creatures, whether they are male, female, androgynous, nonbinary or even an animal for that matter.

In case I am missing the point, please enlighten me.

They are credited as themselves in the new Tom & Jerry movie.

I wanted to leave the above post continuation outside the "List of Accepted Birth Years with Documentation", not to contaminate it with a somewhat off-topic question.
And as I am still curious about the additions of these fictional characters in our DB, I want to continue this here.

I completely understand the fact that, in this case, both Tom and Jerry are credited as themselves in the new T&J movie.
And since there is also another Tom and Jerry, I also do understand that we want to differentiate them by adding a BY.

And I don't doubt one moment about this decision as well.
Heck, I even praise our attention for detail on (most of) our contributions, even on that level that IMDb and related could learn a thing or two about correct additions.

I simply want to know whether we are really using fictional characters in our DB, even with a BY, which only could be verified by their respective original designer or the movie company thereof.
Or do we only want to add real living (or past living) people/animals?

The Credits Rules are not clear on that part, since nothing has been described using fictional characters.

Therefore I hoped to get a conclusive answer on this matter.

N.B. I doubt to use a poll item for this matter, but leave it up to you guys:

Add fictional characters in the profiles, with or without a BY.

Only add real living creatures in the profiles, with or without a BY.

I would agree with using the actual actors including voice actors. it might be a bit clunky if the credit says "as Himself" or "as Herself" but it's still the best to convey the actual cast member. So if the Star Wars Holiday Special ever gets an official release, Kenny Baker would get his due for playing R2D2, though he would be credited as R2D2.

Hmm..interesting, you all have valid points.

In this particular case there are no voice actors (did not see the movie myself thus can't verify, but I believe it when you say so.), and yes they are clearly credited as themselfs.

This is an odd one.

We want to credit the cast as shown at the start and end credits, as per rules.
In this case, we have some credits which are only the first name and they are both fictive characters.

Indeed, when someone is credited as the voice, or in the case of people inside a creature (R2D2 and ALF, for example), then the creature could be added to the "credited as" section of the credit and the real person as the credit.
But when there is clearly no evidence of a real person who is acting and/or speaking on behalf of the movie character, then we have a challenge.

In this case, do we have to see this one as an exception and handle this case by case, or can we write this one down as an addition to our rules, just to make it clear for everyone how to handle this type of credit?

Currently, I am leaning towards both sides of a solution, and in this particular case give the evidence more weight to it, to use the credits as they are.

Quoting Nosferatu:

Quote:
Quoting primetime21:

Quote:
https://twitter.com/KaijiTang/status/1375273422553378820
https://twitter.com/AndreSogliuzzo/status/1369539855441563648

If the tweets from Kaiji Von Tang and André Sogliuzzo are accurate – I have no reason to believe they aren't – then we should be able to enter André Sogliuzzo [Jerry] as himself and Kaiji Von Tang [Tom] as himself in the credits, thus avoiding the absurdity of giving Tom and Jerry birth years and including them in the cast database.

This could be a plausible solution. I could live with "jokey" credits like "Tom as Himself" and "Jerry as Himself" in my database, that would be one thing, but if I then also have to add a birth year to a CGI character, that somehow doesn't sit entirely right with me. To say that the CGI characters in this 2021 film were "born" in 1940, as has been posted to the BY-thread, because that's when those same characters first appeared in an animated short... well, that feels like a giant stretch to me. Again, I understand why someone would reason this way when they've already got another "Tom" and/or "Jerry" in their database, but still, do we really want to add "birth years" to CGI characters...?

I certainly agree with the Kenny Baker/R2D2 example that AndyEN gave: if R2D2 is credited as playing "Himself" but we know (meaning: it's well-documented) that it was Kenny Baker in there, then I indeed would be inclined to enter that credit as "Kenny Baker [R2D2]" with "Himself" in the role name field. So Kenny Baker, credited as R2D2, as Himself.