User talk:Alientraveller/Archive 11

Re: Citizen Kane

I've no problem with it, but J.D.'s been adding to the draft so far. Might be better to check with him, considering he's the one doing production details. I've read the "Heart of Darkness in Citizen Kane" journal article, but it's midterm season for me at the moment. Hopefully, I can add some critical analysis to it soon enough -- the stuff for the film isn't as bad as for Fight Club, haha. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and question -- what's the commented out stuff that you added to the subpage from the DVD? Is that the draft you mentioned? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I thought so, I was meaning to ask, but I've been touch-and-go with Wikipedia lately. I think that happens when I have too much stuff on my plate at the moment. Anyway, at the moment, you could bring the draft forward and maybe have a supersection of your own separate of J.D.'s for now (I suspect he's not online too frequently) and bring up the issue of combining details. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

G.I. Joe (film)

On 26 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article G.I. Joe (film), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 19:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Haha, that's awesome to see. Admittedly, I've checked the IMDb boards once in a while to see if Wikipedia articles on upcoming films are mentioned. Haven't really looked beyond the topic titles, but you're right, it's nice to know someone enjoys your work. If I found one for a personal contribution, I'll probably add it to my "Miscellaneous" section to show off. :-P —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Crystal Cannes

Because no-one expected Sith to be any good. :) There's a lot of expectation behind Indy 4, and the Cannes lot are notoriously (and often unfairly, IMO) judgemental, even for films such as this which won't be in competition. I worry that should the film not meet expectations even the tinyest bit, it'll result in bad word-of-mouth which it (hopefully!) doesn't deserve. Steve ^{T • C} 12:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Bolding in Transformers

I don't know about that. Is that actually written? I thought bolding should be done to these transformers - when you scroll down to the autobots/decepticon section usually you are looking for the Transformers in the movie, and possibly the actors who voice them. It was not conspicuous before and I had to separate into paragraphs each for the last two Decepticons on the list. They should be bold though; just because they don't have speaking roles is not a reason not to bold them. ~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 08:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Alrighty, I'll take your word for it. Good night! (I don't know why I'm still awake) ~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 09:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh. Same effects house too. I was surprised at the result to be honest. Convincing interaction between CGI beasties and the 'real' surroundings is what I tend to judge these things on, and the gold standard for me is still the original Jurassic Park. While some of the effects sequences and vistas in Golden Compass were very good and detailed, few showed a distinctive vision or art beyond the undeniably-impressive processing power used to create them. Everything I've seen of Transformers' effects suggests a good deal more work and invention, especially when it came to that real-world interaction. Steve ^{T • C} 13:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Doc Doom

We just need sources for some of the biography, and to correctly format in {{cite comic}} all the comic references. I'm also a bit concerned with the flow of the character biography- it's slowly becoming longer and longer, which I admit I cut it down perhaps a bit too much, but it would be better to consolidate it into a paragraph or so for each decade. Das Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 21:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Empire

I don't know if you're a regular reader of Empire, or if you just pick it up now and again, but this month's issue (out today) apparently has some extensive Hulk coverage, as well as some Iron Man stuff (judging by the cover), which might be of some use to you. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 14:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Have you considered using a web archive link to replace dead cites? Here's the Iron Man one, for example. Steve ^{T • C} 12:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Hulk

You just beat me to the rv, it certainly was no improvement. Any idea how to remove the white blob without opening a bigger one? --87.189.61.218 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Alientraveller, are you planning on discussing your changes anytime soon? --87.189.61.218 (talk) 22:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand you. --87.189.61.218 (talk) 22:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

One last try: The MOS you pointed out backs me up. What is your point? --87.189.121.82 (talk) 23:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Read MOS:FILM! --87.189.121.82 (talk) 23:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Watchmen

Hey, thanks for that batch! Definitely will check them out. By the way, also left a comment at J.D.'s user talk page with some congratulations and an excuse for why I haven't been pitching in. :-P It's been midterms last week and this week, but spring break is coming up, which could be good or bad for editing. As for Watchmen, are you gonna be like me and read the whole book with annotations right before the film and get giddy over all the Easter eggs in Snyder's work? I really am hoping that the film will be at least somewhat decent. I saw both Patrick Wilson and Jackie Earle Haley in Little Children, and if Wilson got pudgy for the role, both of them should be great. I guess I'm a little more concerned about Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Malin Akerman, a couple of unproven actors. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, that's too bad. A fat suit would be fine, too -- I just think it adds to the washed-up and impotent look. The dynamics of Manhattan, Veidt, and Rorschach should be interesting, though I've read that Moore disliked how Rorschach had such a large fan base where he believed that there was a lot more to Manhattan and Veidt in their worldly schemes. The interpretations I've read questioned the validity of Rorschach's intent to expose Veidt's awful secret, since the damage was done, and exposing the secret would harm what could provide the world some benefit for a while. Still, it's really hard to envision all this live-action, especially Manhattan's scenes. I'm looking forward to the alternate-history news reel, though -- I'm just picturing a god-sized Manhattan walking through Vietnam laying waste to the V.C. through a 1970s TV screen. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Did you... see!?!! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Deletion template

The idea with that rough template I've got isn't really to do a cut-and-paste job each time an AfD comes up (though I have done that); it's more so I've got all the arguments in one place so in the future I can pick and choose which ones to deploy in a given situation. But that's a good idea you've had about mentioning those long-running developments; Superman Returns is one I'd completely forgotten about. It seemed every month for about fifteen years before the film came out, I'd pick up a magazine to be told "filming will be going ahead next year." Still, at least what we ended up with was probably better than most of the ideas bandied about in that time (coughgiantspiderscough). Steve ^{T • C} 11:38, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Jaws

Please stop cutting relevant/important information that I am trying to add to the Jaws article regarding its distribution. I am trying to add to the material and properly source it—it's annoying when you keep messing with it as I am working on it. Thank you. --TallulahBelle (talk) 14:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Buffy

