Talk:Varan the Unbelievable

Untitled

According to Toho Kingdom varan is about 50 meters in size and weighs either 15,000 or 25,000 tons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.100.52 (talk) 19:03, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Changed

The 2005 subtitled DVD release of Daikaijū Baran was titled Varan the Unbelievable, leading to confusion as to which version of the film (Japanese or American) was presented on the disc, much as the title of this article and its munging of two distinct films under the title of the American revision, is confusing, along with its (now deleted) inclusion in "Category:Banned films" without any indication that either version was banned anywhere on Earth.

to

The 2005 subtitled DVD release of Daikaijū Baran was titled Varan the Unbelievable, leading to confusion as to which version of the film (Japanese or American) was presented on the disc.

because we don't discuss the article in the article itself. That's what the discussion page is for.

Varan TV version

Ever heard of the un-compleate varan TV version rent the DVD it has it should we meanchon this on the article... AN UNMADE VERSION! 71.208.62.88 (talk) 17:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Varan 1958.jpg

Image:Varan 1958.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Citation and Expansion

This article like many other articles on films by Toho is unsourced and missing information. This article has no footnotes and only includes a list of sources, this issue needs to be fixed and the article given proper footnotes. This article is also missing information on the film's release and reception which should be added to the article as well. All of these fixes and changes need to occur in order for it to fit Wikipiedia's standards of a well developed article.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:27, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

• The first problem is, there are two films involved here. One is the Japanese original, the other is "Varan the Unbelievable", which is primarily footage shot in the USA with only the special effects and final few minutes (destruction of Varan) footage borrowed from the original. That is even less material from Toho's "Varan" than was used from Toho's "Gojira". This needs to be fixed before anything else can be done, as the story lines, quality and talent involved in the two films are quite different and cannot be munged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.94.164.143 (talk) 14:30, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Poster

Please do not add another poster to show a different styled poster. From WP:FILMNFI, " The content guidelines also list acceptable uses for non-free images, including two that are most relevant to WikiProject Film. Film and television screen shots are for critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television. Promotional material such as posters, programs, billboards, ads are also for critical commentary.

Critical commentary and discussion of the film must come from reliable sources and not original research from the editors themselves. Critical commentary should be embedded in the body of the film article. A non-free image can be used to illustrate the target element of the critical commentary only if it cannot adequately be substituted by a free equivalent image or descriptive text. The non-free image should be significant in increasing the readers' understanding of the topic. Non-free images can illustrate technical or thematic aspects of the film. Examples include, but are not limited to: production design, makeup, costume design, camera technique, visual effects, lighting, and iconic shots." So as we are not doing that for the poster here, we should not include this second poster. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:49, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

@Andrzejbanas: This isn't about the different style of a particular poster. This is about a different film altogether (which I explained in my edit that you seemed to ignore). The American version of the film is substantially different from the Japanese version to the point you can argue it deserves its own page the way Godzilla, King of the Monsters! and Godzilla 1985 have. It even states in the article how the film was "substantially altered" and featured "new scenes" and "new cast members". The point of posters is to give a visual reference to a film which is why we have them in the info boxes. That is the case here. This goes beyond a simple dubbing job. This is a film that contains enough alterations where it can be considered a different film and that file gives us a visual on this version.

As well the cordial thing to do is start a discussion with someone BEFORE you delete. If you have a problem with a particular edit you bring it up for discussion.Giantdevilfish (talk) 16:00, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

You are correct on me discussing before changing. Sorry about that. The thing is, the new poster does not really state anything that text already does. We already know that the film has changed, has new scenes and actors from the text. The poster does not help illustrate that in a way that the text does not. Unless you can explain to me a way it does this. In short, I understand that they made their own film from the footage of the original, but the poster does not really expand on that in a way that a user new to the topic would understand. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:18, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

If we can find more specific sources discussing changes, I'd suggest we add it. But I still do not think it needs another poster. Like, see the article for Black Sabbath, which uses the image to illustrate how the colour is different in the Italian and American version. I could explain in text, but it's something that is definitely assisted by imagery to understand. A poster does not suggest the difference between versions of the film outside maybe cast listing, which we can already illustrate through text, so it is kind of a weak argument. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:22, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

@Andrzejbanas: Realistically movie posters never convey anything that isn't already covered in a films (or books) article. They are really meant more as visuals for the page. Does the movie poster for lets say Shin Godzilla really need to be there? It doesn't give us anything that isn't already in the articles text. Its really meant more to give a physical representation of the film in question for the article. That's why I put that poster there. Its not to make articles look more pretty. Its meant more as a visual for the film. Origianlly it was to show the US poster because this is the English Wikipedia and that is a representation of the film that English readers would probably understand more than the foreign poster. (I guess it would be like someone uploading the Japanese poster on the Japanese Wikipedia for an American film). But in this case it takes it to another level because its a physical representation of a film that has been heavily altered from its original source. Its to illustrate the version that was "substantially altered" per the description of the article. So in my view its no different than the original poster in the info box. Its a visual of an almost entirely different film.Giantdevilfish (talk) 16:31, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

The poster doesn't really explain how it's altered outside a title though. I mean, they make American posters for foreign films and such, and this image does not convey that. Per WP:FILMPOSTER, we use the poster for "Ideally, an image of the film's original theatrical release poster should be uploaded and added to the infobox to serve as an identifying image for the article." Which we use on the English wikipedia, because it's theatrical release was initially for Japan. I think you bring up some good points, but I think it requires more discussion from other users. I'll re-add the image now and post a discussion for it on images for deletion, so we can get more people to discuss it, as I had done earlier for Ghidorah's actors image. Sound okay? Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:47, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

You see. That's how we avoid conflict. You and I should work at the U.N:-) And yeah since we both make strong points and disagree with each other the best way to go is through other editors. Who knows you'll probably win again. Didn't you win in getting a image deleted from Ghidorah, the Three-Headed Monster awhile back?Giantdevilfish (talk) 16:54, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good! Yeah, I don't want to argue. I just want articles (even about monster movies!) to resemble at least what could be found on a good article, even if there is little info I can really get here. I actually think the images are neat and interesting, but I also want them to follow form. So many of the kaiju pages and other foreign genre films are jumbled messes that require work. Like if I'm wrong, it's still okay because then we get the image, just from my understanding of the rules, we can not currently have it. So in a way, hope I'm wrong? :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Keizo Murase.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:54, 31 July 2021 (UTC)