Talk:Mr. Peabody & Sherman

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Animated films task force.
	This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. Please ensure that non-free content guidelines are properly observed.

United States: Animation / Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Animation portal This article is supported by WikiProject Animation - American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Animation: American / Films / Computer / DreamWorks Animation Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Animated films work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Computer animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the DreamWorks Animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

plot

Could anyone here that's British and has seen the film add the full plot, please? Visokor (talk) 13:45, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UK Premier date

Did this film actually play in any theaters in the UK on Feb 7? The source is from last October and all it says is that the film will premier on February 7, but no updated source to confirm that date. JOJ ^Hutton 21:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep it premiered on February 7. Koala15 (talk) 00:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ya but where is the source?JOJ ^Hutton 00:42, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can see it in the release section. Koala15 (talk) 03:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That source also says that it "will" premier. I'm looking for a source that confirms that it "did" premier. Something a little "after the fact". And then the sources need to be updated.--JOJ ^Hutton 12:59, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here is one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2565839/Ariel-Winter-Ty-Burrell-pose-Sydney-premiere-new-film-Mr-Peabody-And-Sherman.html. --Carniolus (talk) 14:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes it does say that, but the source is a bit vague. I was hoping to see a source about the event itself. These premiers tend to get lots of press, but somehow nobody covered it? Seems a bit fishy. JOJ ^Hutton 20:56, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They had a gala screening on February 1, and here you can see some photos from the event (some of them show the UK poster, which says "Opens Feb 7").--Carniolus (talk) 21:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Characters from history

It seemed like there were characters from history that were visually represented but who had no speaking parts so therefore didn't appear in the credits. We might have to wait for the DVD to confirm that - but I'm curious about the identity of one character in particular - a white-haired slender fellow in a tan suit. He looked like he could be a businessman or a scientist - but might have been a by-stander? Don't know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevor Sinclair (talk • contribs) 20:59, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Financial situation

Could someone please add an explanation of how a profit of over $100m against budget can be considered a financial failure? 144.32.60.216 (talk) 00:56, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Theaters take a cut from the box office earnings. The percentage usually varies, but the rule of thumb is using a 50/50 split, meaning a film would have to make double its budget at the box office to completely cover its costs. (This is why John Carter is considered a flop despite also making more at the box office than its budget.) -MarkKB (talk) 03:54, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article may benefit from mentioning this or, perhaps even better, linking to an article dealing with how studios, distributors and theatres split the income. --Bensin (talk) 17:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think its a bit of a weird coincidence that all films released in cinema based off The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show were box office bombs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B010:1874:D085:4628:F07D:561E (talk) 18:36, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mr. Peabody & Sherman. 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) 07:05, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Remove a invalid characteristic

This edit request by an editor with a partial block from editing this page has now been answered.

I have just rewatched this movie and I don't hear any bigotry from Edwina Grunion, I do hear some "anti-dog sentiments" but I don't count that as bigoted as usually bigotry is more targeted for people and not animals. Thomasthedarkenguine (talk) 20:35, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I'll add a compromise instead of "bigoted" let's say something different, maybe "tough" (because she was one of those tough movie characters like many of Allison Janney's characters) or maybe like "rude" or anything else. Thomasthedarkenguine (talk) 20:43, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the statement in the article originates from the IGN source which says in part: "Ms. Grunion (voiced by Allison Janney), a woman with clear canine bigotry issues." Turning that into calling the character "bigoted" without any qualifier certainly gives the wrong impression imo. – Recoil16 (talk) 11:35, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Imo, IGN can be hit or miss but in all seriousness I don't consider it actual bigotry. Allow me to make an example: I'm arachnophobic but I don't view it as a prejudice, I think of Grunion as someone who isn't really a dog person in this case. Thomasthedarkenguine (talk) 14:35, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. StartOkayStop (talk) 04:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I made it clear, remove the word "bigoted" from Ms. Grunion's description. Thomasthedarkenguine (talk) 23:23, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Elli (talk | contribs) 21:12, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]