Well, the Scoobies aren't really known for their maturity. I imagine Xander will be the funniest, he'll probably be a mixture of "huh, what just happened?" (as was I) and finding it a turn on. Giles will be awkward but accepting (his reaction to Willow was a hilarious drunken "Bloody hell!") Apparently there's going to be awkwardness between Willow and Buffy, which should be fun. Joss Whedon has promised to deliver "the funny" but I'm sure Buffy's friends will be supportive once they get over the shock. Willow's coming out was well-handled; humour, followed by tension, followed by total acceptance.  Paul  730 22:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The "outing" was hilarious, as I predicted. The writers basically turned it into a comedy farce, with each of Buffy's friends walking in on her in bed with Satsu. Andrew's was the funniest reaction; "Hi, Buffy. Hi, Nude Asian Girl. ...how much dramamine did I take?" I'm sure there will be serious emotional turmoil down the line, but as Buffy funny goes, this was classic. Loved it.  Paul  730 13:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Lincoln (film)

An editor has nominated Lincoln (film), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lincoln (film) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia

I hope you're right. I think he got the same ugly feeling as I did when it happened to me. I did consider just quitting at that time, mostly because I had heard about other instances like what happened with H. While I never truly believed it could be that extreme, I was more concerned about how it would be exploited. I'd rather not have a web page of tirades (however false they may be) launched against me that could be found via Google. Some people know I edit Wikipedia, but it's relatively secure knowledge. I don't parade around that fact, lest I get a "Hey, Erik (last name), what's up!?" on my user page. :-P

I assessed the situation at the time and cleaned up my page history -- there were a few items where I edited outside of the realm of film that could potentially be pieced together, so I took care of these with the help of an admin. I hope Steve can do the same, so we ensure invincibility to the likes of Don Murphy and his posse. I don't know much about Murphy, only briefly reviewed the AFD of his article to understand his resulting behavior. It's really a bit of a disappointment to see such an attitude from a grown man. I can somewhat understand his beef with Wikipedia regarding his article, but it's childish for him to stoop to such techniques. And hey... I see a return! :-D —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I hope Steve doesn't stay away. Maybe he'll just take a break for awhile and then return. As far as Don goes, I wouldn't worry about him all that much. I understand Erik's concern about a bunch of webpages popping up listing you in negative light can never look good if someone does a search for some reason (i.e. like a background check for employment), but as long as we don't give out our real information we'll be fine. "Bignole" pops up in a lot of places on the web, not all of them are me, and which ones are I don't typically devulge my real identity. Short of hacking any site that contains the user "Bignole" (or some variation, which would be illegal anyway), I don't think any of us have anything to worry about as far as Murphy's minions finding info on us and posting it on the internet. Even if they did, if they post anything negative that isn't true (and judging from my experience with the two of you, I doubt there's any real skeletons in your closets) then they'll be held for libel (as will Murphy for coordinating the effort to defame any Wikipedian's character on the internet)...or slander if they call up our schools and jobs, as they so threatened. I just want to remind everyone (whoever reads this) that most of the time Don does nothing but make idle threats, and we shouldn't allow him the pleasure of thinking that we fear him or his actions.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep, that's why I'm still here. :) And I think that our friend's break has been relatively short, if you notice his old hunting grounds... —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I gotta admit, the disambiguation link made me chuckle. :) Steve ^{T • C} 18:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

This-"This article is about the film producer. For the vicious killing machine that feels no sympathy and no remorse, see Majin Zarak."-is priceless. LMAO.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The Wolf Man

Seeing what Ain't It Cool News is reporting, filming of the remake seems to have begun. Should we resurrect the film article? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

WALL-E

I know you're on top of the movie stuff, but for the WALL-E article, we've been fairly clear about 2 things: (a) Ben Burtt is not a voice actor in the film so he is always removed from the infobox (it would be like Burtt getting credited as R2-D2 in the credits of Star Wars instead of Kenny Baker); and (b) for any advance info on Ratz appearing in a Pixar film, we really need the proper citation to keep the fanboys at bay. SpikeJones (talk) 12:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Just because Burtt uses his voice as a basis for the computer chirps, doesn't mean he's a voice actor. SpikeJones (talk) 13:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think I could justify including him in the infobox based on what those definitions have been set as. On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with including him in the intro paragraph if you think that his participation warrants that level of inclusion.SpikeJones (talk) 23:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

X-Men 2

In addition I copyedited the plot section. I'll finish with the DVD stuff, then see if the IMDB news articles have anything worthwile or useful. Cheers. Wildroot (talk) 13:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the photos. If you go the Danger Room article, that's the concept art shown on the X-Men 2 DVD. Think that might work?Wildroot (talk) 16:23, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Hulk 2

So, what did you think of the trailer? I was personally underwhelmed by what I saw. The CGI didn't appear to be that much better than Ang Lee's Hulk. Some of the cinematography looked a little cartoonish in spots.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Edward Norton looks great as Bruce Banner! Tim Roth looks nicely sleazy as well. Both Hulk and Abomination look awesomely grotesque, especially the latter. It's nice to see that the Hulk isn't as "pretty" as his 2003 incarnation. I've never been thrilled about the choice of the director, but the trailer definitely looks fun. As for the last shot -- The Matrix Revolutions, anyone? :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

The last shot made me think of Clark and Bizarro running at each other in the final moment of season six's "Phantom", but that's more because it is most recent in my head. I certainly like the look of the Hulk more in this film than in the first, but to me the CGI could have been better. There was just certain aspect that looked painfully obvious that they were CG. The Abomination made me think of the Locusts from Gears of War. That, and something out of a Todd McFarlane drawing.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the belated reply. The Hulk trailer looked alright, it wasn't a total fangasm moment but that's probably because I'm not a big fan of the character. I agree with everyone else that Edward Norton looks great. I like the bit where he drops out of the helicoptor, very Ultimates (of course, in that, he was thrown against his will, but still...). The effects are okay, a bit cartoony as Bignole said. Maybe they're not finished but I think it's difficult to make a big green man of Hulk's physique look real. The current effects are adequate, and so long as the story's good, that's what matters. I'm really hoping Iron Man and Incredible Hulk bring it back for Marvel movies, god knows we haven't had any really good ones in a while.  Paul  730 00:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheers mister, and thanks for your kind words while I was gone. Anyway, this Hulk trailer. I've seen numerous comments around the 'net saying the look is a little too TV-ish, and I have to say that I do concur with that. I don't know if it's deliberate or not; the article does mention certain intentional similarities with the TV show after all. Still, almost everything I've heard or seen about the film has been encouraging, and I could watch Norton recite the phone book without getting bored. I wouldn't worry about the CGI either; they render this stuff right up to the last minute. Just take a look at one of the earlier Iron Man trailers compared to the latest; definite improvement in my eyes. So yeah, it's just Leterrier's involvement which fills me with dread. Oh well, hopefully Norton's going to get his own way in the edit suite; while he was criticised at the time for his behaviour on American History X (probably resulting in his not bagging the Oscar that year), many people now agree that his version was the better film. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 11:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I read where Leterrier was defending the look of Abomination. I think he looks pretty good in the screenshot that is on his Wiki page.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Bignole; the still of the Abomination looks more detailed than the trailer lets on. To respond about noticing Norton's mannerisms in the Hulk, I'm not sure if I do... I don't see anything special in how the Hulk gears up for battle and charges at the Abomination. Do you see something similar between Norton and Hulk? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

LOL, primitive hottie, ain't she? :) In any case, I just felt like working on a film article that wouldn't be heavily trafficked. Any chance you can make sure there's UK spelling throughout? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Much thanks! It's harder to notice what needs UK spelling as opposed to what needs US spelling, being an American. :) Oh, and another reason I chose the survivor picture was because most of the production stills available for Doomsday were kind of boring. Even the car chase one seemed like the best one available to illustrate the content. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

USD-GBP

113.4 million pounds (converted at a rate of 1 dollar = .4931 UK pounds) - X201 (talk) 10:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Superman Return sequel

Thanks for working on that. I was going to as soon as I got home from school but I see you did it. Thanks. Wildroot (talk) 15:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 10:35, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Goldfinger (film)

[1] "Isn't Casting a part of production?" Ultra! 19:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I prefer casting because it creates space for sources about characters. Some are in The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day (though they don't have casting). Ultra! 16:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The Matrix franchise

Just because it's based on a film series means nothing. See Indiana Jones franchise, Friday the 13th (franchise), A Nightmare on Elm Street (franchise), Terminator (franchise) etc for other examples. Series gives the wrong impression considering there are other media which doesn't necessarily go in sequential order. Alientraveller (talk) 12:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Just because you and User:Bignole (presuming that you're different people) believe it, doesn't make it the naming convention.

Noting the following moves of your examples:

• Terminator
• Indiana Jones
• Friday the 13th
• A Nightmare on Elm Street

That said, I'm not entirely adverse to the idea, but I feel there should be a broader discussion, since this affects more than just these 4 movies (Peanuts, Superman, Star Wars, and a zillion other examples.) - jc37 21:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

What's so wrong with the word franchise? Alientraveller (talk) 21:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure that your talk page is the best place for a "broader discussion". Any suggestions for such a venue would be welcome. Especially since (imo) this could affect naming conventions for articles which would be under several WikiProjects. - jc37 00:54, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Just dropping a note, wondering if any further discussion regarding this has occurred anywhere. - jc37 01:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Justice League

I was wondering if you could rewrite this page. You did a good job on the Superman Returns sequel. Thanks. Wildroot (talk) 16:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

POTC

Since you are the contributor with most edits in Pirates of the Caribbean (film series), which passed the GA process recently, I wanted your opinion or collaboration on expanding the Reception - do something like in Spider-Man and X-Men, with some selected reviews for all movies. igordebraga ≠ 18:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

TWBB Milkshake

Thanks for the links. They helped.
Jim Dunning | talk 13:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Lindy Hemming

Argghh! You beat me to that article's creation by literally seconds. If only I hadn't got sidetracked asking a stupid question about The Bill. :) Steve ^{T • C} 12:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Re The Lord of the Rings film trilogy

Alientraveller writes:

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page.

Thank your for your time and attention to this article. I don't see the need to cite sources in this respect as the implied sources of the original novel and the movie trilogy are all that's necessary to see the differences between the two. Nor, dare I say, are elaborations on the changes at all 'controversial'.

Even so, some of the already cited sources also address the aspects of the changes I've noted. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petrsw (talk • contribs)

I think some of the edits you suggest are good. Go ahead and make them. I don't see the need to do a wholesale undo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petrsw (talk • contribs) 15:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Raiders of the Lost Ark

An editor has nominated this article for FA at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Raiders of the Lost Ark. As the principle contributor to the article, you can opt to have the nomination withdrawn if you feel the article is not ready or you are unable to participate in the FAC at this time. Your input would be appreciated. Maralia (talk) 15:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Torchwood/Terminator

