Jump to content

Talk:2015 in film/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. Other editors may wish to create a new article called 2016 in film. EdJohnston (talk) 05:19, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

2015 and beyond in film → 2015 in film – Having a film year "and beyond" article is pointless; if we already HAVE RELIABLE RESOURCES for films in multiple future years. It's just going to be split later anyway. Let's maintain histories and use a consistent article naming scheme. — AMK152 (t • c) 01:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

This move was proposed at WP:RM/TR. I copied it over here since it is potentially controversial. EdJohnston (talk) 03:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
My reasoning is because we keep splitting the article anyways as each year goes by. Even the 2013 in film article was redirected to a "Near future in film" article that listed 2013 films. Now those films are being released and are part of a larger list. I don't know what the rationale was behind doing this the way it is being done. If it fails WP:CRYSTAL, then we should removed all 2015 and 2016 films anyways. If it is because of an article (2016 in film) listing just a few films, that reason seems not to make sense. In 2016, when we have a full list of films, the shortness of the article will not be questioned, as the 2013 article was when I first redirected it in 2008. I would love to hear a logical reason, because I cannot find one. Let's keep page histories by year all together. Let's keep the naming scheme consistent. — AMK152 (t • c) 05:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: I think the point is that until there are enough referenced films for 2016 and subsequent years to satisfy WP:GNG, we should hold them here. It might not make sense to have a list article just for a couple of entries. Unless there is somewhere better to put them for the time being.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:55, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Actually what if just move it to 2015 in film and still maintain a "beyond" section here?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:57, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

New Year's Eve 2

Request me New Year's Eve 2. It will be released on December 2, 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C:780:537:D32:9D3D:D6AD:99 (talk) 02:32, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source for that? - SummerPhD (talk) 15:32, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Shaun the sheep the movie

Aardman's STS is out on March 20, 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.98.167.114 (talk) 12:55, 1 November 2013 (UTC) The Movie comes out in 5 days — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fearsear (talk • contribs) 21:41, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Life's a treat

Shaun the sheep has moved up to February 6 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.102.93.78 (talk) 16:23, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Foreigns

Paddington, Coming Home, Underdogs, Wild Tales, What We Do in the Shadows, Beloved Sisters and '71 are foreign productions with the release date either in 2014 or earlier, it should not be on the 2015 worldwide list because the US release date is in 2015. DCF94 (talk) 00:29, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

If BoxOffice Mojo is the source for the highest grossing films of 2015, then shouldn't those movies be included in the section since that is what the site has? --JoseCamachoJr (talk) 03:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
BOM always goes by the US release date, which in fact isn't correct, a movie's official release date is the one of it's original production country. DCF94 (talk) 13:07, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
What About a US film that was released in a different country in before that? 'Seventh Son' was released in Hungary in 2014. If we are going only by the release date in the origin country that means that for now Seventh son is the highest grossing film of the year (22,000,000).89.139.67.133 (talk) 08:55, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I think it should be by first release date, even if it was in a country other than the producing country. By the way, because BOM doesn't include in the chart films that haven't been released in the US, many Chinese films aren't included and so need to be added with other sources.--Cattus talk 19:14, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Yeah but we are using the date the film is released in the producing country (Taken 3 for instnce) for the schedule so why use a diffrent rule for the BO money? 80.178.138.130 (talk) 20:29, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I've added "PLEASE ONLY INCLUDE FILMS FIRST RELEASED IN 2015", because there were films from 2014 being added to the table, probably because they were released in the US in 2015.--Cattus talk 18:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

So, what is the criteria? Is it the first release date anywhere or first release date in the producing country? If it's the last, Seventh Son should be included. Like I've said, I prefer the first release date anywhere, but either way, this should be clear.--Cattus talk 19:00, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment Since this is a global chart, only films released globally after January 1, 2015 should be added to the list. Films like Paddington are 2014 releases. The Box Office Mojo chart is an important source for the chart but we shouldn't be replicating it exactly because it is problematic in some respects: i) it omits films not released theatrically in the United States; ii) the qualification criteria is determined by the US release date. Paddington for instance, was released in 2014 in many territories so for the purposes of a worldwide chart it counts as a 2014 release. For various national charts it would be ranked in the year it is released i.e. 2014 for the UK and 2015 for the US, but for a global chart and consistency the year in which the film begins its box-office run should be used, otherwise it becomes arbitrary. Betty Logan (talk) 12:32, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Then Taken 3 and The Woman in Black 2 should not be on the list, Taken 3 was released in Berlin, Germany on Dec 16[1] and WiB was released in Dubai, UAE on Dec 30 and in Kuwait on Dec 31[2] DCF94 (talk) 17:43, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
they premiered on those dates they weren't released to the public. Dman41689 (talk) 07:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
In that case, we need to go back through 2014 in film. Off the top of my head, both American Sniper and Selma are listed under their AFI premiere dates. Either that stands and both Taken 3 and The Woman in Black 2 leave this list, or it doesn't and we need to go through and fix everything from earlier. Sock (tock talk) 13:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2446042/releaseinfo?ref_=tt_dt_dt
  2. ^ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2339741/releaseinfo?ref_=tt_dt_dt.

