Talk:Intertitle

Examples needed

This article needs more, better examples, from old silent movies, of intertitles containing character dialog.-69.87.193.144 01:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Good point. I tried looking on google, but I couldn't find anything terribly useful, probably because people tend to post images of the actors or scenery and intertitle cards generally aren't visually impressive enough. And most of the cards that you do find are "title of film" cards, which aren't really intertitles in the full sense. Maybe someone could take a screenshot from an old public domain film (mostly pre-1923) that hasn't been restored (which would mean the restoration was copyrighted). In this case a bargain-basement DVD of The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923 film) or something would be best. It would be cool if we could get a screenshot from right before and after the intertitle too, so a little triptych could show the role of the intertitle in the scene.--Pharos 03:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

http://www.transedit.se/history.htm I do not know if this is relevant to this as this describe brief history from intertitle to subtitle. Drahgo (talk) 15:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Title Card

Title Card redirects here. The title card on a tv show is generally the stylised wording of the title of the show shown at the end of the title sequence, yes?

That's what the Wikipedia articles on most TV Shows allude to, and yet, this is not even mentioned at all here, someone more knowledgeable please fix this? KitsuneDragonRA (talk) 01:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The name

Intertitles (and hence subtitles) are not titles, they are lines. How has this misnomer come about - were title cards originally used to display the title of films? 213.122.54.56 (talk) 22:55, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

"Intertitles" seems to be just plain wrong. All the books I've seen on movies use the term "subtitles" or simply "titles" sometimes even "captions". I've seen "titles" used in very old documents etc. Anyway, They are not always lines, often, they are prologs, epilogs, descriptive, or explanatory text as well. Think about it this way: When you look at a picture in a book or anywhere, there is usually a descriptive "title" or a "caption" for the picture. Now, here is a moving picture with a main title, let's say "Smilin' Today". You see on screen, a person smiling, and saying something. Then the screen goes black and it says "Hello, how are you?" That sentence is essentially, the title/caption of the "moving image" (the person smiling and speaking) you just witnessed. Then, there's another moving image and another "title" for that image. "Subtitle" is just used to distinguish the text throughout the movie from the main title of the movie. I hope this makes sense, that's the way I understand it. ArmyPhases (talk) 01:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I went on to fix a sentence: Where the paragraph referring to "Law & Order" originally said "[...] to give only the LOCATION of the upcoming scene", I fixed it so it reads "[...] to give not only the LOCATION, but also the DATE of the upcoming scene" (both "location" and "date" in lowercase, I just put them as examples in capitals so you could see the difference between the original version and the improvement.) --Fandelasketchup (talk) 17:50, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Mistake in one sentence

The following paragraph has wrong information:"Law & Order and its related spinoffs used them to give not only the location, but also the date and time of the upcoming scene." The wrong information is bolded and italicized. For what I have seen, the intertitle ønly gives the date of the following scene, but not the time. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 18:45, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Inappropriate image.

I'm sure i can't be the only person to be surprised, disappointed, and more than a little uncomfortable to find Wikipedia using an example from "The Birth of a Nation" to illustrate this page. Especially an example with such explicitly racist and historically revisionist content as this. Granted that is rather what that film is known for but is not and I hope will never be what Wikipedia is known for. Surely an example from some other silent film, or at the very least a less disgusting and degrading example from TBOAN could be found? I'm sorry if this sounds prudish or self righteous or whatever but when I clicked on that image and saw what the text actually said i was genuinely shocked. I'm not calling for censorship or debating the merits of the film itself, I simply feel that this image is not appropriate to this page and should be removed ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.205.15.120 (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2018 (UTC)