I don't really like it when the Whoniverse tries to go supernatural rather than sci fi; episodes like "Tooth and Claw", "The Shakespeare Code", and last night's TW just feel like a different series. The TW ep was particularly flawed because I just don't understand what the "aliens" were or how the characters defeated them. It started creepy, but became really dull nonsense IMO. I've barely worked on the John Connor article, but thanks for your help, I'll have a look when I'm more focused (I'm always busy lately and when I do get online I lack the concentration to seriously edit). I didn't know Reese was returning, but I heard his brother was appearing in the TV show, which I've yet to see. He's probably my favourite Terminator character, bar Robert Patrick's T-1000. I hope whoever plays him can do Michael Biehn justice.  Paul  730 15:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh no, you're not distracting me. I'm not studying or anything, I just meant that I've been working a lot lately and I'm usually too tired when I get home to concentrate properly on wiki. A reboot... I'm kinda happy and kinda wary. Don't get me wrong, that cast needs flushed ASAP, but are we going to have to sit through another origin story? And who will they get to play the Thing? Hopefully the new version will feature Dr Doom in all his glory, that was always one of the most disappoitning aspects of the series. Do you think it'll be a pseudo-sequel like Hulk?  Paul  730 05:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, the movies had a good theme tune. I think the problem with the movies is that they're just not fun enough. I'm not asking for a dark, political drama, I'm asking for a fun, memorable children's film like the Incredibles. The FF are imaginauts, exploring the universe, there's so much potential going untapped. I want to see Mole Man and Subterranea, the Inhumans and New Attilan, or Namor and Atlantis. I know I defended cloudly Galactus before, but I think RotSS could have been more indulgent with the cosmic-y aspect of things. It was pretty bland in restropect.  Paul  730 12:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Now that's more interesting, and makes me care more about the character.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 08:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

No, in theory it would be a canon continuation of the TV series (like Serenity) that would ignore the comics, which are in themselves a canon continuation of the TV series. He's basically saying he would trample over the comics with a movie, which is pretty insulting to the people who have paid money for and invested emotionally in the comics for the past two years. It probably won't happen, I think it was just his way of conveying how much he'd like to do a movie. Still really rude, though.  Paul  730 22:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Normally, I'd agree with you. I love the Marvel Universe, flaws and all, everything is canon no matter what. Even stories which don't Earth-616 continuity still "count" in some alternate universe. But with Buffy, the canon is so confusing and messy. You have the original movie (non-canon), the TV shows (canon), the novels (non-canon), and the comics (most non-canon, elite few canon). There's constant debate over what qualifies; I have two Buffyverse canons, the official one, and my own "personal" one. I count some of the non-canon stuff because I like them and they follow continuity, but I like knowing there's an official canon. It's as much about quality-control as anything, almost all of the "offical" Buffy canon is written or plotted by Joss Whedon, whereas most of the non-canon stuff is glorified fan fiction. I'm jealous of the Star Wars franchise, where Lucas keeps an eye on all the expanded universe stuff and it's all really well-defined.  Paul  730 23:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, how cool does the werewolf in the new Wolf Man look? Normally I prefer my werewolves with more of a snout, like the early Buffy werewolf [2], but this looks very natural and impressive, I'm so sick of CGI werewolves. It's nice they're sort of keeping the original Lon Chaney look. Looking forward to it.  Paul  730 12:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

First Contact

Thanks. The DVD has been really useful, and there's still a lot of stuff left on it. Obviously if you can find anything else (particularly marketing/release info, I suck at that for past films) then that'd be great. Gran² 16:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I haven't gone through it with a fine-toothed comb yet, but must of it seems to just be talking about the in-universe stuff. But there is something about the space walk scene which I'll try and use. Gran² 16:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Well that's the DVD done with, and the production section is pretty much finished. I think I'll merge Music into filming or something, because I can't find much information on it. Now it's really just the reaction section left, and possibly some marketing (although I might just leave that out for now). The Memory Alpha article for the film is really good, but that doesn't use any sources, so I can't use any of the information from it. But ah well, I looks good anyway. Gran² 17:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Transformers (film)

• In Transformers (film) I have again inserted the information about Optimus's polygon count etc, and its reference. I could not find this information elsewhere in the article. I am prepared to discuss whether or not to include this information. CGI users (which includes me) would find this information to be relevant. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:33, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Where is the entry on polygon count for the models? I can't find it. Did you delete it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.243.74.186 (talk) 19:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't mean to be random, but...

I just looked at your page - just to see the status of a certain article in your editing-portfolio, and I have to say, your page is hilarious! Even if you didn't mean it to be that way. Either way...BlackPearl14^talk! 23:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Character list

I'm not sure. I've worked on the Buffy minor characters list, but I'm not very happy with it. It's tidier than what was there before but I doubt some of those characters have even enough notability to warrant mentioning on a list. Bignole's working on a Smallville character list, which is quite a lot better and more discriminate, I'd use that as an example. How you lay it out is up to you, I would perhaps suggest by film, but I'm not familiar enough with the series to be certain. Maybe a main/recurring charcters section, followed by a minor-characters-by-film section?  Paul  730 16:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, how many characters are we talking about in total? What do you mean by historical characters shown on TV? Were they actual characters, or more like some actor doing a cameo appearance of the historical figure (ala Hitler in Last Crusade").  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd probably section it off by "Film", "Television", "Literature" (if there were books or comics or something, I don't know the series beyond the films). Then I'd have a subsection for each character name. You can limit the table of contents to only display the main section headers, this way you don't have a TOC that stretches the length of the page. From there, I'd probably list them by order of their first appearance. At least, that's the way I would go about it. The alphabetical way is another, but then you get to a point where you might not know all the characters from the TV show, yet you want to read about them, in which case if they were broken up by alphabetical order you might not find all of them in one place.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for your kind words in support of me as a coordinator. We sure have collaborated a lot together, haven't we? I'm glad to have worked with you this long; you've definitely contributed a lot of great works to Wikipedia. I hope we can collaborate for a good while longer! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The Truman Show: Themes

You can go ahead and finish that. I'm not too good with writing those sections. Cheers. Wildroot (talk • contrib) - 23:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The Dark Knight Image Deletion

So you really think that an image of Batman interrogating the Joker as a major plot point is absolutely unnecessary, given by your expert view of movies? —DarthBotto (talk • contrib) - 7:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Bond

