Rae Sunshine Lee and now Dian Van Patten

  • 2
  • Problem
  • Updated 5 months ago
  • In Progress
  • (Edited)
This actress Rae Sunshine Lee https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0498314/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1 has been the subject of numerous verified cases of credit padding on literally dozens of unverifiableĀ  TV and Movie "uncredited" and false "Credited" roles.
To my surprise (or not actually) I have found a parallel career by this actress. Dian Van Patten,
From 1960 to 1971 they managed to be on the same TV shows in uncredited roles.
On THE SAME episodes even.
Also both had uncredited roles on 'Mary Poppins' (1964)
That cannot be coincidence. It is too far fetched.
They obviously know each other, as there are other instances of their careers intertwining over the decades.

But are Dian's credits as suspicious as Rae's are or is it that Rae's are even more suspicious now?

Anyone care to do some investigating and share the load?

Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23021 Posts
  • 27227 Reply Likes
  • Slueth mode!

Posted 6 months ago

  • 2
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23021 Posts
  • 27227 Reply Likes
This just presented itself.
The "Rita The Beater" credits that Rae uses are being used when they are clearly not an actual character name but a Character AKA for Rae's appearances by selfie or other means.
Here is the example.
They are from an exchange by the supposed producer of

He if it is truly him provided a cast list that is incomplete and does not match the cast list on IMDb.
User Vince Brando is his/? Get Satisfaction name.
The screen grab clearly does not correlate to the IMDb Cast List
As also can be seen Dian Van Patten as Valerie Starr is not listed in position #2
While the grab is incomplete it calls into question of the validity of the credits.
Please read the other get satisfaction topic if you would please.

Rae, no doubt has a lot of friends in the industry, but that is no reason for her to lend her good name to the productions of others so as to prop up a production with dubious participation in said production. With the addition of the internet video as a part of the database, the abuses by some have resulted in thousands of credits that are literally unverifiable. Those that take advantage of the weakness in the system will continue to do so.
Where the fix for this is, escapes me. The can is open. The worms have escaped.
The ignoring of this post is a little disheartening also.
It's as if no one cares that thumbs are being flung!
As this production is Released. It cannot be proven as such.
Maybe it is time to reign in the madness and only allow on small internet productions a verified cast list and a finished presented product with some "real" proof is provided.
This producer has admitted that it cannot be viewed anywhere and that he could not provide proof of a release that can easily be verified except by e-mail or a phone call.

Staff. please advise.
Should this be ???? What?
Not sure what to do with this title.
It needs a mass correction that likely would result in being rejected as unverifiable.

Please Help
Want to do the right thing here.
Photo of Jaime

Jaime, Employee

  • 678 Posts
  • 919 Reply Likes
Hi Ed

Thanks for the report.

I have opened a ticket of investigation into this for you.

The reference is #0307080098

We will get back to you once we have looked into this.

Have a great day!
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 22963 Posts
  • 27213 Reply Likes
Have fun.