document_title: Pro Football Hall of Fame Game

question_text: who is playing in the 2017 nfl hall of fame game

text: Pro Football Hall of Fame Game

text: Team selection[edit]

text: The two teams that play in the Pro Football Hall of Fame Game are typically selected by the league in advance of the remainder of the preseason schedule. The participants are usually announced around the time that the new Hall of Fame members are announced, which coincides with Super Bowl week. Often if a particularly notable player will be entering the Hall of Fame that year a team they were strongly associated with may be selected to play in the game to help maximize attendance and publicity of the game itself. Since 1971, the opponents for each game have traditionally included one AFC team and one NFC team. In 2009, as recognition of the 50th anniversary of the American Football League, the game paired two AFC teams who were part of the "original eight" franchises of the AFL, the Tennessee Titans (dressed as their previous incarnation, the Houston Oilers) and the Buffalo Bills, whose owner, Ralph Wilson, was inducted into the Hall that year. An all-NFC matchup was scheduled for 2011,[1] but it was canceled due to the 2011 NFL lockout; the following year, another intra-conference matchup of two NFC teams took its place. Since 2012, both competing teams in the game has had at least one prominent alumnus being inducted into the Hall that year.

text: Because this game and the Hall of Fame's induction ceremonies are scheduled on the weekend before the league's regular four-week exhibition season begins, both teams end up playing five exhibition games instead of the normal four, and unlike the Canadian Football League, the league does not remove an exhibition game from another week.

text: Expansion clubs[edit]

text: The last four expansion teams to have been added to the league each played in the Hall of Fame Game as their first game. In 1995, expansion clubs Jacksonville and Carolina played one another, and in 2002, Houston was one of the participants. When the Cleveland Browns returned to the league with a rebooted roster in 1999, they too played in the Hall of Fame Game. (The Baltimore Ravens, while officially considered as being established in 1996, did not play in the Hall of Fame Game that year, nor have they played at any time in their existence.)

text: Scheduling[edit]

text: Prior to the AFL-NFL merger, the Hall of Fame Game was played in August or September, in some cases at the end of the preseason. In 1970, it was moved to the beginning of the preseason. Prior to 2002, it was not uncommon for the game to be played in July. Since 2002, when the league permanently moved the start of the season to the weekend after Labor Day, the game has always been played in early August.

text: The 2011 game was originally scheduled between the St. Louis Rams and the Chicago Bears, but the game was canceled due to an ongoing labor dispute that had disrupted nearly all league activity during the 2011 offseason. The two clubs had set a deadline of July 22 to ratify a resolution in enough time to prepare for the game. The league and players did not ratify the agreement until July 25, forcing cancellation of the game.

text: The 2016 edition, which was scheduled to be played between the Green Bay Packers and the Indianapolis Colts, was canceled due to unsafe playing conditions. Mike Silver of NFL.com reported that on the morning of game day, the logos at midfield and the end zones had been painted using paint which was not intended for use on artificial turf. When it was apparent the paint wasn't drying fast enough, the field was heated to speed up the drying process, but this caused the turf's rubber to melt. These issues led to unfavorable play conditions. The affected areas were described as being slick and "like cement," making it impossible to get decent footing. Stadium officials attempted to address this by applying a solvent, reportedly paint thinner, to the turf. A Packers employee noticed a label warning that this substance could result in burns when exposed to skin, and alerted others to the discovery. When officially cancelling the game, both the league and the Players Association cited safety concerns.[2][3][4]

text: Both teams were told at 6:40 p.m.--an hour and 20 minutes before kickoff--that the game was going to be canceled. However, fans in the stadium only learned of the pending cancellation via social media. No official announcement was made until just before the scheduled 8 p.m. kickoff.[5]

text: On December 28, 2016, the NFL announced that the 2017 edition of the game would be played on Thursday, August 3, 2017. The scheduling change makes the Hall of Fame Game the first event of the Hall of Fame Weekend. On February 23, 2017, it was announced the 2017 edition will be played between the Dallas Cowboys and the Arizona Cardinals.[6]

text: Television and radio[edit]

text: Unlike the majority of NFL preseason games, which air on local networks, the Hall of Fame Game airs nationwide. From 1999 to 2005, the game was held on Monday night, televised as part of ABC's Monday Night Football package. It had previously been held typically on Saturday afternoons, except from 1963 to 1965 on Sunday afternoons, televised as part of ABC's Wide World of Sports package (still using the MNF crew). In 1998, the game was put in the MNF package, and played on a Saturday night, which served as a test run for the move to Monday night. Starting in 2006, it was moved to Sunday night, coinciding with the new NBC Sunday Night Football[7] television package. The 2007 game was telecast on NFL Network as NBC was intending to televise the China Bowl game in Beijing, China (a game which was postponed to 2009 and later canceled). The Hall of Fame Game has since bounced between both networks. The 2012 game aired on NFL Network due to NBC's coverage of the Summer Olympics. After a two-year absence, the game returned to NBC in 2013 and remained on the network until 2015. The 2016 game was scheduled to air on ESPN as it was to be played two days into the 2016 Summer Olympics but the game was canceled due to field conditions, it returned to NBC in 2017 and will remain on the network until 2019.

text: Westwood One owns national radio rights; it is the only preseason game to air on a nationwide network. Each team's radio network is also allowed to broadcast the games (albeit usually with fewer affiliates since exhibition games are traditionally much lower priority to non-sports and non-flagship stations).

text: In 2007 and 2008, the game was broadcast live in both Ireland and the United Kingdom by Sky Sports. It was not shown in 2009 because of a dispute between Sky Sports and the NFL over TV rights. ESPN America (formerly North American Sports Network) broadcasts the game in the rest of Europe.

text: From 1998 to 2005, the Global Television Network aired the game in Canada, simulcasting ABC; upon the move to Sunday night in 2006, the CTV Television Network aired the game until 2010. With CTV airing the 2012 Summer Olympics, TSN broadcast the Hall of Fame Game in 2012. Azteca 7 aired Spanish-language coverage of the Hall of Fame Game in Mexico from 1998 to 2005; the Game moved to Canal 5 in 2006 and aired on that station until 2010. Due to the cancellation of the 2011 Hall of Fame Game and Televisa's Summer Olympics coverage, the Hall of Fame Game moved to Televisa Deportes in 2012 and then to Galavision in 2013.

text: Tom Benson Hall of Fame Stadium is part of the Cleveland market, and is also within 75 miles of numerous other television markets in northeast Ohio and western Pennsylvania. As such, the NBC affiliates (and before them, the ABC affiliates) are within league requirements to blackout the game in the rare event the game does not sell out. Because the stadium only holds 22,375 fans (less than half the NFL's minimum requirements for its stadiums) and the Hall of Fame induction ceremonies bring large numbers of outside fans to Canton, the game has, to date, always sold out (several NFL teams, as well as the Super Bowl, have similarly enjoyed long sellout streaks).