Kingsman: The Secret Service

The release date for the film Kingsman: The Secret Service is 29 January 2015 not 13 February 2015.

Beyond the Mask

Hi, The movie Beyond the Mask is going to be released April 6th. I didn't see it on the list, so, I thought I'd mention it. Here's a link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2433040/ Thanks 64.85.217.174 (talk) 02:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)P.L.S

there needs to be a wiki page for it to be on the list. Redsky89 (talk) 04:56, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
the page has been made and is now on the list Redsky89 (talk) 07:11, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Monty Oum

Monty Oum should be listed among the notable deaths. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.5.184 (talk) 04:19, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

No he didnt work on any films he did webs shows Redsky89 (talk) 04:54, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Premiere Date over actual wide Release Date?

Why is it that we use the premiere date like in minions on june 11 over the actual release date of july 10, this to me would create confusion to the public as they are on generally aware of the wide release date? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.184.76 (talk) 13:09, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

it goes by the premiere date just like it says on their pages and how is it confusing when it is released earlier in different countries other then the U.S. Redsky89 (talk) 04:24, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Minions movie

It says Minions Universal Studios / Illumination Entertainment

But in my contry its only made by Universal Studios so can someone remove Illumination Entertainment please A8v (talk) 09:56, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

The movie is made by the same companies in every country. Seeing as Illumination Entertainment is the company that did actually produced the film and created all of the animation, you are mistaken in saying that only Universal made it. Universal usually doesn't actually make movies, it finances and distributes them. It is appropriate to leave Illumination. Sock (tock talk) 11:29, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

List markup

I changed the raw bullets to horizontal lists per wp:accessibility. please discuss here if there is a problem. Frietjes (talk) 18:03, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

jane's got a gun will distribute by the weinstein company due to their original distributor relativity media had filed for bankruptcy

American Release Dates Page

Given these pages are subject to flip-flopping between the U.S. release dates and world wide release dates, I feel that there should be a second page established exclusively for U.S. Release dates while the existing pages should be retooled for world wide release dates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.155.225.1 (talk) 17:55, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I have now set all films currently listed on this page to their original release dates, rather than the American ones. Obviously there is still far too much of a dominance of American films, and many more need to be added. Willowandglass (talk) 18:18, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Accessibility

Tables are not my strong suit, but I don't believe the giant tables with giant rowspans and obnoxious

v
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

text separated by <br/>s are accessible to screen readers. Please see WP:DTT. I could be wrong, though. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:53, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, template:rotated text? Frietjes (talk) 15:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
A very smart suggestion, Frietjes, (I wasn't aware of that template) but I fear that the requirement that Firefox users have to enable the functionality manually might create more problems that we want. And I think that the rowspans are the bigger problem. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:42, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Cyphoidbomb, the Firefox warning is out-of-date, as far as I can tell. I use Firefox and had to do no such thing. Frietjes (talk) 16:44, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Dates are wrong?

I'm quite sure that some of the dates are incorrect (I'm quite sure Jurassic World came out in June, not May). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.28.119.53 (talk) 18:09, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Per WP:FILMYEAR, films are listed by their earliest release date (such as a premier date), not by their wide release date. Jurassic World had its premier on May 29th, so that is the date it is listed on, even though its wide release wasn't until June. Calathan (talk) 18:27, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
One could make a career trying to fix the dates in these lists. Easy to miss the small films like Star Wars 7, which is listed by date of wide release, rather than premiere. Kid Bugs (talk) 00:06, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

MOS:LARGENUM

Is there a reason why we're enduring almost daily updates to the box office totals when MOS:LARGENUM prefers a condensing of the values, especially where the uncertainty information is unknown (margin of error) and where the accuracy is of no specific value? I condensed these numbers a while back, but some editor(s) restored them with no explanation. We certainly don't need the constant updating. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

You may wish to be aware of the discussion at Talk:Skyfall, where when last I looked, there was a consensus to use the short billion, but none yet on how many decimal figures to append. You probably want some level of consistency aross all articles citing box office figures. Samsara 06:14, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Using this makes the page lie. Jurassic World has not mad 1.7 billion dollars. It has made 1,668,912,312 according to the last update on Box Office Mojo. This is the first year that this has been used and I personally find it misleading.98.240.126.68 (talk) 16:42, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Change can be painful, and rounded values are not lies. Thankfully we have references like Box Office Mojo to satisfy people who are hungry for down-to-the-dollar box office values. If you think we need an additional decimal figure, I'm not outright opposed to that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Page protection

This article is temporarily page-protected to encourage communication about the disputed content. Please all parties use this opportunity to make your case. There is a section already provided above for doing so. Thanks, Samsara 06:18, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

This film will be released one day earlier in Germany. --Jobu0101 (talk) 14:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

That's all well and good, but this page only has the American release dates, this might be noteworthy to point out in the article itself. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 18:29, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
If that is the case you should definitely point that out in the article. --Jobu0101 (talk) 21:41, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
American release date I thought it was suppose to be the films first release date or premiere date. Jkl2299 (talk) 06:41, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
After checking a bit more, yeah you're right. I was wrong on that one. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 11:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
So does that mean that we should change it to the German release date because it is earlier? --Jobu0101 (talk) 09:42, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
There are pages for American films, but they hardly get used and do not seem to be complete. I notice that Star Wars: The Force Awakens, although stated to be an American film, is not listed. Kid Bugs (talk) 02:38, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

List of years in film

I write this in this way on page 2015 in film because if you look at all previous pages (see List of years in film) such us about years in films 2014 in film 2013 in film 2012 in film e.t.c. are written in this way. Why all this pages are written in this way? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.86.255.196 (talk) 19:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

You should have posted these comments days ago. The place for you to explain your disruptive behavior is at WP:ANI. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
As I pointed out on my talk page, just because other pages are one way doesn't mean this page should be that way. And if anything this means the style should change on these other pages as well. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 19:23, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. And for the record, in early November, I changed these values in the 2015 article as well as in 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, and 2010, but they were all silently reverted by this IP editor, which underscores how problematic silent reversions are. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:40, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
I noticed something, the discussion was at the WikiProject, not here. So yeah, there was no excuse to start an edit war over this. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 19:41, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
I brought the matter up at the WikiProject because it was a more intuitive place to hold a discussion that would impact multiple articles. But as noted, MOS:LARGENUM already represents greater Wikipedia community consensus. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:19, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

The Himalayas

The Himalayas (film) in it's second weekend beat Star Wars: The Force Awakens' opening weekend in South Korea [1], but is not even listed here. Kid Bugs (talk) 02:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Dugun Dernek 2: Sunnet in it's third week beat Star Wars: The Force Awakens in Turkey. All other countries reported on Box Office Mojo at this time show the Star Wars film as number one for it's first weekend, but several do not show detailed ranking. Kid Bugs (talk) 05:22, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Studio?

Does it refer to the production companies of a movie instead of the distributor? I think Jurassic World isn't produced by Universal but Amblin Entertainment and Legendary Pictures. In dialogue with Biomedicinal 11:40 on 30 December 2015 (UTC)

In film articles the "studio" traditionally refers to the production company. We actually changed it to "production company" precisely because of the confusion it causes. Betty Logan (talk) 15:42, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I see but most of those on the top ten list here are wrong then. They're all the distribution companies. Shall we fix them? In dialogue with Biomedicinal 15:15 on 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, whatever it is supposed to be I think it should be explicit (either production company or distributor) and it should match the respective field in the film article infobox. You could drop a note to the most frequent article editors and ask them for their views on this. Betty Logan (talk) 15:51, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Hitchcock/Truffaut

Is there any reason why Hitchcock/Truffaut (film) is not on this list? It was first shown at Cannes 2015/05/19, and has been in limited domestic (US/Can) release since 2015/12/02. Kid Bugs (talk) 13:43, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Sometimes things aren't on the list simply for the reason they haven't been added. There are probably hundreds of releases every year that are not added to these articles. If I were you I would add it and if someone has a valid reason for it not being there they can always revert with an explanation in the edit summary. Betty Logan (talk) 14:32, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm okay with minor corrections and stuff, but I have found WP:ISPC (Is Pissing Contest), and I ain't gonna waste my time on that. Kid Bugs (talk) 15:23, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm not following. Is someone actually challenging its inclusion? Betty Logan (talk) 15:46, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, probably should not have made the note as a question. Just pointing it out in case anyone wants to do the legwork to properly add the film to the article. Kid Bugs (talk) 23:38, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2015_in_film/Archive_1&oldid=1142388923"