I was going to ask your opinion of that actually, since you know the character more indepth than I do. I think I have to agree with you about the mysogynist in him being lessened, since his use and abuse of women is a pretty defining character trait. I don't think I'd be opposed to him having a one-off or maybe a bit of Angel/Spike-style subtext, but fully bisexual Bond might be too far removed from who the character is. Also, I know you're Christian so all due respect, but religious imagery seems strange to me in the Whoniverse, given the Doctor's usual atheism and Torchwoods "there's nothing" existentialist themes. It doesn't seem to mesh with what the series is about, but maybe I'm taking it too literally. I'm not opposed to religous imagery in other series; Angel has quite a lot, although not all of it positive - one story involved an all-powerful diety coming down to Earth and turning the population into brainwashed followers with no free will.  Paul  730 18:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, Buffy's not strictly bisexual, but you're right about Jack. I think that although I wouldn't have a problem with bi Bond (which probably stems from the fact I don't care about the character that much) you're probably right that it would just be unnecessary. I'm not a fan of gratuitous bisexuality for the sake of having gratuitous bisexuality... not pointing any elbows. :P I don't get your comment on Nick Fury? I kind of prefer black Fury just cos I know him better and he was the version I was introduced to in the pages of The Ultimates. I thought the Doctor was atheist based on "The Satan Pit"... maybe I should go back and rewatch that episode. I always figured the Doctor liked to know everything, and wasn't fond of the idea that some things are beyond even his comprehension. So I guess he does have a bit of a God complex there. I think Buffy is agnostic like myself... she's died and went to heaven, but when someone asked her there was any evidence that God was real, she just shrugged and said "Nothing solid."  Paul  730 21:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Black Fury works simply because Sam Jackson is badass.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I've never read the Bond books and I have to say, the character's cruelty was never apparent to that extent to me in the films. I never considered him homophobic or even that sexist - he uses women, sure, but I always had the impression he respected some of the Bond girls, the strong ones who proved themselves. His characterization in the books isn't neccessarily the same as it is today... look at other fictional characters' various personality changes over the years and various media (Batman, Jason Voorhees, the Doctor). Out of interest, who is your favourite Bond girl and why? Mine is Natalya Simonova... an uncoventional choice I know, but I loved the actress who played her, she was fiesty and strong but not in a "I have big jugs and can kick Bond's ass" kind of way. She was a big reason why GoldenEye became my favourite Bond film.

"Partners" got bad reviews? Bastards! :P I was reading negative Torchwood reviews on IGN, it was depressing but I tend to take their reviews with a pinch of salt after they trashed "Chosen".  Paul  730 14:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Lol, so basically you like pretty much all the Bond girls then? I liked Honey as well... IIRC (it's been a while) she wasn't smart or strong but there was something about her naivety (sp) that made her very likable. What about villains? I liked Trevelyn, obviously, but I think Jaws was probably my favourite. I liked all the classic "freak" villains, and I remember having a soft spot for Scaramanga, if only for his cool gun.  Paul  730 15:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thought I'd ask you this since you're a 007 fan; are there any rules on what counts as canon in the Bondverse(s)? Are the subsequent non-Flemming-written books canon with the Flemming ones? I thought perhaps there were three Bondverses, the literature one, the original movie one, and the reboot movie one, but I'm not familar enough with the books to know if that's true or not. I was just wondering if there was any clear Bond narrative. Do we know what happened to Flemming's incarnation of the character... did he ever die or retire?  Paul  730 22:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the belated reply, I've not read the Indy article in detail yet but I'm not sure about the images. I realise you were probably trying to reduce the number of non-free images by having multiple characters in a shot, but overall they look a little disjointed. I hate to be an image nazi, but they don't seem to have much critical commentary. Also, are you going to write up a lead section? Otherwise, the article looks great I hope to get a chance to look over it more thouroughly.  Paul  730 22:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Indiana Jones

Re: [3] and Category:Fictional military personnel. I know the character fought bad guys in WWII, but I haven't found anything yet to say he actually served in the military to justify the category. I'm probably just missing something obvious. Thx. — MrDolomite • Talk 03:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Robosapien

Heads up. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Variety.com

Is it allowing you to access the website. I'm trying to go through their news archives but it won't let me. This is weird. Wildroot (talk) - 16:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, it's working Wildroot (talk) - 21:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hot Fuzz

Hi there. As a respected editor of film articles, can I get your input on the Hot Fuzz article? There have been many reverts between two versions of the article.

The first one reads: Angel and Danny eventually bond over drinks at the local pub and the films Point Break and Bad Boys II. The second one reads: Angel and Danny eventually bond over action films and drinks at the local pub. I prefer the latter, as I don't think we need to specifically mention the titles of the films they watch. I am unable to find a guideline or policy that actually states this, I just feel that the second version reads better. I've started a discussion but nobody seems very keen to participate; instead they just revert. I've seen you (and others) reverting changes to the Transformers (film) article that get too specific, and I'm just wondering what would your take on the matter be and whether there is a guideline or policy that I can quote to corroborate my opinion? -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 12:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your input! -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 12:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Empire cult refs

At some point, when you have time, could add the other nine "Ten Best Movie Gags In The Simpsons" to the relevant episodes please? I'm in the process of sourcing as many cult refs sections as possible using the BBC source and Complete Guide to Our Favourite Family book, but I'm guessing that Empire will actually be able to provide some more sources. Gran² 18:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Nope, not at the moment. Gran² 21:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'm probably going to nominate ST:FC for GA later on this weekend, but before I do, what is your opinion on the "Trademark litigation" section? I'm considering axing it because I can't find any other sources (aside from the source wiki transcript) to indicate that such a lawsuit ever took place. What do you think? Gran² 16:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Nationality of LOTR

It's should have a UK flag and name as a large amount (probably 1/2) are from the UK, the music was recorded there by an English musician and the books trhe films are based on are written by a British writer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdb2812 (talk • contribs) 12:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I think even though NZ is a commonwealth country, the UK has contributed enough to deserve a mention, what has the USA contributed other than a few actors and a bit of cash? I think the author probably contributed the most important thing of all, and he was English too. Good to know the article is in UK English though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdb2812 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think any other nation could have given more to the films than UK and NZ (who together probably make up 90% of the cast), and the American money had ensured the production of the films. I think leaving those 3 countries on there would best represent the contributions by nationality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdb2812 (talk • contribs) 13:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Minor characters

Each version of the show has exclusive information (the original series having the George Hall bookends, and the re-edits having the bridging footage), so I think we should reference both where appropriate. The Wookieepedian (talk) 19:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

G.I. Joe

The additions of Dwayne Johnsona dn Brendan Fraser have been confirmed by several sources including Firstshowing.net. Please do not remove form the article. http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/04/03/gi-joe-updates-brendan-fraser-and-dwayne-johnson-cameos/
http://gmanmovieblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/dwayne-johnson-and-brendan-fraser-go.html
http://www.comicsbulletin.com/news/120725266337645.htm Rgwilliams (talk) 21:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

IMDB is also listing both actors as cast members

I've prepared the report in my sandbox to save you some trouble, if we need to file one. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Oakley

I've decided to send the questions off tomorrow. Since we are posting the interview on WikiNews, I decided to ask some more general questions that he may have already answered before. My logic behind this is that it will all be in one useable source and he may give a different, more detailed answer than he has before. However, I've been trying to compile a list of 20 questions and I can't think of any more. Do you have any ideas? Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:03, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Excellent work

Words cannot descibe hwo terrific the Indiana Jones characters article is. Great, sourced, out-of-universe information on toy figures and set development. Great job. hbdragon88 (talk) 20:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: Avatar

Okay, thats a better reason for a redirect. I will not revert. Rau's Speak Page 10:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

A question

Hi, would just like to ask I have seen you doing some edits to the Thunderbirds page and would just like to ask is it possible that i can place screenshots of the characters for their various pages on wikipedia? Eg. Jeff Tracy? I know that Brains has a pic and it is stated 'use of a limited number of web-resolution screenshots', i am assuming that there is already enough screenshots, am i right? Thanks Roadrunnerz45 ^{(talk 2 me)} 08:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes i'll see what i can come up with from the episodes, it will take some time. Thanks for replying though. Happy wikipeding Roadrunnerz45 ^{(talk 2 me)} 12:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Iron Man

Hey, how have you been? It looks like you've been doing a stellar job (as always) keeping the summer films updated! I was shocked to find out that Iron Man is going to be released so soon -- the summer sure got here in a hurry. As you have probably noticed, my edit count is down this month, as I've been finishing up school in a big way. I was wondering if it would be helpful for me to perform a citation dump for Iron Man -- I undoubtedly have Google Alerts for the film in my inbox. I can take a few minutes out of my studying to do this, so let me know! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've usually tried to do that. There are more headlines in my Google Alerts that I don't dump than I actually dump when I go through these purges. I'll read the Wikipedia article closely and review their references, then look at the Google Alerts I have to ensure that headlines in the citation dump will be beneficial and not redundant. I'll avoid cast backslapping, too -- that kind of stuff is rather boring to me, too. It's only interesting when there's an apparent rift between cast and crew members. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:07, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Just want to say, "Good notes" within Iron Man (film). I'm glad you're helping to keep the rumor mill tamped down, and informing other editors of WP:FILM style. Nice work! --Tenebrae (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Back at'cha. Truly a pleasure to work with people like you, Hiding, Doczilla, and other WPC regulars who've got Wiki policies and guidelines down pat. Makes this whole thing feel like a genuine academic effort, and that feels great. Now g'wan, ya big lug!    :-)   --Tenebrae (talk) 18:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to pitch in and say that you're doing a damn fine job with, well, every blockbuster film article for this year and for the past few years so far! My goodness, I love reading about the development and background of upcoming films; I actually checked Iron Man (film) every few weeks or even days and love seeing major updates to it, especially the hard work that you have put into the article :) Cheers! Gary King (talk) 05:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

While

This? Steve ^{T • C} 20:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 06:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

FPC I'd Like Help With

I was just wondering if you wouldn't mind going to Portal:James Bond. I'd really appreciate any criticisms or support that you could provide for this Featured portal candidate. Thanks. Ultra! 14:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Two Face cleanup

Is there a way to incorporate all that you removed better, either in the film article, or some other manner? ThuranX (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Iron Man (film)

Are you interested in taking the article to FA? I think I'd like to do that, if you've got the time. Any thoughts? Gary King (talk) 03:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

You mean doing Iron Man 2, Thor and Captain America? I don't know. I like the fact that they are at least getting these origin stories out of the way first (*cough*DC, take a hint*cough*), but I fear that it will be hard to find an audience for Thor, AND bring Captain America into the modern age. I think it can be done, but I think it will be difficult. I mean, Hellboy has shown that audiences can handle a bit of relious, paranormal fantasy, but it'll be a little hard to get them into Norse Mythology. I think he could be fun, but I don't expect a lot from it. I would really like a "relevant" Captain American story, because I think, if he can be brought into modern times, he has a lot of good qualities. It'll be interesting to see an Avengers film with so many crossovers.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I would just be afraid the having Thor would remove any sense of realism that at least Iron Man has, and the large leap of faith that The Incredible Hulk and Captain America have.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

That was my other fear for Iron Man 2. I mean, for all its faults, I really didn't have a problem with the supernatural creation of Sandman and Venom in Spider-Man 3. So, here's to hoping that it comes out well. Speaking of, I highly doubt that Marvel is going to get the rights back to the Spider-Man film series. They REALLY need to get them back for the Fantastic Four, and save that franchise from the nightmare that is Tim Story.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:38, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, have you heard that they haven't even contacted Downey about doing the sequel? I mean, he's contracted by they have the option to get rid of him. It appears that Marvel is talking sequel, but failing (whether intentionally or not) to mention Downey alongside.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

They may have a great working environment, but they won't jeopardize their vision; that's the reason they decided to finally get the money together to produce these films themselves. I doubt they'll recast either, because Downey made that film, and they'd be idiots not to keep him.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

X2

This particular game is canon. It specifically states that this game is to fill in the gap between the two films and nothing says otherwise. That's why it's X-Men: The Official Game. I'll admit that most tie-ins are either non-canonical or only partially canonical, but this game is one of the few that is. Emperor001 (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Angel

How is Angel not part of the X-Men? He moved into the X-Mansion, he was there during the final fight, he even had a uniform on the DVD box. Who said that he never joined? The last we saw of him was him flying over San Fran. Emperor001 (talk) 17:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Not necessarily true. To explain Deathstrike's survival, you simply include a reference to the video game and everyone knows that Angel's and X-Man. He was one of the original five. Emperor001 (talk) 22:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

style guide?

Is that based on an article style guide, or just how one other film does it? It looks awful as far as layout goes. ThuranX (talk) 20:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

gotta say ,i think that just putting the younger casting right after, then continuing with the normal order works fine. It's not a big deal, but it does look strange, esp. as it only happens once in that cast list. ThuranX (talk) 20:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Indiana Jones

Wish I could cite a page number, but I can't. I didn't purchase the book; I took detailed notes in the book store, but that did not include the page number of the index section. All I can say is that if you look at the index and look up Dietrich, you'll find Herman right there next to it. I did not check to see if it was in the body of the book itself, but I regard the index as sufficiently canon. To be sure, there isn't any other source that ever gave a first name to the good colonel. Erik Pflueger (talk) 04:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

• Went to go recheck the book again, and found Dietrich's first me also in the body of the book, page 68. Also found Belloq's middle name (Emile) and Toht's first name (apparently definitively Arnold now) on the same page, and Katanga's first name (Simon) on page 75. Adjusted the article accordingly. Hope that helped! Erik Pflueger (talk) 03:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Is there more to Rene and Shortround than what is in the List at the moment? Because, I don't see a need to separate them if that's all there is. If there's more, and it's just too much to put in the list then go ahead. As far as Marcus goes...if you don't have anything other than what he does in the films, and some side mentionings in other mediums then he may need to be merged into the list. Sometimes the most important characters just aren't that important to film scholars, while comedic ones like Shortround get more attention. It's up to you. You can always be bold with your article and see how the community responds.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Is there a lot of stuff on LaBeoff's character out there, because we don't want to be premature with it. Anyway, keep me posted and let me know if you need assistance with anything.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Iron Monger

Not credited this way, huh? Why don't you look at the official site and research before starting an edit war. [4]

If you need help finding it, look at the right.

Jon24hours (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Speedracerposter.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Speedracerposter.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

Hey, I just got back from visiting some friends at a college 13 hours away. Ugly drive, that was. I saw Iron Man with a few of them, and I loved it. Great effects, great humor -- just overall great! :) I really do not have any particular bone to pick with the film at all, unlike my last viewed superhero film, Spider-Man 3. I'm definitely looking forward to Marvel Studios putting together the Avengers (I stuck around after the credits for the related scene) -- they need to start Captain America pronto!

As for Harry Potter, I got Books 1-6 for Christmas. Since I just finished school for the summer, I've been making good use of my free time! I'm trying to decide, though, if I should wait on reading Books 6 and 7 till after the films. (I know some of my friends, being HP fans, didn't really enjoy the films after being so familiar with the books.) Also thinking about watching the first five films again to compare, though I don't know if I'll dislike the films. What's your experience with the books and the films?

I'm going to get back to editing soon enough. I've been on my laptop, and I'm not at ease with using it to edit Wikipedia. Gonna get my CPU set up in my bedroom tomorrow or so and do some serious catching up. Great work with the article for Iron Man, by the way! :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

That reminds me of how my mom, for some reason, bought the last Harry Potter book (with all the popularity going on last summer) despite the fact she didn't read any of the previous six. I'm not even sure that she started it at all... so with Books 1-6 from Christmas and my mom's Book 7 gathering dust... could read the whole thing in the next month or two. :) What did you think of Iron Man yourself, anyway? And I did check out the Lego parody films -- they were hilarious! I loved the part about the height limit for entering the temple. Hard to believe that Crystal Skull is coming so soon; I just remember how last summer, I was thinking how long of a wait it would be. Yet Iron Man is out, and a lot more are very immediate. I just hope I can see a good portion of them in theaters, especially The Dark Knight! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I read them pretty nonstop this past week. :) I'm not sure if I have a favorite character. If I had to choose, it would probably be Dumbledore. I'm hoping to watch the movies again, though I can't imagine what the last three will be like. There seem to be certain elements and roles that were ignored in the first five books that become important now. Without S.P.E.W., Dobby's epitaph isn't as strong, and there is not as much of a catalyst for Hermione finally kissing Ron. I liked Book 7 best with how everything unfolded. The first half felt LOTR-esque to me, hiding from evil as a battle wages out there and being on the run. I'm sure that the filmmakers will flesh out the Battle of Hogwarts pretty substantially. I wasn't too crazy about the epilogue, though... I wanted to know more about the state of affairs in a post-Voldemort world. Overall, though, a fantastic series. Makes me want to get into another series with the continued character development. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Not sure. I never got a chance to finish Stephen King's The Dark Tower series (stalled at the beginning of Book 6). Also got recommendations: Prince of Nothing and A Song of Ice and Fire. I used to read some of the Wheel of Time books, but honestly, these have gotten a little too long for my tastes. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:22, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

You sure about that Transformers 2 thing? The section reads:

One guy ready for more action is Optimus Prime himself, voiced by Peter Cullen. "(Producer) Don Murphy mentioned to me, 'Only because of the tremendous expense to animate Optimus Prime, he'll be in just a certain amount of things.' But he said, 'Next time, if the movie is a success, you're gonna be in it a ton.'"