text: Game history[edit]

text:
Date
Away team
Away score
Home team
Home score
Recap

August 11, 1962
New York Giants
21
St. Louis Cardinals
21
Recap

September 8, 1963
Cleveland Browns
7
Pittsburgh Steelers
16
Recap

September 6, 1964
Baltimore Colts
48
Pittsburgh Steelers
17
Recap

September 12, 1965
Detroit Lions
3
Washington Redskins
20
Recap

August 5, 1967
Cleveland Browns
13
Philadelphia Eagles
28
Recap

August 3, 1968
Dallas Cowboys
24
Chicago Bears
30
Recap

September 13, 1969
Green Bay Packers
38
Atlanta Falcons
24
Recap

August 8, 1970
New Orleans Saints
14
Minnesota Vikings
13
Recap

July 31, 1971
Houston Oilers
6
Los Angeles Rams
17
Recap

July 29, 1972
Kansas City Chiefs
23
New York Giants
17
Recap

July 28, 1973
San Francisco 49ers
20
New England Patriots
7
Recap

July 27, 1974
Buffalo Bills
13
St. Louis Cardinals
21
Recap

August 2, 1975
Washington Redskins
17
Cincinnati Bengals
9
Recap

July 24, 1976
Denver Broncos
10
Detroit Lions
7
Recap

July 30, 1977
Chicago Bears
20
New York Jets
6
Recap

July 29, 1978
Miami Dolphins
3
Philadelphia Eagles
17
Recap

July 28, 1979
Dallas Cowboys
13
Oakland Raiders
20
Recap

August 2, 1980
San Diego Chargers
0
Green Bay Packers
0
Recap [A]

August 1, 1981
Atlanta Falcons
10
Cleveland Browns
24
Recap

August 7, 1982
Baltimore Colts
14
Minnesota Vikings
30
Recap

July 30, 1983
New Orleans Saints
14
Pittsburgh Steelers
27
Recap

July 28, 1984
Seattle Seahawks
38
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
0
Recap

August 3, 1985
New York Giants
21
Houston Oilers
20
Recap

August 2, 1986
New England Patriots
21
St. Louis Cardinals
16
Recap

August 8, 1987
San Francisco 49ers
20
Kansas City Chiefs
7
Recap

July 30, 1988
Cincinnati Bengals
14
Los Angeles Rams
7
Recap

August 5, 1989
Washington Redskins
31
Buffalo Bills
6
Recap

August 4, 1990
Cleveland Browns
0
Chicago Bears
13
Recap

July 27, 1991
Detroit Lions
14
Denver Broncos
3
Recap

August 1, 1992
New York Jets
41
Philadelphia Eagles
14
Recap

July 31, 1993
Green Bay Packers
3
Los Angeles Raiders
19
Recap

July 30, 1994
San Diego Chargers
17
Atlanta Falcons
21
Recap

July 29, 1995
Carolina Panthers
20
Jacksonville Jaguars
14
Recap

July 27, 1996
Indianapolis Colts
10
New Orleans Saints
3
Recap

July 26, 1997
Minnesota Vikings
28
Seattle Seahawks
26
Recap

August 1, 1998
Pittsburgh Steelers
6
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
30
Recap

August 9, 1999
Dallas Cowboys
17
Cleveland Browns
20
Recap

July 31, 2000
New England Patriots
20
San Francisco 49ers
0
Recap

August 6, 2001
St. Louis Rams
17
Miami Dolphins
10
Recap

August 5, 2002
Houston Texans
17
New York Giants
34
Recap

August 4, 2003
Kansas City Chiefs
9
Green Bay Packers
0
Recap[B]

August 9, 2004
Denver Broncos
17
Washington Redskins
20
Recap

August 8, 2005
Chicago Bears
27
Miami Dolphins
24
Recap

August 6, 2006
Oakland Raiders
16
Philadelphia Eagles
10
Recap

August 5, 2007
New Orleans Saints
7
Pittsburgh Steelers
20
Recap

August 3, 2008
Indianapolis Colts
16
Washington Redskins
30
Recap

August 9, 2009
Buffalo Bills
18
Tennessee Titans
21
Recap

August 8, 2010
Dallas Cowboys
16
Cincinnati Bengals
7
Recap

August 7, 2011
Canceled due to 2011 NFL lockout
Ref.

August 5, 2012
Arizona Cardinals
10
New Orleans Saints
17
Recap

August 4, 2013
Miami Dolphins
20
Dallas Cowboys
24
Recap

August 3, 2014
New York Giants
17
Buffalo Bills
13
Recap

August 9, 2015
Pittsburgh Steelers
3
Minnesota Vikings
14
Recap

August 7, 2016
Canceled due to poor field conditions
Ref.

August 3, 2017
Dallas Cowboys
20
Arizona Cardinals
18
Recap

August 5, 2018
TBA

TBA

tag: table

text: Standings[edit]

text:
Team
W
L
T
PCT
Last appearance

Washington Redskins
5
0
0
1.000
2008

Chicago Bears
4
0
0
1.000
2005

Oakland/Los Angeles Raiders
3
0
0
1.000
2006

Carolina Panthers
1
0
0
1.000
1995

Minnesota Vikings
3
1
0
.750
2015

Pittsburgh Steelers
3
3
0
.500
2015

New England Patriots
2
1
0
.667
2000

San Francisco 49ers
2
1
0
.667
2000

Los Angeles/St. Louis Rams
2
1
0
.667
2001

Kansas City Chiefs
2
1
0
.667
2003

New York Giants
3
1
1
.625
2014

Dallas Cowboys
3
3
0
.500
2017

Indianapolis/Baltimore Colts
2
2
0
.500
2008

Philadelphia Eagles
2
2
0
.500
2006

New York Jets
1
1
0
.500
1992

Seattle Seahawks
1
1
0
.500
1997

Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1
1
0
.500
1998

Cleveland Browns
2
3
0
.400
1999

New Orleans Saints
2
3
0
.400
2012

Green Bay Packers
1
2
1
.375
2003

Cincinnati Bengals
1
2
0
.333
2010

Atlanta Falcons
1
2
0
.333
1994

Denver Broncos
1
2
0
.333
2004

Detroit Lions
1
2
0
.333
1991

Tennessee Titans/Houston Oilers
1
2
0
.333
2009

Arizona/St. Louis Cardinals
1
3
1
.300
2017

Los Angeles/San Diego Chargers
0
1
1
.250
1994

Baltimore Ravens
0
0
0
–
N/A

Houston Texans
0
1
0
.000
2002

Jacksonville Jaguars
0
1
0
.000
1995

Buffalo Bills
0
4
0
.000
2014

Miami Dolphins
0
4
0
.000
2013

text: Most appearances – 6: Pittsburgh Steelers (1963, 1964, 1983, 1998, 2007, and 2015) and Dallas Cowboys (1968, 1979, 1999, 2010, 2013, and 2017)

text: Most wins – 5: Washington Redskins (1965, 1975, 1989, 2004, and 2008)

text: Longest active drought without Hall of Fame Game appearance – 26 seasons: Detroit Lions (last appearance – 1991); 25 seasons: New York Jets (last appearance – 1992); 23 seasons: Atlanta Falcons and Los Angeles Chargers (last appearance – 1994); 22 seasons: Carolina Panthers and Jacksonville Jaguars (last appearance – 1995)

text: Active teams to have never made a Hall of Fame Game appearance – Baltimore Ravens

text: Notes[edit]

text:
Jump up ^ Game ended with 5:29 remaining in the fourth quarter due to severe lightning.
Jump up ^ Game ended with 5:49 remaining in the third quarter due to severe lightning.

