Jump to content

Talk:Big Day

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

24 in sitcom?

[edit]

I remember seeing in an interview that the original concept for 24 was a sitcom, about wedding preparations in real time. This is from the creators themselves, and they said in in 24's True Hollywood Story on E!, if I'm not mistaken. --Surten (talk) 01:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Surten[reply]

Viewer Opinions

[edit]

1. What a stupid show. Marriage is a beautiful thing, you can't abuse it like those horse f****rs in Hollywood.

2. As a person who recently got married, this show was a wonderful, if exaggerated, portrayal of what the process was like. My wife and I loved it!

3. It's a marvelous show. I'm very dissapointed that it's been cancelled, because it was one of those few witty comedies, that have only very little no-brains humour. The script is great, the director is wonderful and the actors are superb, they all portray their characters a little exaggerately, which is exactly what they should be aiming for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.18.45.36 (talk) 15:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lineage

[edit]

Having seen some episodes, it rather looks like this show is a version of the UK BBC show The Worst Week of My Life, but with the timescale compressed from 7 days to 1 day, and the number of episodes augmented to meet US network requirements (the UK series had one episode for each day, as 7 episode series are acceptable in that market).

I have as yet not been able to verify my suspicion. --Bill Martin 00:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As no clear lineage between Big Day and Worst Week can be found -- although the latter predates the former -- a reference to similar story arcs has been added. Bill Martin (talk) 09:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Final Episode ?

[edit]

I know ABC never aired it, but does anyone know if the final episode (#13) is available anywhere? Thanks, Jaruzel (talk) 14:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move?

[edit]
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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved Mike Cline (talk) 13:29, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


– This series was short-lived, and I don't think this series is popular enough to be the primary topic. In fact, I don't find other entries in the disambiguation page as primary. Moreover, reality series have become critically panned nowadays. Should I give you popularity statistics already? <relisted--Mike Cline (talk) 14:14, 29 February 2012 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 12:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, since it's plausible that a short-lived series is the primary topic for a title (especially one in which none of the other dab page entries are at the title with a qualifier, but rather are translations of the title or just mentioned in other articles. That will make it hard to determine their "popularity" for this title, since none of them have this title. Or you might have traction turning The Big Day into a dab (or moving Big Day (disambiguation) there), to disambiguate the French film from the Cantopop album, but those would be "beside" Big Day. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Big Day, The Big Day, The Big Day (disambiguation), Big Day (disambiguation), and Big Days (TV episode). --George Ho (talk) 21:17, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You should use data from prior months, so it won't skew because of the move request. But that looks like evidence for opposing the move, right? -- JHunterJ (talk) 22:12, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
January 2012: Big Day, French film and its redirect, and Big Days (TV episode). By the way, believe what you want, but do these evidences support the move? --George Ho (talk) 22:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, no, since they are for distinct titles that don't need qualifiers ("Big Day", "The Big Day", "Big Days"). And thank you for leave to believe what I want. -- JHunterJ (talk) 22:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Big Day. 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.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Big_Day&oldid=1200004074"