I can see how it could look like di Bonaventura said it, but the inclusion of "you're" when talking about Prime's reappearance suggests otherwise. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 12:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting

He changed his name from Vikrant Phadkay to Ultraviolet scissor flame, he has been blocked twice as a vandal for being a page blanker [Phadkay]. He also failed spectacularly when he tried to be a Wikipedia Admin Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Vikrant Phadkay. He is also a master sock puppeteer, Paerduug, [5] and then when he realised he had given himself away, he tried to cover it up [6] 81.130.223.198

81.130.223.198 (talk) 14:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

81.130.223.198

Do you know who that heck this guy is? He put the same message on our pages as well as about a dozen others? Emperor001 (talk) 16:57, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Indy

This may be of some use to you. I don't think he was joking, but Alan Dale said that his script for KotCS was "printed on tin foil so you couldn't photocopy it". http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/stage/theatre/article3483853.ece Also IMDb have listed his role as General Ross. Gran² 09:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

My work on that annoying Batman (1989 film) article

Please take a look at it. I'm not completely finished by I'm getting there. It has problems with overlinking, grammar and just about everything. Please do a little editing. Thanks. —Wildroot (talk) 03:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For fixing "The Simpsons (season 20)".- Yours truly, [ S ] υ ρ є r ı o r _reply! 16:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't you be in this category?

I mean you DID get Transformers (film) to featured article status didn't you? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 16:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not a dumb question, at least not intentionally dumb question. I think it's reasonable that you're in that category, you're the one that helped getting Transformers to featured status. Now to my knowledge it's you that got the article featured, please correct me if I'm wrong but I think you deserve to be in that category. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 16:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

More Indy

Hi. I stumbled across an article in New Scientist this morning which may or may not be of use to you. It's a reasonably positive piece by author and professor Cornelius Holtorf which examines Indy's role in attracting people to archaeology (and deterring them from it). The text is currently (and temporarily) hidden behind the curtains on my sandbox page if you wanted to see if it's something you can use. While it uses the new film as its jumping off point, it seems to me that anything useful would be more appropriate to the franchise article. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 10:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: The Hobbit

Looking at the size of the section, you're probably right. Maybe a way you could differentiate this is to treat it as a historical article rather than a film article. Maybe leave out the film infobox or a Cast section in the meantime? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:26, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Not sure, considering that there's two films to talk about. I assume that there's no common name for the duology? Didn't we consider something like "Tolkien films" some time ago? Maybe we could give it the "film series" treatment, only mention LOTR briefly and provide the existing links, then have the upcoming films be the bulk of it? I know it's not quite a stand-alone article, but it seems difficult to determine a title for these two films in development. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:33, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Any new thoughts on this? By the way, I've reviewed the JP issue, and you are most assuredly in the right. Let me know if the issue continues to be problematic. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:50, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I liked Prince Caspian a lot more than the first film, haha. Some good humor, some kiddie moments (fine by me), some tough decisions. My biggest beef with the film is that I didn't think Ben Barnes was the best choice for Prince Caspian. He just struck me as rather wooden. You've read the books, right? How does the film compare? I was trying to figure out what parts were originally C.S. Lewis and what parts were Adamson add-ons. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, geez, I was thinking that since the film was based on British literature, it would have come out about the same time as here. Strange setup! Let me know what you think when you do get to see it! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

List of works published posthumously

I've been thinking about splitting the Films section off into a separate, tablified, sourced and more manageable list. I've started building a concept here. I'm using this as my "break" project, in between revision and so I don't waste hours on it, I could use some feedback about the table structure (included separating multiple films released after an actor's death) and also any glaring missing names from the original list. Thanks. Gran² 20:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I decided just to keep it to people credited as appearing in the film. Do you know the circumstances of production after Morrow died (I knew he was killed during filming, but I was reading the Twilight Zone article and was amazed they were able to finish his segment). And, yeah, for it to be anywhere near complete, it'll need to include directors, producers and screenwriters at least... Maybe I'll justs source the actors for now. Anyway, I just came back from Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (pretty good in my book, but not quite Raiders or Last Crusade) but I thought, what about a List of Indiana Jones films cast members? Gran² 13:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you seen any of my videos?

Here's a stop-moation film I made that was never finished: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Zm_qGvZOsJc

And here's a recent film I directed/starred/edited/special effects coordinator, etc.: http://youtube.com/watch?v=CMvnfLvI1d0

I play the salesman, and the quality came out a little bad when I uploaded it. You'll love the E.T. reference.—Wildroot (talk) 17:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey Traveller!

I'm new to Wikipedia! I don't know how to respond to comments--is this the way of doing it?? If there's a better way of sending email, I could use instruction....

Anyway, it is crazy, I'm a huuuuuge Indy and Spielberg fan. I love the old Indy films and I grew up with Star Wars (too bad about the prequels, wish they were better...), but Schindler's List will certainly give Spielberg his place in history for centuries to come. it does seem like the new Indy film,--well,--it wasn't really up to snuff, you must admit, and the reviews were not great, though I don't know what RT sums are,--what are they? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Youcallhimdoctorjones (talk • contribs) 10:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Crystal Skull

If the making of book says that Hangar 51 is supposed to be Area 51, that's fine. But that means that the warehouse in Raiders and this one are not the same. Area 51 wasn't used until WW2 for bombing practice, and then was abandoned until 1955. In 1935 (and indeed in 1947, when the UFOs supposedly crashed), it didn't exist. Any changes indicating that the warehouse in Raiders and Crystal Skull are the same should be reverted. ColdFusion650 (talk) 12:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 13:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Alientraveller (talk) 13:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Quick question, why is my block six hours longer? Is it because I'm more established and knowledgable an editor? If so, I understand the example needed to be set. Alientraveller (talk) 13:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, and you were blocked for edit-warring before, I believe. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 13:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Great Job on Indiana Jones Comics

Just wanted to say I thought you did a fantastic job on the Indiana Jones comic books.

Please watch your tone

There was simply no need to use sarcasm in your removal of my RFC (which I may or may not, take further). You do not own Wikipedia, I had every right to put it up and I have done nothing to you or on Wikipedia to warrant what in effect, is verbal abuse. 86.2.32.31 (talk) 17:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)