tag: ol


document_title: Closed-circuit television

question_text: when were cctv cameras first used in the uk

question_tokens: when were cctv cameras first used in the uk

root

text: Closed-circuit television

text: History[edit]

text: The first CCTV system was installed by Siemens AG at Test Stand VII in Peenemünde, Nazi Germany in 1942, for observing the launch of V-2 rockets.[9] The noted German engineer Walter Bruch was responsible for the technological design and installation of the system.[12][not in citation given]

tag: p

text: In the U.S. the first commercial closed-circuit television system became available in 1949, called Vericon. Very little is known about Vericon except it was advertised as not requiring a government permit.[13]

text: Technology[edit]

text: The earliest video surveillance systems involved constant monitoring because there was no way to record and store information. The development of reel-to-reel media enabled the recording of surveillance footage. These systems required magnetic tapes to be changed manually, which was a time consuming, expensive and unreliable process, with the operator having to manually thread the tape from the tape reel through the recorder onto an empty take-up reel. Due to these shortcomings, video surveillance was not widespread. VCR technology became available in the 1970s, making it easier to record and erase information, and use of video surveillance became more common.[14]

text: During the 1990s, digital multiplexing was developed, allowing several cameras to record at once, as well as time lapse and motion-only recording. This increased savings of time and money which then led to an increase in the use of CCTV.[15]

text: Recently CCTV technology has been enhanced with a shift toward Internet-based products and systems, and other technological developments.[16]

text: Application[edit]

text: In September 1968, Olean, New York was the first city in the United States to install video cameras along its main business street in an effort to fight crime.[17] Another early appearance was in 1973 in Times Square in New York City.[18] The NYPD installed it in order to deter crime that was occurring in the area; however, crime rates did not appear to drop much due to the cameras.[18] Nevertheless, during the 1980s video surveillance began to spread across the country specifically targeting public areas.[15] It was seen as a cheaper way to deter crime compared to increasing the size of the police departments.[18] Some businesses as well, especially those that were prone to theft, began to use video surveillance.[18] From the mid-1990s on, police departments across the country installed an increasing number of cameras in various public spaces including housing projects, schools and public parks departments.[18] CCTV later became common in banks and stores to discourage theft, by recording evidence of criminal activity. In 1998, 3,000 CCTV systems were in use in New York City.[19] A study by Nieto in 2008 found many businesses in the United States had invested heavily in video surveillance technology to protect products and promote safe workplace and consumer environments. A nationwide survey of a wide variety of companies found that 75 percent utilize CCTV surveillance. In private sector CCTV surveillance technology is operated in a wide variety of establishments such as in industry/manufacturing, retailing, financial/insurance/banking, transportation and distribution, utilities/communications, health care, and hotels/motels.

text: Experiments in the UK during the 1970s and 1980s, including outdoor CCTV in Bournemouth in 1985, led to several larger trial programs later that decade. The first use by local government was in King's Lynn, Norfolk, in 1987.[20] These were deemed successful in the government report "CCTV: Looking Out For You", issued by the Home Office in 1994, and paved the way for an increase in the number of CCTV systems installed. Today, systems cover most town and city centres, and many stations, car-parks and estates.

text: Uses[edit]

text: Crime prevention[edit]

text: A 2009 systematic review by researchers from Northeastern University and University of Cambridge used meta-analytic techniques to pool the average effect of CCTV on crime across 41 different studies.[21] The results indicated that

text:
CCTV caused a significant reduction of crime by on average 16%.
The largest effects of CCTV were found in car parks, where cameras reduced crime by on average 51%.
CCTV schemes in other public settings had small and non-statistically significant effects on crime: 7% reduction in city and town centers and 23% reduction in public transport settings.
When sorted by country, systems in the United Kingdom accounted for the majority of the decrease; the drop in other areas was insignificant.

text: The studies included in the meta-analysis used quasi-experimental evaluation designs that involve before-and-after measures of crime in experimental and control areas.[21] However, several researchers have pointed to methodological problems associated with this research literature. First, researchers have argued that the British car park studies included in the meta-analysis cannot accurately control for the fact that CCTV was introduced simultaneously with a range of other security-related measures.[22] Second, some have noted that, in many of the studies, there may be issues with selection bias since the introduction of CCTV was potentially endogenous to previous crime trends.[23] In particular, the estimated effects may be biased if CCTV is introduced in response to crime trends.[24]

text: It has been argued that problems of selection bias and endogeneity can be addressed by stronger research designs such as randomized controlled trials and natural experiments. A 2017 review published in Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention compiles seven studies that use such research designs. The studies included in the review found that CCTV reduced crime by 24-28% in public streets and urban subway stations. It also found that CCTV could decrease unruly behaviour in football stadiums and theft in supermarkets/mass merchant stores. However, there was no evidence of CCTV having desirable effects in parking facilities or suburban subway stations. Furthermore, the review indicates that CCTV is more effective in preventing property crimes than in violent crimes.[25]

text: Another question in the effectiveness of CCTV for policing is around uptime of the system; in 2013 City of Philadelphia Auditor found that the $15M system was operational only 32% of the time.[26] There is still much research to be done to determine the effectiveness of CCTV cameras on crime prevention before any conclusions can be drawn.

text: There is strong anecdotal evidence that CCTV aids in detection and conviction of offenders; indeed UK police forces routinely seek CCTV recordings after crimes.[27] Moreover, CCTV has played a crucial role in tracing the movements of suspects or victims and is widely regarded by antiterrorist officers as a fundamental tool in tracking terrorist suspects. Large-scale CCTV installations have played a key part of the defences against terrorism since the 1970s. Cameras have also been installed on public transport in the hope of deterring crime,[28][29] and in mobile police surveillance vehicles, often with automatic number plate recognition, and a network of APNI-linked cameras is used to manage London's congestion charging zone. Even so, there is political hostility to surveillance and several commentators downplay the evidence of CCTV's effectiveness, especially in the US.[30] However, most of these assertions are based on poor methodology or imperfect comparisons.[31]

text: A more open question is whether most CCTV is cost-effective. While low-quality domestic kits are cheap the professional installation and maintenance of high definition CCTV is expensive.[32] Gill and Spriggs did a Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of CCTV in crime prevention that showed little monetary saving with the installation of CCTV as most of the crimes prevented resulted in little monetary loss.[33] Critics however noted that benefits of non-monetary value cannot be captured in a traditional Cost Effectiveness Analysis and were omitted from their study.[33] A 2008 Report by UK Police Chiefs concluded that only 3% of crimes were solved by CCTV.[34] In London, a Metropolitan Police report showed that in 2008 only one crime was solved per 1000 cameras.[35] In some cases CCTV cameras have become a target of attacks themselves.[36]

text: Cities such as Manchester in the UK are using DVR-based technology to improve accessibility for crime prevention.[37]

text: In October 2009, an "Internet Eyes" website was announced which would pay members of the public to view CCTV camera images from their homes and report any crimes they witnessed. The site aimed to add "more eyes" to cameras which might be insufficiently monitored. Civil liberties campaigners criticized the idea as "a distasteful and a worrying development".[38]

text: In 2013 Oaxaca hired deaf police officers to lip read conversations to uncover criminal conspiracies.[39]

text: In Singapore, since 2012, thousands of CCTV cameras have helped deter loan sharks, nab litterbugs and stop illegal parking, according to government figures.[40]

text: Body worn[edit]

text: In recent years, the use of body worn video cameras has been introduced for a number of uses. For example, as a new form of surveillance in law enforcement, with cameras located on a police officer's chest or head.[41][5]

text: Industrial processes[edit]

text: Industrial processes that take place under conditions dangerous for humans are today often supervised by CCTV. These are mainly processes in the chemical industry, the interior of reactors or facilities for manufacture of nuclear fuel. Special cameras for some of these purposes include line-scan cameras and thermographic cameras which allow operators to measure the temperature of the processes. The usage of CCTV in such processes is sometimes required by law.[specify]

text: Traffic monitoring[edit]

text: Many cities and motorway networks have extensive traffic-monitoring systems, using closed-circuit television to detect congestion and notice accidents.[42] Many of these cameras however, are owned by private companies and transmit data to drivers' GPS systems.

