Period costumes and sets work because the number of people who care about the differences in parisian fashion between 1850 and 1870 are very very slim. Rarely is something truly period because completely and totally representing a time in drama is really really expensive for very little return on investment. And anyway, there are more modes for drama than realism and the costumes, sets, makeup, and locations can be used for more than making it look real.
555 numbers don’t bother me any more than soundtracks, the speaker locations being on the walls, the credits at the beginning or any title cards that flash during the film.
I actually came in here to say why not just use an area code that hasn’t been assigned? In Chicago you have to dial the area code + the seven digit number to even make a local call. I realize this isn’t the case nationwide but it really isn’t that out of the ordinary is it? Looking at this list it seems there still are a large number of area codes you could use. Particularly in the 900 range. I don’t see this being so hard to work around I just suspect film and television writers take the easy way and just use 555 rather than figuring out a what numbers may not be in use.
When is it ever totally necessary to the plot to show, or speak, someone’s specific phone number?
In my observation, hardly ever. It would be so easy to just write around the issue of having to say the phone number out loud or show it written on a piece of paper. Yet they are so lazy, they take the easy way out. 555. And it jolts me right out of the movie every damn time.
555 numbers bother me in the same way deliberate non-subtle product placement, a visible matte line in an effects shot, or seeing the boom mic in frame does.
You are right in almost every situation. There really is almost never any reason to mention or show the actual phone number. In particular given the prevalence of caller ID and how most cell phones can now be programed to have a person’s name or picture come up rather than the actual number I am surprised this is even much of an issue anymore.
Few things are 100% necessary in film, and film scripts are usually pared down to have only the dialog which is deemed crucial to advance plot or define characters.
As for showing a phone number in print, I agree that it’s rarely necessary to actually show the whole thing. But that doesn’t happen nearly as often as spoken phone numbers. If they keep in a spoken phone number, it’s usually because it’s necesary to make clear that the other person doesn’t know the number, or because the way in which the number is delivered contributes to the balance of the spoken interaction or characterization, or the timing of the dialog or cutting. Probably a lot of phone numbers in original scripts are cut out precisely because they’re not considered necessary.
But really, does it “jerk” you out of the movie when people answer the phone simply by saying, “Yeah?”, without saying hello or identifying themselves? Because that also screams “FAKE.”
Or when the other person on the line hangs up and the dial tone immediately comes on? This screams “FAKE” too. Or that more often than not in movies when you hear a dialtone it’s not a real one (440 hz)?
Or that (in the days before cellphones were prevalent) no one ever had to look up numbers? Or that people repeat everything they presumably are hearing on the phone for the benefit of those listening, even though that in no way resembles realistic telephone discourse?
I don’t think so, because I never hear people commenting on these things. Telephones in movies are plot devices unto themselves, and so they have a life of their own apart from realism.
And I think the 555 phone number in particular is actually more a kind of movie buff pasttime, in which they actually LIKE to notice it and to be taken out of the movie. They’re actively listening for it whenever a phone number comes into the dialog, and instead of just processing “digit-digit-digit-digit-digit-digit-digit” as “phone number” in the dialog, they’re more concerned about the decision itself to use a 555 number than the actual viewing experience.
Because damn it I paid to see a nuclear-zombie-space-sex movie, not a nuclear-zombie-space-sex-with-fake-phone-numbers movie!
Seriously though, I think it’s different when something is an essential element of the plot. I mean, it’s like if Spider-Man sticks to walls, sure, fine, he’s Spider-Man. If Spider-Man wins on Jeopardy by answering “This U.S. city…” with “What is Toronto?”, well that’s just bullshit.
That’s essentially the same as 555, except that if it’s a valid area code, it’s risking eventually coming into use, and invalid area codes (ones beginning with 1, for instance) are generally recognizable as invalid (and set aside for special usage). So for it to work at all, NANP would have to give a potentially valid area code the 555 treatment. Which means ‘area code XXX’ would become the new ‘exchange 555’.
Also, there are still 12 states, 5 provinces, and 3 Canadian territories that only have one area code, and of the areas within the NANP system that aren’t part of the US or Canada proper, only the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico have more than one. So that cuts down on the places you can set a story and actually use area code XXX. Because those places are generally still on 7 digit dialling, and even if they went pre-emptively to 10, they’d know the area code was wrong. Even in those states and provinces that have multiple area codes, not all of them have gone to routine 10-digit dialling, due to a relative lack of splitting and overlays.
Quite aside from the fact that…yes, people WOULD notice if a specific number got used repeatedly - that’s the issue with 555! There are multiple practical issues with this.
It would require taking even more numbers out of circulation, which is a big issue, because the reason that there are multiple states (and one province) that have 10 or more area codes is because, in populace areas, the existing ones are running of numbers. Only an issue, in, oh, let’s call it a dozen area codes (may be an underestimate - it’s entirely possible a dozen are facing the crunch in California alone!), but still an issue.
Since there are still ~30 states, provinces, territories and countries with a single area code in the NANP system, and many more which still have 7 digit dialling within the area code, you’d have to have the same set of numbers in all of them - even the ones that require 10 digit dialling, to deal with people in 10-digit areas who will append their own area code and/or another local one, when confronted with a 7 digit number - because there are going to be a lot of stories set in times and places where giving the area code would be wrong - someone in Newfoundland giving their number out as 709-XXX-XXXX would stand out even more than their saying it was 555-XXXX. Or someone in a story set in Toronto in the 1970s would look strange giving their number out as 416-XXX-XXXX. (Both assume they’re giving it to someone else in the same area code, of course. And both are chosen because I know the area code off-hand. Insert Maine and 1970s New York City for the same effect with American examples.)
British fiction doesn’t really have this problem. The UK Office of Communications has reserved some plausible-looking numbers specifically for use in dramatic productions. An entire area code is reserved for drama, as well as number ranges in each real-life area code. So in a pinch it’s possible for an author to come up with a real-sounding fictitious phone number in, say, London or Glasgow. Of course, if you happen to have the reserved ranges memorized, you can spot the fictitious numbers, but they’re not nearly so memorable as the US’s 555-5555.
The first thing I noticed was that every single range begins with 496. 555 has the disadvantage of repetition, but I see no reason why 496 couldn’t achieve the same status.
Heck, it could actually be worse, since they only reserved 1000 numbers in each range. Can you imagine giving your number to someone as 496-2854 and they immediately think you’re blowing them off with a fake number?
If that is his point then he is misunderstanding what people are saying. “555” throws me out of a movie as well, and I’m not sitting there going “Oooooh, look at me! I’m so clever, look what I just noticed!”. If I’m actually engaged in the film, I do forget that I’m just watching a movie. Its not like if you asked me afterwards whether it was real or not I’d say “yes”, but during the movie I’m completely in the movie. A giant “555” is jarring. I’m not trying to make it jar me, in fact it is annoying, but I can’t help it. I feel the same way when I’m watching a show where they’ve actively covered up brand logos with a sticker or if they had terrible editing and you saw a boom mike.
You’re trying to give people ulterior motives here that just isn’t so. This is more instinctual. I bet if people could choose not to have this ruin a movie for them they would.
Are we looking at the same list, or did you not bother to read it to the end? Only slightly more than half (11 of 20) of the ranges begin with the digits 496.
