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)
--BorgQueen (talk) 19:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
I gotta admit, the disambiguation link made me chuckle. :) Steve T • C 18:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
113.4 million pounds (converted at a rate of 1 dollar = .4931 UK pounds) - X201 (talk) 10:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
[1] "Isn't Casting a part of production?" Ultra! 19:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
Thanks for the links. They helped.
Jim Dunning | talk 13:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
Now that's more interesting, and makes me care more about the character.~ZytheTalk to me! 08:27, 22 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)
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)
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)
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...BlackPearl14talk! 23:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
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)
...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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
Heads up. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
Okay, thats a better reason for a redirect. I will not revert. Rau's Speak Page 10:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
This? Steve T • C 20:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
For fixing "The Simpsons (season 20)".- Yours truly, [ S ] υ ρ є r ı o r reply! 16:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I mean you DID get Transformers (film) to featured article status didn't you? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 16:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
Just wanted to say I thought you did a fantastic job on the Indiana Jones comic books.
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)