text: The UK Highways Agency has a publicly owned CCTV network of over 3000 Pan-Tilt-Zoom cameras covering the British motorway and trunk road network. These cameras are primarily used to monitor traffic conditions and are not used as speed cameras. With the addition of fixed cameras for the active traffic management system, the number of cameras on the Highways Agency's CCTV network is likely to increase significantly over the next few years.[citation needed]

text: The London congestion charge is enforced by cameras positioned at the boundaries of and inside the congestion charge zone, which automatically read the licence plates of cars. If the driver does not pay the charge then a fine will be imposed. Similar systems are being developed as a means of locating cars reported stolen.[citation needed]

text: Other surveillance cameras serve as traffic enforcement cameras.[citation needed]

text: Transport safety[edit]

text: A CCTV system may be installed where any example, on a subway train, CCTV cameras may allow the operator to confirm that people are clear of doors before closing them and starting the train.[citation needed]

text: Sporting events[edit]

text: Many sporting events in the United States use CCTV inside the venue for fans to see the action while they are away from their seats. The cameras send the feed to a central control center where a producer selects feeds to send to the television monitors that fans can view. CCTV monitors for viewing the event by attendees are often placed in lounges, hallways, and restrooms. This use of CCTV is not used for surveillance purposes.

text: Monitor employees[edit]

text: Organizations use CCTV to monitor the actions of workers. Every action is recorded as an information block with subtitles that explain the performed operation. This helps to track the actions of workers, especially when they are making critical financial transactions, such as correcting or cancelling of a sale, withdrawing money or altering personal information.

text: Actions which an employer may wish to monitor could include:

text:
Scanning of goods, selection of goods, introduction of price and quantity;
Input and output of operators in the system when entering passwords;
Deleting operations and modifying existing documents;
Implementation of certain operations, such as financial statements or operations with cash;
Moving goods, revaluation scrapping and counting;
Control in the kitchen of fast food restaurants;
Change of settings, reports and other official functions.

tag: ul

text: Each of these operations is transmitted with a description, allowing detailed monitoring of all actions of the operator. Some systems allow the user to search for a specific event by time of occurrence and text description, and perform statistical evaluation of operator behaviour. This allows the software to predict deviations from the standard workflow and record only anomalous behaviour.[43]

text: Use in schools[edit]

text: In the United States, Britain,[44] Australia[45] and New Zealand, CCTV is widely used in schools due to its success in preventing bullying, vandalism, monitoring visitors and maintaining a record of evidence in the event of a crime. There are some restrictions on installation, with cameras not being installed in an area where there is a "reasonable expectation of privacy", such as bathrooms, gym locker areas and private offices (unless consent by the office occupant is given). Сameras are generally acceptable in hallways, parking lots, front offices where students, employees, and parents come and go, gymnasiums, cafeterias, supply rooms and classrooms. The installation of cameras in classrooms may be objected to by some teachers.[46]

text: Criminal use[edit]

text: Criminals may use surveillance cameras to monitor the public. For example, a hidden camera at an ATM can capture people's PINs as they are entered, without their knowledge. The devices are small enough not to be noticed, and are placed where they can monitor the keypad of the machine as people enter their PINs. Images may be transmitted wirelessly to the criminal.

text: Home security[edit]

text: In the early to mid 2000s, companies including ADT, LiveWatch, and SimpliSafe started offering CCTVs to the consumer market for home safety and security. Cameras typically come as part of alarm monitoring packages that may also include fire and flood detection.[47]

text: Prevalence[edit]

text: There are an estimated 350 million surveillance cameras worldwide as of 2016 compared with about 160 million in 2012. About 65% of these cameras are installed in Asia. The growth of CCTV has been slowing in recent years.[8][note 1]

text: United States[edit]

text: There were an estimated 30 million surveillance cameras in the United States in 2011.[50] Video surveillance has been common in the United States since the 1990s; for example, one manufacturer reported net earnings of $120 million in 1995.[51] With lower cost and easier installation, sales of home security cameras increased in the early 21st century. Following the September 11 attacks, the use of video surveillance in public places became more common to deter future terrorist attacks.[18] Under the Homeland Security Grant Program, government grants are available for cities to install surveillance camera networks.[52][53][54] In 2009, there were an estimated 15,000 CCTV systems in Chicago, many linked to an integrated camera network.[55][56][57] New York City's Domain Awareness System has 6,000 video surveillance cameras linked together,[58] there are over 4,000 cameras on the subway system (although nearly half of them do not work),[59] and two-thirds of large apartment and commercial buildings use video surveillance cameras.[60][61] In the Washington D.C.-area, there are more than 30,000 surveillance cameras in schools,[62] and the Metro has nearly 6,000 cameras in use across the system.[63]

text: United Kingdom[edit]

text: In the United Kingdom, the vast majority of CCTV cameras are not operated by government bodies, but by private individuals or companies, especially to monitor the interiors of shops and businesses. According to 2011 Freedom of Information Act requests, the total number of local government operated CCTV cameras was around 52,000 over the entirety of the UK.[64]

text: Although specific legalities of running a home CCTV system in the UK are rather vague there are published [65] rules and regulations that although are mostly common sense, do include some laws that most people may not be aware of, including registering with ICO as a data controller if any CCTV camera catch images of any of the public on, or outside of your property.

text: An article published in CCTV Image magazine estimated the number of private and local government operated cameras in the United Kingdom was 1.85 million in 2011. The estimate was based on extrapolating from a comprehensive survey of public and private cameras within the Cheshire Constabulary jurisdiction. This works out as an average of one camera for every 32 people in the UK, although the density of cameras varies greatly from place to place. The Cheshire report also claims that the average person on a typical day would be seen by 70 CCTV cameras.[66]

text: The Cheshire figure is regarded as more dependable than a previous study by Michael McCahill and Clive Norris of UrbanEye published in 2002.[66][67] Based on a small sample in Putney High Street, McCahill and Norris extrapolated the number of surveillance cameras in Greater London to be around 500,000 and the total number of cameras in the UK to be around 4,200,000. According to their estimate the UK has one camera for every 14 people. Although it has been acknowledged for several years that the methodology behind this figure is flawed,[68] it has been widely quoted. Furthermore, the figure of 500,000 for Greater London is often confused with the figure for the police and local government operated cameras in the City of London, which was about 650 in 2011.[64]

text: The CCTV User Group estimated that there were around 1.5 million private and local government CCTV cameras in city centres, stations, airports, and major retail areas in the UK.[69] This figure does not include the smaller surveillance systems such as those that may be found in local corner shops and is therefore broadly in line with the Cheshire report.

