Talk:The Hours (film)

message: Suspected copyvio from IMDb.
The story of how the novel Mrs. Dalloway affects three generations of women (Virginia Woolf writes the story, Laura Brown reads it, and Clarissa Vaughn lives it), all of whom, in one way or another, have had to deal with suicide in their lives.
Will put up copyvio warning. Thorns Among Our Leaves 03:35, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted the article to a pre copyvio state. My appologies as over a years worth of edits have now been lost as a result of a merge of a copyvio article into this one in October of 2004. --best, kevin [kzollman] [talk] 05:08, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio

message: I removed the Halle Berry reference in this sentence, "Kidman won both the Golden Globe and the Oscar for Best Actress. Kidman's portrayal in the film, in which she wore a prosthetic nose, highlighted the Hollywood rumor that beautiful actresses can only receive the best dramatic roles once they diminish their physical attributes in a role. Other examples are Halle Berry's and Charlize Theron's wins in 2002 and 2004 respectfuly."
* Kidman? http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38552000/jpg/_38552173_hours300.jpg Yes.
* Charlize? http://cumplicidades.no.sapo.pt/imagens/charlize/monster.jpg No doubt.
* Halle? http://images.hollywood.com/images/large/l_1103928.jpg Not even close.
:I totally disagree, and I'm reverting the Halle Berry sentence back to the way it was. Halle Berry didn't wear make-up, and while she was quite glamorous on the night of her Oscar win, it was quite evident she wasn't gourgeous in Monster's Ball.--Amynewyork4248 09:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed this section entirely. This is original research irrelevant to the film. The article is about The Hours; neither Ms. Theron and Ms. Berry appeared in the film, so discussion about their makeup is irrelevant. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a gossip page nor a compendium of irrelevant chit-chat.207.69.137.203 06:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Diminished looks for an Oscar

message: :Image:The hours-julianne moore.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The hours-julianne moore.jpg

message: :Image:The hours-ed harris.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The hours-ed harris.jpg

message: The book is marked by a fairly unusual "stream of conciousness" style. Shouldn't we comment on how the film deals with that ? -- Beardo 15:26, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film vs book 

message: This article needs to clarify how the action is set "within the span of one day" while apparently being set in different eras. I haven't seen the film so I can't amend the article, but as a reader of the article, it has left me baffled and needs to be rectified. Yeanold Viskersenn (talk) 03:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timespan

message: Why is the critical response text almost entirely full of negative reviews, yet the Metacritic score is a very positive 81%. It seems unbalanced that the reviews listed are all negative, needs to be rectified. Seems like an author with a negative agenda wrote it.  - Connor 5612, 13 September 2010
:The first two reviews look positive to me. The next one is negative, the next one mixed. The St. Petersburg Times review is also fairly positive although the reviewer did not particularly enjoy the film. The last few are mixed. I don't see it as "almost entirely full of negative reviews", but if you think there is critical response missing from the article and you would like to add more review summaries to the section, then please do.--BelovedFreak 12:15, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical response

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The Hours (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091204232423/http://www.nytimes.com:80/2002/12/27/movies/27HOUR.html to http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/27/movies/27HOUR.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Hours (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110227204440/http://www.media-courses.com/blog/australian-actress-nicole-kidman/ to http://www.media-courses.com/blog/australian-actress-nicole-kidman/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:53, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: WP:FILMPLOT states: "The summary should not exceed the range unless the film's structure is unconventional, such as Pulp Fiction or Memento's non-linear storylines, or unless the plot is too complicated to summarize in this range." I feel this film's (The Hours) structure is unconventional, non-linear, and relies a lot on the visuals and dialogue which is why it's quite detailed. It would take away from the plot summary to not include what's been written. If you've seen the film, you'll know what I'm talking about. Does anyone agree or disagree? And if you disagree, how would you go about decreasing the plot summary size for this film? Factfanatic1 (talk) 03:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not so much chipping out important details. Just excise and trim. Reword sentences that can be said in a shorter way, you know? Inception is a pretty intricate film, but it's plot summary falls under the 700 limit. Rusted AutoParts 20:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

text: You said you wanted specifics, here's one simple example: both the first and last paragraphs mention the suicide, that's an obvious redundancy that can be condensed. I would tighten that up by shortening the opening paragraph so that it talks about narrative structure only without mentioning any plot details, and only mention the suicide in the final paragraph. -- 109.78.217.4 (talk) 14:25, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decreasing the plot summary (to 700 words or less)