Random trivia

[Perun]

The answer is probably no, but just in case I repeat the question:

I didn't see the original post. Close, but no cigar.

 

[Forostar]

Perhaps a newsreel film on King Edward VIII's abdication?

 

[Perun]

No. A WWII propaganda film would be closer. You're thinking in the right direction.

 

[CriedWhenBrucieLeft]

This question is so hard I couldn't even find the answer on Wikipedia, good job Perun

Right, I, like NP, have just had a good look (cheated!) at the Wiki page for UK films; admissions & cash. I don't see any British films that came anywhere near US releases at the time, or before. Either the Wiki page, which looks pretty detailed, is missing some vital piece of information; I've not read it properly; this is a trick question; or... Perun is making this up!

 

[Forostar]

Then it's a King George VI speech?

 

[CriedWhenBrucieLeft]

How is that a film in any meaningful sense?

 

[Perun]

No, but I'll just reveal it:

The Battle of the Somme (1916)

It sold 20 million tickets in the first six weeks after its release in the UK, a record which stood until Star Wars was released there. Mind you - 20 million tickets at a population of 43 million at the time.http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0006405/

 

[CriedWhenBrucieLeft]

Wiki & the BFI say otherwise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films_in_the_United_Kingdom
e.g.
Gone with the Wind (1940) - 35 million admissions
The Sound of Music (1965) - 3o million admissions

 

[Forostar]

The British Film Institute (1933) isn't as old as the Battle of the Somme.
The BFI might not have checked films older than their own existence (using only own data).

 

[CriedWhenBrucieLeft]

And where do you suggest everyone is getting their film data from?

 

[Perun]

It's possible that the data I have only refers to the first six weeks - but then the source I initially read it in misled me.

 

[Forostar]

And where do you suggest everyone is getting their film data from?

The imdb says official sources. Perhaps the government.

 

[CriedWhenBrucieLeft]

Okay, we'll let you off Perun, since that was fun.

The imdb says official sources. Perhaps the government.

I'd guess they get their data generally from the BFI too; but in this case I don't know. The BFI is government funded anyway:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Film_Institute

 

[SinisterMinisterX]

New question: what is the fastest speed at which a human being has thrown an object?

I will tell you that the answer is easily obtainable from Google. I'll even tell you the record is the fastball record in American major league baseball, so baseball fans may know it. Please don't cheat; I'm curious to see how close you guys guess without looking.

 

[CriedWhenBrucieLeft]

Tennis players can serve at over 100mph; canny mind the record, but it's in the 140+ range. So, I reckon someone can probably throw about that fast.

My guess: 132mph.

 

[SinisterMinisterX]

Incorrect - specifically, too fast. Let's see if we get a few more guesses.

 

[LooseCannon]

118 mph.

 

[SinisterMinisterX]

Still too fast ... anyone else? I'll give it a couple hours and then (since like I said, the answer is easy to find) something interesting.

 

[SinisterMinisterX]

The record: Aroldis Chapman threw a baseball 105 mph (169 kph). The record for cricket is 100.2 mph (161 kph).

What's interesting about this: the record may not increase much more, if scientists are right. Due to the physical limitations of the human body, 105 mph is the estimated top speed possible.

 

[LooseCannon]

There you go. Though we'll see about the top speed.