text: Research conducted by the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research and based on a survey of all Scottish local authorities, identified that there are over 2,200 public space CCTV cameras in Scotland.[70]

text: Defra made it legal in 2017 to have all Abbatoirs in the UK now covered by CCTV to prevent cruelty to animals during the slaughter process.[71]

text: Canada[edit]

text: Project SCRAM is a policing effort by the Halton Regional Police Service to register and help consumers understand the complex issues of privacy and safety that confront households when dealing with installations of home security systems. "The SCRAM program enables community members to voluntarily identify and register their residential video surveillance equipment through a simple, secure, confidential, online form.".[72] It has not been extended to commercial businesses. A wide-ranging effort to provide registration and monitoring of home security and systems. "Security camera registration and monitoring is a community-based crime prevention opportunity and investigative tool that enlists the help of residents and can help prevent crime on three levels. Residential video surveillance cameras can deter criminals from entering the area, can prevent crimes from occurring and help solve crimes by providing valuable evidence to the police."[72]

text: South Africa[edit]

text: In South Africa due to the high crime rate CCTV surveillance is widely prevalent but the country has been slow to implement the latest technology e.g. the first IP camera was released in 1996 by Axis Communications but IP cameras didn't arrive in South Africa till 2008.[73] In order to regulate the number of suppliers in 2001 the Private Security Industry Regulation Act was passed requiring all security companies to be registered with the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA).[74]

text: Around the world[edit]

text: In Latin America, the CCTV market is growing rapidly with the increase of property crime.[75] In Asia, different human activities attracted the use of surveillance camera systems and services, including but not limited to business and related industries,[citation needed] transportation,[76] sports,[77] and care for the environment.[78]

text: Video surveillance and terrorism[edit]

text: Material collected by surveillance cameras has been used as a tool in post-event forensics to identify tactics, techniques and perpetrators of terrorist attacks. Furthermore, there are various projects − such as INDECT − that aim to detect suspicious behaviours of individuals and crowds.[79] It has been argued that terrorists won't be deterred by cameras, that terror attacks aren't really the subject of the current use of video surveillance and that terrorists might even see it as an extra channel for propaganda and publication of their acts.[80][81] In Germany calls for extended video surveillance by the country's main political parties, SPD, CDU and CSU have been dismissed as "little more than a placebo for a subjective feeling of security".[82]

text: Privacy[edit]

text: Many civil liberties campaign groups, academics and consultants have published research papers into CCTV systems. Opponents of CCTV point out the loss of privacy of people under surveillance, and the negative impact of surveillance on civil liberties. Furthermore, they argue that CCTV displaces crime, rather than reducing it. Critics often dub CCTV as "Big Brother surveillance", a reference to George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, which featured a two-way telescreen in every home through which The Party would monitor the populace.

text: Proponents of CCTV cameras argue that cameras are effective at deterring and solving crime, and that appropriate regulation and legal restrictions on surveillance of public spaces can provide sufficient protections so that an individual's right to privacy can reasonably be weighed against the benefits of surveillance.[83][84][85] However, anti-surveillance activists have held that there is a right to privacy in public areas. Furthermore, while it is true that there may be scenarios wherein a person's right to public privacy can be both reasonably and justifiably compromised, some scholars have argued that such situations are so rare as to not sufficiently warrant the frequent compromising of public privacy rights that occurs in regions with widespread CCTV surveillance. For example, in her book Setting the Watch: Privacy and the Ethics of CCTV Surveillance, Beatrice von Silva-Tarouca Larsen argues that CCTV surveillance is ethically permissible only in "certain restrictively defined situations", such as when a specific location has a "comprehensively documented and significant criminal threat".[86] Her central reasoning is that widespread CCTV surveillance violates citizens' rights to privacy and anonymity within the public sphere by jeopardizing both their liberty and dignity. She concludes that CCTV surveillance should therefore be reserved for specific circumstances in which there are clear and reasonably demonstrated benefits to its implementation and few ethical compromises.

text: In the United States, the Constitution does not explicitly include the right to privacy although the Supreme Court has said several of the amendments to the Constitution implicitly grant this right.[87] Access to video surveillance recordings may require a judge's writ, which is readily available.[88] However, there is little legislation and regulation specific to video surveillance.[89][90]

text: All countries in the European Union are signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights which protects individual rights including the right to privacy. The EU's Data Protection Directive regulates access to personal data including CCTV recordings.[91] This directive is translated into the national law of each country within the European Union.

text: In the United Kingdom the Data Protection Act 1998 imposes legal restrictions on the uses of CCTV recordings and mandates the registration of CCTV systems with the Data Protection Agency. In 2004, the successor to the Data Protection Agency, the Information Commissioner's Office clarified that this required registration of all CCTV systems with the Commissioner, and prompt deletion of archived recordings. However, subsequent case law (Durant vs. FSA) limited the scope of the protection provided by this law, and not all CCTV systems are currently regulated.[92] Nonetheless, private sector personnel in the UK who operate or monitor CCTV devices or systems are considered security guards and have been made subject to state licensing.

text: A 2007 report by the UK Information Commissioner's Office, highlighted the need for the public to be made more aware of the growing use of surveillance and the potential impact on civil liberties.[93][94] In the same year, a campaign group claimed the majority of CCTV cameras in the UK are operated illegally or are in breach of privacy guidelines.[95] In response, the Information Commissioner's Office rebutted the claim and added that any reported abuses of the Data Protection Act are swiftly investigated.[95] Even if there are some concerns arising from the use of CCTV such as involving privacy,[96] more commercial establishments are still installing CCTV systems in the UK.

text: In 2012, the UK government enacted the Protection of Freedoms Act which includes several provisions related to controlling and restricting the collection, storage, retention, and use of information about individuals. Under this Act, the Home Office published a code of practice in 2013 for the use of surveillance cameras by government and local authorities. The aim of the code is to help ensure their use is "characterised as surveillance by consent, and such consent on the part of the community must be informed consent and not assumed by a system operator. Surveillance by consent should be regarded as analogous to policing by consent."[97]

text: In Canada, the use of video surveillance has grown very rapidly. In Ontario, both the municipal and provincial versions of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act outline very specific guidelines that control how images and information can be gathered by this method and or released.[98] In some areas in Ontario the use of surveillance cameras are strictly prohibited and controlled based on individual by-laws.[99]

text: Technological developments[edit]

text: Computer-controlled analytics and identification[edit]

text: Computer-controlled cameras can identify, track, and categorize objects in their field of view.[citation needed]

text: Video content analysis (VCA) is the capability of automatically analyzing video to detect and determine temporal events not based on a single image. As such, it can be seen as the automated equivalent of the biological visual cortex.

text: A system using VCA can recognize changes in the environment and even identify and compare objects in the database using size, speed, and sometimes colour. The camera's actions can be programmed based on what it is "seeing". For example; an alarm can be issued if an object has moved in a certain area, or if a painting is missing from a wall, or if a smoke or fire is detected, or if running people are detected, or if fallen people are detected and if someone has spray painted the lens, as well as video loss, lens cover, defocus and other so called camera tampering events.[citation needed]

text: VCA analytics can also be used to detect unusual patterns in an environment. The system can be set to detect anomalies in a crowd, for instance a person moving in the opposite direction in airports where passengers are supposed to walk only in one direction out of a plane or in a subway where people are not supposed to exit through the entrances.[100]

text: VCA can track people on a map by calculating their position from the images. It is then possible to link many cameras and track a person through an entire building or area. This can allow a person to be followed without having to analyze many hours of film. Currently the cameras have difficulty identifying individuals from video alone, but if connected to a key-card system, identities can be established and displayed as a tag over their heads on the video.[citation needed]

text: There is also a significant difference in where the VCA technology is placed, either the data is being processed within the cameras (on the edge) or by a centralized server. Both technologies have their pros and cons.[101]

text: A facial recognition system is a computer application for automatically identifying or verifying a person from a digital image or a video frame from a video source. One of the ways to do this is by comparing selected facial features from the image and a facial database.[citation needed]

text: The combination of CCTV and facial recognition has been tried as a form of mass surveillance, but has been ineffective because of the low discriminating power of facial recognition technology and the very high number of false positives generated. This type of system has been proposed to compare faces at airports and seaports with those of suspected terrorists or other undesirable entrants.[citation needed]

text: Computerized monitoring of CCTV images is under development, so that a human CCTV operator does not have to endlessly look at all the screens, allowing an operator to observe many more CCTV cameras.[citation needed] These systems do not observe people directly. Insta Types of body-movement behavior, or particular types of clothing or baggage.

text: To many, the development of CCTV in public areas, linked to computer databases of people's pictures and identity, presents a serious breach of civil liberties. Conservative critics fear the possibility that one would no longer have anonymity in public places.[102] Demonstrations or assemblies in public places could be affected as the state would be able to collate lists of those leading them, taking part, or even just talking with protesters in the street.

text: Comparatively harmless are people counter systems. They use CCTV equipment as front end eyes of devices which perform shape recognition technology in order to identify objects as human beings and count people passing pre-defined areas.

text: Retention, storage and preservation[edit]

text: Most CCTV systems may record and store digital video and images to a digital video recorder (DVR) or, in the case of IP cameras, directly to a server, either on-site or offsite.[citation needed][103]

text: There is a cost in the retention of the images produced by CCTV systems. The amount and quality of data stored on storage media is subject to compression ratios, images stored per second, image size and is effected by the retention period of the videos or images.[104] DVRs store images in a variety of proprietary file formats. Recordings may be retained for a preset amount of time and then automatically archived, overwritten or deleted, the period being determined by the organisation that generated them.

text: Closed-circuit digital photography (CCDP)[105][edit]

text: Closed-circuit digital photography (CCDP) is more suited for capturing and saving recorded high-resolution photographs, whereas closed-circuit television (CCTV) is more suitable for live-monitoring purposes.[citation needed]

text: However, an important feature of some CCTV systems is the ability to take high resolution images of the camera scene, e.g. on a time lapse or motion-detection basis. Images taken with a digital still camera often have higher resolution than those taken with some video cameras. Increasingly, low-cost high-resolution digital still cameras can also be used for CCTV purposes.[citation needed]

text: Images may be monitored remotely when the computer is connected to a network.[citation needed]

text: IP cameras[edit]

text: A growing branch in CCTV is internet protocol cameras (IP cameras). It is estimated that 2014 was the first year that IP cameras outsold analog cameras.[106] IP cameras use the Internet Protocol (IP) used by most Local Area Networks (LANs) to transmit video across data networks in digital form. IP can optionally be transmitted across the public internet, allowing users to view their cameras through any internet connection available through a computer or a phone, this is considered remote access. For professional or public infrastructure security applications, IP video is restricted to within a private network or VPN,[107] or can be recorded onto a remote server.

text: Networking CCTV cameras[edit]

text: The city of Chicago operates a networked video surveillance system which combines CCTV video feeds of government agencies with those of the private sector, installed in city buses, businesses, public schools, subway stations, housing projects etc.[108] Even homeowners are able to contribute footage. It is estimated to incorporate the video feeds of a total of 15,000 cameras.[109]

text: The system is used by Chicago's Office of Emergency Management in case of an emergency call: it detects the caller's location and instantly displays the real-time video feed of the nearest security camera to the operator, not requiring any user intervention. While the system is far too vast to allow complete real-time monitoring, it stores the video data for later usage in order to provide possible evidence in criminal cases.[110]

text: New York City has a similar network called the Domain Awareness System.

text: London also has a network of CCTV systems that allows multiple authorities to view and control CCTV cameras in real time. The system allows authorities including the Metropolitan Police Service, Transport for London and a number of London boroughs to share CCTV images between them. It uses a network protocol called Television Network Protocol to allow access to many more cameras than each individual system owner could afford to run and maintain.[citation needed]

text: The Glynn County Police Department uses a wireless mesh-networked system of portable battery-powered tripods for live megapixel video surveillance and central monitoring of tactical police situations. The systems can be used either on a stand-alone basis with secure communications to nearby police laptops, or within a larger mesh system with multiple tripods feeding video back to the command vehicle via wireless, and to police headquarters via 3G.[citation needed]

text: Integrated systems[edit]

text: Integrated systems allow different security systems, like CCTV, access control, intruder alarms and intercoms to operate together. For example, when an intruder alarm is activated, CCTV cameras covering the intrusion area are recorded at a higher frame rate and transmitted to an Alarm Receiving Centre.

text: Wireless security cameras[edit]

text: Many consumers are turning to wireless security cameras for home surveillance. Wireless cameras do not require a video cable for video/audio transmission, simply a cable for power. Wireless cameras are also easy and inexpensive to install, but lack the reliability of hard-wired cameras.[111] Previous generations of wireless security cameras relied on analog technology; modern wireless cameras use digital technology which delivers crisper audio, sharper video, and a secure and interference-free signal.[112]

text: Talking CCTV[edit]

text: In Wiltshire, UK, 2003, a pilot scheme for what is now known as "Talking CCTV" was put into action; allowing operators of CCTV cameras to order offenders to stop what they were doing, ranging from ordering subjects to pick up their rubbish and put it in a bin to ordering groups of vandals to disperse. In 2005 Ray Mallon, the mayor and former senior police officer of Middlesbrough implemented "Talking CCTV" in his area.[113]

text: Other towns have had such cameras installed. In 2007 several of the devices were installed in Bridlington town centre, East Riding of Yorkshire.[114]

text: Countermeasures[edit]

text: Due to the widespread implementation of surveillance cameras, glasses are being built which can defeat CCTV cameras. In December 2016 a form of anti-CCTV and facial recognition sunglasses called 'reflectacles' were invented by a custom-spectacle-craftsmen based in Chicago named Scott Urban.[115] They reflect infrared and, optionally, visible light which makes the users face a white blur to cameras. The project easily surpassed its funding goal of $28,000 and reflectacles will be commercially available by June 2017.[116]

text: CCTV camera vandalism[edit]

text: Unless physically protected, CCTV cameras have been found to be vulnerable against a variety of (mostly illegal) tactics:[citation needed]

text:
Some people will deliberately destroy cameras. Some cameras can come with dust-tight, pressurized, explosion proof, and bullet-resistant housings.
Spraying substances over the lens can make the image too blurry to view.
Lasers can blind or damage them. However, since most lasers are monochromatic, color filters can reduce the effect of laser pointers. But filters also impair image quality and overall light sensitivity of cameras (see laser safety article for details on issues with filters). Also, complete protection from lasers of any wavelength would require use of completely black filters, rendering the camera useless.

