Talk:Fantasia 2000

message: This entry states that Fantasia 2000 was shown exclusively in IMAX theaters. However, when I saw it, it was in a normal United Artists movie theater. LJade728 13:42, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: *Apparently changed by now.  States it went to Imax first, then other theaters.--PvtDeth 18:31, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I hate to be nitpicky, but I think the correct way to write the film's title is Fantasia/2000 as a reference to it being a continuation of the original.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.252.38.253 (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, IMDb also lists the title this way. Ghostkeeper (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As ever IMDb does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for being a reliable source. MarnetteD | Talk 20:47, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: I removed the section on Criticism of Levine because it seems unfounded. Below are quotations from the removed section and my commentary:
"There has also been criticism of Disney's decision to hire the controversial conductor James Levine."
Who has criticized Disney's decision? Where? When? No citations were given.
"Currently, there are allegations that Levine has engaged in unspecified criminal activity and pedophilia."
Does this qualify as an "allegation"? The article does not name Levine in the body-- only in the Usenet headline. Unless an actual allegation comes out in print from some kind of news source, this sentence is unfounded.
"These allegations against Levine were serious enough to prompt the German Green Party to demand a "certificate of good behavior" from Levine showing that he had no criminal convictions or charges pending against him when he became Music Director of the Munich Philharmonic."
The linked article does not give the reason why the Germany Green Party demanded the certificate. Whoever added the "Criticism of Levine" article to the Fantasia Wikipedia entry may know something, but unless a valid citation can back up this statement, it should be cut.
NapoleonicStudent 00:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism of Levine 

message: In the "Firebird" section, the article used to read that the mountain sprite awoke the "Firebird spirit of the volcano". That's a misunderstanding of the original music; the Firebird is the good character, representing the Phoenix, reborn from the ashes. The volcano is better imagined as corresponding to the evil Kastchei.  [The final few seconds of the Firebird suite are the Firebird theme itself, victorious over evil]  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.40.226 (talk) 15:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Think the visuals of that segment were partly based on Mt. St. Helens and its aftermath... AnonMoos (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

text: The 2010 commentary describes the Firebird as being just as much a part of the natural order of things as the Sprite. The forest can't be renewed without first being purged by fire. Lee M (talk) 04:16, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Misunderstanding of Firebird

message: No citations, but people talk. Until there's a confirmed source for a sequel, don't bother brining it up past this thread, I suppose. All I've "heard" in these rumors is things like Mannheim Steamroller, Vanessa Mae, Yanni, Regina Spektor, etc., etc., are involved. I highly doubt it. The only thing I've ever seen was a print-out at a local library with, what I think, was either a rave or a phony logo stating Fantasia's sequel is called Fantasia 3-D for release in IMAX/OmniMax 3-D theaters. I also read in this phony paper that A Night on Bald Mountain/Ave Maria and Dance of the Hours to be redone in 3-D, along with other classics like stuff from Chopin (SHOWPAN, damnit! Not "choppin'"!), Mozart, some Russians, some Americans (Leonard Bernstein was named on the phony paper), and some classical from the Far East, if such exists.
I wholly think it's all rumor, and would prefer that nobody adds any info into the main article for a third sequel. For all we know, the rumors can evolve to the point where music by Smike.dk and The Prodigy are included! Fictional Science Sextuple Feature! 17:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rumored sequel? 

message: The article states that this is the first Disney film to use computer generate imagery. I immediately thought of the ballroom scene in Beauty and the Beast,  eight years earlier, which Wikipedia confirms uses digital animation. PurpleChez  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.249.207.195 (talk) 17:00, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It may be one of those hairsplitting situations where CGI was being used in 1990 on this film before it was being used on BatB but that would need sourcing. So I have performed a copy edit to fit the sourced info in the article. MarnetteD|Talk 17:29, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  CGI 

message: Putting Walt Disney Pictures as distributor in the infobox just makes it redundant and as we all know, WDP is a releasing label, not a distribution label. That distinction belongs to Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures (formerly named Buena Vista Pictures). I already have enough problems with one IP user who puts Touchstone as distributor on infoboxes on Touchstone pages. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 04:10, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If you would take a moment to look at the edit I linked to the same article that you did - I just refined it so the reader would be taken to the section of the article that is about BVP. This avoids the WP:EGG problems mentioned in the edit summary. MarnetteD|Talk 04:13, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distributor in infobox 

message: Greetings. Please refrain from making such large changes, mostly cosmetic, to an article which has just recently been through a GA review. Several of your changes are simply incorrect, or poor grammar. Others make the text less specific about details, which is not a good thing, usually. Onel5969 TT me 16:59, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with , especially about the poor grammar. MarnetteD|Talk 17:33, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You guys do a great job in keeping the quality of such articles intact. Nice work! LowSelfEstidle (talk) 22:31, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks LSE. The same edits are now being made by Rectify 54 who is clearly the same person who edited as the IP. MarnetteD|Talk 15:25, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits by ip editor 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Fantasia 2000. 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  tag to http://uk.eonline.com/news/disneys_fantasia_2000_going_imax/37717
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110312005736/http://disneydvd.disney.go.com:80/fantasia-fantasia-2000-2-movie-collection-special-edition.html to http://disneydvd.disney.go.com/fantasia-fantasia-2000-2-movie-collection-special-edition.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080424041350/http://annieawards.org/28thwinners.html to http://annieawards.org/28thwinners.html
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) 18:04, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified