Jump to content

Talk:A Hard Day's Night (film)/Archive 1

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

Video CD

I can't fill in any of the details, but from what I remember this was one of the first films to come on Video CD - or at least it was one of the first films to be released on Video CD outside Japan. I remember back in 1994-ish there was a concerted but doomed effort by various manufacturers to make Video CD take off in the UK, and along with Kate Bush's The Whole Story and Star Trek VI this was one of the launch titles for the Phillips CDi, Commodore CDTV and Amiga CD32 etc. Unfortunately I was only a small child at the time and I can't find an authoritative source. -Ashley Pomeroy 21:25, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

main shot in article

are you sure the harrison & boyd shot you have up is a screenshot from the movie?? i don't remember george harrison & pattie boyd sitting next to each other in any scene in the movie...so maybe it's a shot from the set?? =S 70.30.164.129 21:23, 21 November 2005 (UTC) veronica

A photograph of Harrison and a woman who might be Boyd asleep on the train also appears in Roy Carr’s Beatles at the Movies, page 29. The image appears rather candid, possibly suggesting the authenticity of the above photo as being taken from the actual film has reasons for dispute. 207.81.164.238 22:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Mockumentary?

A Hard Day's Night does not quite fit the mold of mockumentaries. The dialogue in mockumentaries tends to be improvved. Almost everything in this film was scripted (save for the sequence to "Can't Buy Me Love"). Swatson1978 23:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

A "Mockumentary" is simply a fake documentary. Whatever other specifics each one has in it are not defining rules but the director's preferences.

Is not a mock documentary--which phrase, nor even concept I daresay, nor the word mockumentary even existed in 1964---defined by having NON performers as the main characters.......Hence the "fakeness"?....

Since the Beatles were the real group, the movie is a comedy containing them, with some fun performances? just asking....67.163.141.14 (talk) 12:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not keen on "Mockumentary" either, it just doesn't seem to fit that mould. The humour is more the Beatles' natural style, as opposed to that of Spinal Tap. "Mock documentary" falls into the same trap. Suggest we lose "mock", because the style of Lester's direction is more "fly on the wall" than the usual involved style of other mockumentaries, and principally it is not knowing, as are The Office and Spinal Tap. Lester does not break the fourth wall to any great degree. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 13:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I too disagree that it's a "Mock documentary", because the film crew of a true mock documentary/mockumentary are implicitly a presence in the film; as Rodhullandemu points out, This Is Spinal Tap and The Office are true mockumentaries because the film crew are acknowledged as a presence by the characters. A Hard Day's Night is, by contrast, a stylised and ironically self-aware comedy. At one point, Paul McCartney does break the fourth wall (when he points a hairdryer at the camera and shouts 'Zap!') but elsewhere the conceit seems to have planned around the Beatles' limitations as actors and strengths as personalities: the Beatles give the impression that they are self-consciously playing themselves in a movie, but nobody else in the movie is aware that they are fictional characters. So I would argue that A Hard Day's Night is in no way a mock documentary. In fact, given that Lester and his crew sometimes drew on documentary elements for effect (such as shooting real crowds of genuine Beatle fans), the film is a mixture of fictional comedy and genuine documentary. Lexo (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

OK I am confused

WP:Beatles thinks B class but WP:Films thinks Start? Huh? Are we Beatlemaniacs overgenerous? Are the filmies overharsh? Grin. I'm confused. ++Lar: t/c 01:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Not sure, but it looks a little better than Start class to me. Start/B, either way is not good enough so the discrepancy doesn't matter too much. I notice they wanted to rate it High on importance but their template's importance feature seems to be either missing or faulty. --kingboyk 16:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Roger Ebert Review of Film

This is Roger Ebert's review of the film for use in the article [1] - last accessed 1 November, 2006. LuciferMorgan 22:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Film review

I am adding this reference November 23, 2006, in the event that references are required in future for this page. Carr, Roy. Beatles at the Movies. (New York: HarperCollins, 1996), p.43, 53. 207.81.164.238 22:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

It might be worthwhile to list various occasions whence this film has been referred to or parodied over the years. I can provide three examples. The opening scenes of the first Austin Powers, as well as those parodied in a preview for Goldmember, are directly lifted from The Beatles’ madcap escape from their fans that serves to open this film. Also, in an episode of Eek The Cat, Eek drops into the first sequence on the train, where The Beatles admire Paul’s grandfather. Finally, in an episode of Family Ties, the family returns from having just seen the film; the children did not like it. (Mchelada 19:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC))