text: Cost[edit]

text: The security camera installation cost in Los Angeles, United States ranges from US$300 to US$3,500. On average, however, the cost can be anywhere from US$893 – US$2,267. The price will go up depending on specific requirements or the extent of the security that will be required.

text: Factors affecting security camera installation cost[edit]

text: Among other factors, the specific type of camera being used has the most significant impact on its cost. The average cost of two digital cameras packaged with an LCD monitor is around US$450. Different brands can also have different prices. The type of technology used also has an impact of security camera installation cost. Wireless camera systems are generally more expensive than their wired counterparts.

text: The specific type of software that is being used also has a role to play on its price. On average, professional level software is offered at US$75, with some of them requiring annual fees for membership. Network attached storage or DVR, used for storing recorded video, will also be part of the cost. On average, that can cost about US$499. This will depend on the storage capacity and other features of the device chosen by the user.


document_title: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (film)

question_text: what was jack nicholson's character name in one flew over the cuckoo's nest

question_tokens: what was jack nicholson 's character name in one flew over the cuckoo 's nest

text: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: In 1963 Oregon, recidivist criminal Randle McMurphy is moved to a mental institution after serving a short sentence on a prison farm for statutory rape of a 15-year-old. Though not actually mentally ill, McMurphy hopes to avoid hard labor and serve the rest of his sentence in a relaxed environment. Upon arriving at the hospital, he finds the ward run by the steely, strict Nurse Ratched, who subtly suppresses the actions of her patients through a passive-aggressive routine, intimidating the patients.

text: The other patients include anxious, stuttering Billy Bibbit; Charlie Cheswick, who is prone to childish tantrums; delusional Martini; the well-educated, paranoid Dale Harding; belligerent Max Taber; epileptic Jim Sefelt; and “Chief” Bromden, a tall Native American believed to be deaf and mute. Ratched soon sees McMurphy’s lively, rebellious presence to be a threat to her authority, confiscating the patients’ cigarettes and rationing them. During his time in the ward, McMurphy gets into a battle of wits with Ratched. He steals a hospital bus, escaping with several patients to go on a fishing trip, encouraging his friends to become more self-confident.

text: McMurphy learns his sentence may become indefinite, and he makes plans to escape, exhorting Chief to throw a hydrotherapy cart through a window. He, Chief, and Cheswick get into a fight with the orderlies after the latter becomes agitated over his stolen cigarettes. Ratched sends them to the “shock shop,” and McMurphy discovers Chief can actually speak, feigning being deaf and mute to avoid engaging with anyone. After being subjected to electroconvulsive therapy, McMurphy returns to the ward pretending to have brain damage, but reveals the treatment has charged him up even more. McMurphy and Chief make plans to escape, but decide to throw a secret Christmas party for their friends after Ratched leaves for the night.

text: McMurphy sneaks two women, Candy and Rose, into the ward, and bribes the night guard. After a night of partying, McMurphy and Chief prepare to escape, inviting Billy to come with them. He refuses, not ready to leave the hospital. McMurphy instead convinces him to have sex with Candy. Ratched arrives in the morning to find the ward in disarray and most of the patients passed out drunk. She discovers Billy and Candy together, the former now free of his stutter, until Ratched threatens to inform his mother about his escapade. Billy is overwhelmed with fear and locks himself in the doctor’s office and commits suicide. The enraged McMurphy chokes Ratched, before being knocked out by an orderly.

text: Ratched comes back with a neck brace and a scratchy voice. Rumors spread that McMurphy escaped, rather than be taken "upstairs". Later that night, Chief sees McMurphy being returned to his bed. He discovers McMurphy has lobotomy scars on his forehead, and smothers his friend with a pillow. Chief finally throws the hydrotherapy cart through the window and escapes into the night, cheered on by Taber.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Jack Nicholson as Randle McMurphy
Louise Fletcher as Nurse Ratched
Will Sampson as "Chief" Bromden
William Redfield as Dale Harding
Brad Dourif as Billy Bibbit
Sydney Lassick as Charlie Cheswick
Christopher Lloyd as Max Taber
Danny DeVito as Martini
Dean Brooks as Dr. John Spivey
William Duell as Jim Sefelt
Vincent Schiavelli as Bruce Frederickson
Michael Berryman as Ellis
Nathan George as Attendant Washington
Marya Small as Candy
Scatman Crothers as Orderly Turkle
Louisa Moritz as Rose
Peter Brocco as Col. Matterson

text: Production[edit]

text: Actor Kirk Douglas—who had originated the role of McMurphy in the 1963–1964 Broadway stage version of the Ken Kesey novel—had purchased the film rights to the story, and tried for a decade to bring it to the big screen, but was unable to find a studio willing to make it with him. Eventually, he gave the rights to his son Michael Douglas, who succeeded in getting the film produced—but the elder Douglas, by then nearly 60, was considered too old for the McMurphy role, which ultimately went to 38-year-old Jack Nicholson.

text: Douglas brought in Saul Zaentz as co-producer.[4]

text: The film's first screenwriter, Lawrence Hauben, introduced Douglas to the work of Miloš Forman, whose 1967 Czechoslovak film The Firemen's Ball had the sort of qualities they were looking for. Forman flew to California and went through the script page by page and outlined what he would do, in contrast with other directors who had been approached who were less than forthcoming. Forman wrote in 2012: "To me [the story] was not just literature but real life, the life I lived in Czechoslovakia from my birth in 1932 until 1968. The Communist Party was my Nurse Ratched, telling me what I could and could not do; what I was or was not allowed to say; where I was and was not allowed to go; even who I was and was not."[5]

text: Saul Zaentz, a voracious reader, felt an affinity with Kesey, and so after Hauben's first attempt he asked Kesey to write the screenplay, and promised him a piece of the action, but it didn’t work out and ended in a financial dispute.[4]

text: Hal Ashby, who had been an early consideration for director, suggested Jack Nicholson for the role of McMurphy. Production was delayed for about six months because of Nicholson's schedule. However, Douglas later felt that this ended up as a blessing, as it gave more time to get the ensemble right.[4]

text: Casting[edit]

text: Danny DeVito, who was Douglas's oldest friend, was the first to be cast as he had played Martini, one of the patients, in the 1971 off-Broadway production. Douglas found Will Sampson, who played Chief Bromden, through a used car dealer that Douglas was sitting next to on an aircraft. Douglas had told him that they were looking for a big guy to play the chief. He sold a lot of cars to Native Americans and six months later called Douglas to say: “the biggest sonofabitch Indian came in the other day!”[4]

text: Miloš Forman had considered Shelley Duvall for the role of Candy. While screening Thieves Like Us (1974) to see if she was right for the role, he became interested in Louise Fletcher, who had a supporting role, for the role of Nurse Ratched. A mutual acquaintance, the casting director Fred Roos, had already mentioned her name as a possibility. Even so it took four or five meetings, over a year, (during which the role was offered to other actresses) for Fletcher to secure the role of Nurse Ratched. Her final audition was late in 1974, with Forman, Zaentz and Douglas. The day after Christmas, her agent called to say she was expected at the Oregon State Hospital in Salem on 4 January to begin rehearsals.[6]

text: Rehearsals[edit]

text: Prior to commencement of filming, a week of rehearsals started on 4 January 1975 in Oregon, during which the actors watched the patients in their daily routine and at group therapy. Jack Nicholson and Louise Fletcher also witnessed electroconvulsive therapy on a patient.[4]

text: Filming[edit]

text: Other than Nicholson, the rest of the cast were working for scale, or a little above that.[clarification needed] Fletcher worked for 11 weeks, and made $10,000 before taxes.[6]

text: Filming began in January 1975, and concluded approximately three months later, and was shot on location in Salem, Oregon, and the surrounding area, as well as on the Oregon coast.[7][8][9]

text: The producers decided to shoot the film in the Oregon State Hospital, an actual mental hospital, as this was also the setting of the novel.[10] The hospital’s director, Dean Brooks, was supportive of the filming and eventually ended up playing the character of Dr. John Spivey in the film. Brooks identified a patient for each of the actors to shadow, and some of the cast even slept on the wards at night. He also wanted to incorporate his patients into the crew, to which the producers agreed. Douglas recalls that it wasn't until later that he found out that many of them were criminally insane.[4]

text: As Forman didn't allow the actors to see the day's filming, this led to the cast losing confidence in him, while Nicholson also began to wonder about his performance. Douglas convinced Forman to show Nicholson something, which he did, and restored the actor's confidence.[4]

text: Haskell Wexler was fired as cinematographer and replaced by Bill Butler. Wexler believed his dismissal was due to his concurrent work on the documentary Underground, in which the radical terrorist group The Weather Underground were being interviewed while hiding from the law. However, Miloš Forman said he had terminated Wexler over artistic differences. Both Wexler and Butler received Academy Award nominations for Best Cinematography for One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, though Wexler said there was "only about a minute or two minutes in that film I didn't shoot.”[11]

text: According to Butler, Jack Nicholson refused to speak to Forman: "...[Jack] never talked to Miloš at all, he only talked to me."[1]

text: Filming went over the initial budget of $2m and over-schedule, but Saul Zaentz, who was personally financing the movie, was able to fund this by borrowing against his company, Fantasy Records. The movie cost in total $4.4m to make.[4]

text: Reception[edit]

text: The film was met with overwhelming critical acclaim; Roger Ebert said "Miloš Forman's One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is a film so good in so many of its parts that there's a temptation to forgive it when it goes wrong. But it does go wrong, insisting on making larger points than its story really should carry, so that at the end, the human qualities of the characters get lost in the significance of it all. And yet there are those moments of brilliance."[12] Ebert would later put the film on his "Great Movies" list.[13] A.D. Murphy of Variety wrote a mixed review as well,[14] as did Vincent Canby: Writing in The New York Times, Canby called the film "a comedy that can't quite support its tragic conclusion, which is too schematic to be honestly moving, but it is acted with such a sense of life that one responds to its demonstration of humanity if not to its programmed metaphors".[15]

text: The film opens with original music by composer Jack Nitzsche, featuring an eerie bowed saw (performed by Robert Armstrong) and wine glasses. Commenting on the score, reviewer Steven McDonald has said, "The edgy nature of the film extends into the score, giving it a profoundly disturbing feel at times -- even when it appears to be relatively normal. The music has a tendency to always be a little off-kilter, and from time to time it tilts completely over into a strange little world of its own ..."[16]

text: The film went on to win the "Big Five" Academy Awards at the 48th Oscar ceremony. These include the Best Actor for Jack Nicholson, Best Actress for Louise Fletcher, Best Direction for Forman, Best Picture, and Best Adapted Screenplay for Lawrence Hauben and Bo Goldman. The film currently has a 95% "Certified Fresh" rating at Rotten Tomatoes, with an average rating of 9/10.[17] Its consensus states: "The onscreen battle between Jack Nicholson and Louise Fletcher serves as a personal microcosm of the culture wars of the 1970s - and testament to the director's vision that the film retains its power more than three decades later."

text: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is considered to be one of the greatest American films. Ken Kesey participated in the early stages of script development, but withdrew after creative differences with the producers over casting and narrative point of view; ultimately he filed suit against the production and won a settlement.[18] Kesey himself claimed never to have seen the movie, but said he disliked what he knew of it,[19] a fact confirmed by Chuck Palahniuk who wrote, "The first time I heard this story, it was through the movie starring Jack Nicholson. A movie that Kesey once told me he disliked."[20]

text: In 1993, this film was deemed "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" by the United States Library of Congress and selected for preservation in their National Film Registry.[21]

text: Awards and honors[edit]

text:
Award
Category
Nominee
Result

Academy Award
Academy Award for Best Picture
Michael Douglas and Saul Zaentz
Won

Academy Award for Best Director
Miloš Forman
Won

Academy Award for Best Actor
Jack Nicholson
Won

Academy Award for Best Actress
Louise Fletcher
Won

Academy Award for Writing Adapted Screenplay
Lawrence Hauben and Bo Goldman
Won

Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor
Brad Dourif
Nominated

Academy Award for Best Cinematography
Haskell Wexler and Bill Butler
Nominated

Academy Award for Best Film Editing
Richard Chew, Lyzee Klingman and Sheldon Kahn
Nominated

Academy Award for Original Music Score
Jack Nitzsche
Nominated

Golden Globe Award
Golden Globe Award for Best Motion Picture - Drama
Michael Douglas and Saul Zaentz
Won

Golden Globe Award for Best Director - Motion Picture
Miloš Forman
Won

Golden Globe Award for Best Actor - Motion Picture Drama
Jack Nicholson
Won

Golden Globe Award for Best Actress - Motion Picture Drama
Louise Fletcher
Won

Golden Globe Award for Best Screenplay
Lawrence Hauben and Bo Goldman
Won

Golden Globe Award for New Star of the Year - Actor
Brad Dourif
Won

BAFTA Award
BAFTA Award for Best Film
Michael Douglas and Saul Zaentz
Won

BAFTA Award for Best Direction
Miloš Forman
Won

BAFTA Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role
Jack Nicholson
Won

BAFTA Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role
Louise Fletcher
Won

BAFTA Award for Best Actor in a Supporting Role
Brad Dourif
Won

BAFTA Award for Best Editing
Richard Chew, Lynzee Klingman and Sheldon Kahn
Won

BAFTA Award for Best Cinematography
Haskell Wexler and Bill Butler
Nominated

BAFTA Award for Best Adapted Screenplay
Lawrence Hauben and Bo Goldman
Nominated

text: Others[edit]

text: American Film Institute

text:
AFI's 100 Years... 100 Movies - #20
AFI's 100 Years... 100 Heroes and Villains:

Nurse Ratched - #5 Villain
Randle Patrick McMurphy - Nominated Hero[22]

AFI's 100 Years... 100 Cheers - #17
AFI's 100 Years... 100 Movies (10th Anniversary Edition) - #33