Fair use rationale for Image:HardDaysNight.jpg

Image:HardDaysNight.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

GA

With the right references this film could easily be a GA.--andreasegde (talk) 11:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Are the photos from Commons really free-use? They're just phtos of the cover, and are not free-use, but fair-use, methinks.--andreasegde (talk) 12:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
This is a great article, and with a little cleaning up, could be nominated soon! Just trying to rally up some support, Andreasedge. Kodster (Talk) 02:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Successful good article nomination

I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of April 5, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Pass
2. Factually accurate?: Pass
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass
4. Neutral point of view?: Pass
5. Article stability?: Pass
6. Images?: Pass

If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. Realist2 (talk) 20:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Why?

Listen, I am currently, in English, studying the Beatles, during this lesson, we began to see the movie, and he pauses at the part (opening credits) where the Beatle trips, and explains about it, well I decided to add that little peice of info for everyone to know that, so please, will someone undo the edit that Rodhullandemu undid? Here's the info, just copy and paste (go to edit, then goe to the trivia section i added, then copy and paste when it is authorized):

This would need a reliable source, not just watching the film, because this constitutes original research. Also, Trivia sections are deprecated and the information can go into the article body- if a source for it can be found. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 04:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Ah, thank you.

Colonel Valh ala-112 02:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

In the opening credits of the movie, one of the Beatles trips and falls on accident. This shot was originally meant to be deleted, but was then decided later to be kept. Also, if you closely after the Beatle trips and falls, you can see the crowd chasing them laugh.

That's George Harrison falling, and he almost takes Ringo Starr down with him. I've never noticed the laughing crowd, though. 174.0.46.168 (talk) 18:36, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

He doesn't almost take Ringo down they both end up on the floor, I've just replayed the intro. Stub Mandrel (talk) 23:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

On review (on hold)

I am reviewing this article today.Realist2 (talk) 07:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

To do list

  • Sort out red links
 Completed
  • Remove IMDd link , its unreliable
 Completed - no longer used as a source
  • Remove unfree image
 Completed
  • Release history section completely unsourced, why?
 Completed
  • Information on the locations would be better merged into the backdround section.
 Completed
  • Generally the article is insufficiantly sourced. I could go through it with citation tags ....
 Completed hopefull all covered now

Hum i will put this article onhold, it must be sourced better. If you dont think you can resolve these issues within 7-10 days let me know. Realist2 (talk) 07:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

GA 2nd opinion

Just to clarify a couple of things:

 Completed removed, unnecessary
  • Redlinks are acceptable if an article could feasibly be created from them. The only redlink I see is to a notable role (a film producer), which is OK for GA.
 Completed
  • Agree that the IMDb reference should be replaced with a [{WP:RS|reliable source]]. Shouldn't be too difficult as the point it supports is quite broad.
 Completed
  • Locations should not only be merged, it should be written in prose.
 Completed
  • Similarly, the awards should be written in prose and sourced.
 Completed
  • "New York Times film critic Bosley Crowther..." needs referencing
 Completed
  • "After six weeks the film had grossed $5.8 million in rentals." paragraph needs referencing.
Rejected removed, no source
  • "David Crosby admits, “I came out [of the theater] and swung..." needs referencing, as does other points in this paragraph.
Rejected removed, no source
  • As Realist2 says, generally it is unsourced. I have only listed a few examples.
 Completed
  • Single years should not be wikilinked -- only when in full dates.
 Completed

Hope this helps. The JPStalk to me 09:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

More:

  • Formatting quotations like that makes it look fragmented. Just integrate them within the text. The quotation in the lead particularly looks odd and is itself perhaps a little too specific for the lead.
 Completed
  • The above is especially true of the 'plot' section, which ahs some very short paragraphs.
 Completed
  • Lose the 'Academy awards' subheading -- reception will accommodate it nicely, and write in prose.
 Completed
  • "The film is also credited with being a precursor of pop music videos." Paragraph too short. Suggest combining with previous paragraph.
 Completed moved to "Influence" & expanded.
  • Television, film and magazine titles should be italicised.
 Completed
  • Could you make more use of the Ebert article?
 Completed expanded "Influence heading"
  • I've replied to Rodhull...'s question about the IMDb on my talk page.
 Completed
  • Keep the Allmovie etc. links as external links, not references. References should be indicated at the relevant point.
 Completed moved
  • Lose the Ebert External link as he is listed in references.
 Completed

The JPStalk to me 17:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

side comment to 2nd opinion

  • Yes I did just mean that picture, sorry if that wasnt clear.
  • There are a number of citations required and i have offered to add citation tags to the article if needs be (this offer was mad at their talk pages as well). I dont intend to list the vast number of citation problems, im sure these experienced editors who often review articles themselves dont need that level of spoon feeding. Realist2 (talk) 11:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Good Article reviewing is a read-only process and does not extend to adding [citation needed] tags. These issues should be addressed in the review. And, no, we need neither spoon-feeding nor patronising nor insults. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 13:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure thanx for the heads ups. Realist2 (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

What's all this about??? I had no problem at all when Realist2 put "citation needed" on the articles he reviewed for me. It saved his time, and mine, by not him not writing, and me not reading reams of stuff. Whatever may have gone on in the past is complete bollards now, because Realist2 and Kodster are two editors that I have a lot of respect for. These editors are working for free, don't forget, and are doing some really good work. Okay? Okay.--andreasegde (talk) 12:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Its ok we've had a massive argument "AGAIN" but its cleared the air, Rodhullandemu wasnt aware that i had grown up was all, he was understandably concerned about my own pov biases but i think ive put him clear on where i stand. He can trust me to reach an impartial view. I was asked to review the article personally, im so happy and glad that people i have argued with in the past have gone to such lengths to forgive and forget and to also respect my views. ;-) Realist2 (talk) 16:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Upon reading this article, I think it's great. Definitely worth a GA! Sorry I couldn't really work on this, having nominated this. Thanks to Realist2, The JPS, Rodhull..., and all involved! Great job!
Realist2, your call. Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 19:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

If everyone is finished working i'd be happy to review it, i think rodhull wants to make more adjustements though ? Realist2 (talk) 19:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I think at present all it really needs is sources for the Releases section. Everything else is covered, I think. I was going to take a short break to watch the last "Torchwood" & return refreshed a little later. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 19:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Ha. sounds good, i would rather wait till your sure your finished, im in no rush. Realist2 (talk) 19:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, this sounds more like it. You are all good people and it fills my heart with joy (a little bit too poetic, no?) to read such nice words. May your sails be forever pushed to the west (that is not only too poetic, but confusing - please forgive me). Have fun. :) --andreasegde (talk) 23:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
"May your sails be forever pushed to the west". Are you telling them to move to this rotten place? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kodster (talk • contribs) 18:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Poetry !!!!!!, another talent andreasegde ? Realist2 (talk) 00:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Update

OK im going to look through it all now and mention any further corrections (if any) needed. This will take some time but I would appreciate it if everyone let me finish my job before commenting or making further edits to the article. Cheers. Realist2 (talk) 17:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. You can always put an {{inuse}} tag on the article while you're doing this. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 17:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
  • OK there IS still red links for the producer, i really think they should be removed for an article that is this good.
 Completed OK, leave it as it is for now, although redlinks are not fatal to a GA status
  • There is still a link to IMDd at the Right hand side, can we just do away with it, it weakens the credibility of the article.
 Completed has been removed
  • Again on the RHS, uncredited music by ... (in the brackets), just delete it, its far to specific.
 Completed
  • Remove the "Beatlemania" word, i think its in the article twice, its not prefessional, just say "at the peak of their popularity" with a link to beatlemania.
 Completed
  • "he had shown a knack for Liverpudlian dialogue" - is knack english slang? alter that word.
 Completed "talent" might be better, or link to [here] - changed to "aptitude", less colloquial but less clumsy than "adeptness"
  • McCartney's grandfather causes minor drama at a casino - doesnt quite work. Needs rewording
 Completed left as it is, but is he "McCartney's" grandfather? Paul is playing a character- "Paul". He is not credited as "McCartney" in the cast list, although it is obviously him.
  • Is the dialogue sub heading nessary, its only 3 lines long, unless you intend to expand it???
 Completed merged, probably not worth a sub-heading of its own
  • Make sure pounds and dollars are correctly wiki linked.
 Completed - done, but only needs doing once, if at all.
  • There are about 3 dates in the production section that need wiki dating.
 Completed
  • The reception section would look better as a sold paragraph, it looks disjointed.
 Completed - recast but Crowther's is long enough to stand on its own.

Sorry, Realist2, I undid your edits by accident. You'll have to do them again. I fixed the majority of the things you said. :) Please feel free to talk to me on my for any comments. Cheers, Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 18:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, theres a few things on the list left to do, kodster handled the ones crossed out. Let me know when they are done. Realist2 (talk) 19:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Some notes: We don't need {{fact}} tags when what is asserted can be verified through a Wikilink; this would just clog up the whole of the encyclopedia. Have replaced a piece of plot because otherwise there would be a reference without a target. Have removed "studio thought that their fame would not last beyond the summer", on the basis that it's not essential, no idea how it can be sourced anyway, and it's not critical to the article. All looks fine now. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 19:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Final review

Part1 (A=Pass B=Pass) - Well written, correct style and formatt.

Part2 (A=Pass B=Pass C=Pass) - Well sourced, correctly formatted, no original material.

Part3 (A=Pass B=Pass) - Broad, covers the main points without going off point.

Part4 (A=Pass) - Neutral

Part5 (A=Pass) - Stable

Part6 (A=Pass B=Pass) - Good pictures with good captions.

GA PASSED!


Well done folks!!! - --Realist2 (talk) 19:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Realist2! We got there. I've put the template at the top, you just need to swap my sig for yours. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 19:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Good the thing is even if im being a little strict, it just makes FA easier ;-) Realist2 (talk) 20:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

And I hope your opinion of me has changed,,,, at least a little. Realist2 (talk) 20:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Very much, in fact. I apologise for misreading your motives. Let's move on to the next GA Nom. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 20:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan, mi amiga/o ! Realist2 (talk) 20:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This is what I call really nice. Is this what happens when I stop editing?--andreasegde (talk) 20:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Only when, not because. Thanks for your input, plenty more work around the corner! --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 20:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

My heart is overflowing with.... (wait a minute, I'Ll think of something :)--andreasegde (talk) 21:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

You have such a way with words, Andreasegde, just like a true poet. :) Cheers, Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 22:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Great job, sorry I missed the celebration! What with A Day in the Life, Thriller, etc. etc. Another GA for Wikipedia! Cheers, Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 22:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Novelisation

Having managed to score a copy of the novelisation, I added a very basic section about it. I don't know if that's the right place to put it, so feel free to put it somewhere else if you can think of a more appropriate place. Not much to say about the novelisation except that it's by a British hack writer named John Burke who's written a lot of other novelisations besides, and like most novelisations it has all the evidence of being based on an earlier draft than the one that was shot. e.g., The press conference is a scene in the book but none of the Beatles' quips from the film are in it; instead there are what looks like attempts, probably by Alun Owen, to think up Beatleoid quips that were probably replaced on the day of shooting. Still, I am a bit of a connoisseur of the novelisation and I was glad to find a copy of this one. Lexo (talk) 00:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Discussion pertaining to non-free image(s) used in article

A cleanup page has been created for WP:FILMS' spotlight articles. One element that is being checked in ensuring the quality of the articles is the non-free images. Currently, one or more non-free images being used in this article are under discussion to determine if they should be removed from the article for not complying with non-free and fair use requirements. Please comment at the corresponding section within the image cleanup listing. Before contributing the discussion, please first read WP:FILMNFI concerning non-free images. Ideally the discussions pertaining to the spotlight articles will be concluded by the end of June, so please comment soon to ensure there is clear consensus. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:14, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Citation needed for Charlotte Rampling appearance

I added a "fact" tag to the reference to Rampling being in the film. I have been unable to find any reputable online source indicating she appeared in the film. Not even the IMDb lists this. And the fan sites - as well a Rampling's Wikipedia article - all say she made her film debut in another Richard Lester film, The Knack in 1965. 68.146.81.123 (talk) 04:10, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Paddington Station?

Surely Paddington Station would be too busy to film at? http://www.movie-locations.com/movies/h/harddaysnight.html mentions Lime St Station and Marylebourne Station, though it does say they meant to be at Paddington, which may be why the confusion lies.

Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.195.50 (talk) 14:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The article is incorrect when it says filming was at Paddington. The location was Marylebone. --Kstern999 (talk) 17:57, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Bound for Where?

The wiki article under "Plot" states "Bound for a Liverpool show, the Beatles escape a horde of fans". Next paragraph starts "On arrival in London". It was my understanding that the opening, while filmed in London, was meant to represent Liverpool Lime Street Station, and the boys are departing from Liverpool, and in fact are bound for a London show.[1] But I'm no Beatles scholar. Kzirkel (talk) 13:15, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Brit vs US currency

The article says it cost so many pounds, but the box office was so many dollars. This is unencyclopedic and puzzling. What was the 1964 exchange rate? One of the cost figures should be converted to give the reader some idea of how profitable it was. The figure for box office is not a sensible one, since the reference cited states that it starts in 1982, 18 years after the film premiered. It is pretty much a meaningless and misleading figure, and "Unknown" would be more accurate. It was a famous and popular and widely seen film, though it appeared to have been made on a minimal production budget, save perhaps the salaries for the musical group. Edison (talk) 03:39, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on A Hard Day's Night (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:17, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on A Hard Day's Night (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:02, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:A Hard Day's Night (film)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I rated this article B-Class for the sole reason of that it didn't site it's references. I rated it High on the importance scale because it was one of the few Beatles films.Vint 04:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
The film project rated High on importance also, but I don't think we can rate this "B". -- Shane (talk/contrib) 16:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 16:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 06:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on A Hard Day's Night (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:02, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on A Hard Day's Night (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

"Mockumentary"

It seems to have gotten fashionable to call AHDN the "first mockumentary" or refer to its supposed "documentary quality" as some kind of first, ever since for marketing purposes a VHS or DVD edition of it from the 90s or later has called it a "mockumentary" on the back cover blurb just to sell more copies due to using a fashionable term. All that just because the film purports to be showing a few days in the lifes of The Beatles in a way that's most obviously fictional, being a style of narration which had been known from Hollywood musicals about music stars before, such as the films Elvis Presley and Frank Sinatra had made in the 50s and early 60s, or The Girl Can't Help It (1956), the latter being an important influence upon the early lads as to how they imagined music stardom and they've also all cited it as an important conceptual influence upon AHDN in the Beatles Anthology.

In any case, AHDN lacks all the features of an actual mockumentary, or a traditional documentary as they had been made until then, such as a narrator or verbal narration, many long (often hand-held) takes, interviews led by the film's director or crew who are asking questions, and camera angles/photography that would be considered sub-standard for traditional fiction work, all of which are the basic features of mockumentaries at least since Monty Python's Flying Circus (1969-74), Lenny (1974), and All You Need Is Cash (1978). Indeed, if you define a "mockumentary" as any film with somebody portraying a fictionalized version of themselves as a main character or a stage/screen persona under their IRL name, as is obviously being done to refer to AHDN as such, you could even argue that the first "mockumentaries" were made by Charlie Chaplin.

Overall, this is an issue that concerns our articles music video and mockumentary, both claiming that AHDN would be pretty much the "first mockumentary" or would be the "first fiction feature with documentary qualities". But I'm putting it here because this is the central talkpage for the film itself. --2003:71:4E6A:B425:68BE:24D3:6E60:5230 (talk) 18:03, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

The question for Wikipedia is whether there are reliable sources calling it a "mockumentary" or not. I don't think DVD covers and other marketing materials qualify. I notice that the article Mockumentary is pretty poorly sourced and has no sourcing for many of the supposed examples of a mockumentary, including A Hard Day's Night. I think you could justify removing that example from that article until someone comes up with sources. My personal opinion is that AHDN does not "feel" like a mockumentary, but that's not the standard for our articles. Neutron (talk) 20:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on A Hard Day's Night (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:51, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on A Hard Day's Night (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:36, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on A Hard Day's Night (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:43, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Cocaine Reference

Presumably the 'small reference to cocaine' is when Lennon sniffs a bottle of Coca-Cola on the train? Stub Mandrel (talk) 23:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Spy films

I'm puzzled by the statement that Hard Day's Night inspired spy films. Doesn't seem to have much espionage in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dynzmoar (talk • contribs) 14:22, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Just Wiki being Wiki. 2600:4040:5D38:1600:7C60:F852:F943:7353 (talk) 12:41, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
  1. ^ http://www.movie-locations.com/movies/h/harddaysnight.html#.U7qc241dUsw
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:A_Hard_Day%27s_Night_(film)/Archive_1&oldid=1258406100"