Talk:H. G. Wells' The War of the Worlds (Pendragon Pictures film)

message: */Archive 1
fix link (broke by move of article?) Naaman Brown (talk) 16:49, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Archives

message: The article says that Hines had raised $42 million from Microsoft employees: I'm not aware of any evidence of this other than Hines' claims. If that's the case, I don't think it should be phrased in that manner, and earlier in the article it says 'Hines claimed' when referring to the same sum, rather than stating it as a fact. Mark Grant 15:09, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  $42 million? 

message: Can someone who's seen the film edit the article? The introduction says it's a modern retelling set in Seattle, the synopsis says it's a period piece set in Victorian England. I'm fairly sure it's set in Victorian England, but not having seen the film myself, I don't want to make a cock up. Optimus Sledge 00:59, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done and done. I blame myself because when I did the initial draft of the production history, I seemed to have done what I always do - work on an floating assumption, that being that everyone knew they changed directions from modern to loyal adaptation. I addressed this both in the production history and intro so, hopefully, this makes it soundly clear. --Bacteria 16:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern or period 

message: There seem to be a lot of screenshots on this page which don't meet the fair use licensing requirements for 'identification and critical commentary on the film and its contents'. Does anyone have any opinion as to which should stay and which should be removed? I think it's hard to claim that more than a fraction of them are being used in a valid manner here, though I'm willing to be convinced. Mark Grant 14:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If no-one else has any opinion I'm going to remove about half of them shortly, because right now it seems like overkill. Mark Grant 23:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: There are a lot of unsourced claims in the 'Controversy' section, some of which have been flagged for months, and I've just added a couple more. Is there any reason why we should keep them if people can't find a source for them after they've been flagged for so long? Mark Grant 19:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've removed those too. Feel free to add them back if you have a source to support them. Mark Grant 00:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced Claims

message: Can people please stop changing the budget to $5,000? Now, I can certainly believe the movie was made for that amount, but unless you can cite a reliable source, it's just going to keep getting deleted. Mark Grant (talk) 18:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Budget 

message: :Image:PendragonWotWposter.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 ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 00:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:PendragonWotWposter.jpg

message: It looks like Timothy Hines or someone from Pendragon has been edting the hell out of this article. There is such a riduculous amount of mis-information that it has become useless as a reference. Someone needs to some in and clean up this mess or this article needs to be deleted. Andy120290 (talk) 16:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done some tidying, but it could certainly do with more. I don't think I've made anything worse than it was, and removed a bunch of duplicated and uncited information, while adding cites for some others; of course most of the sources in the article are interviews with people involved in the production, which may not be reliable sources by Wikipedia standards. Mark Grant (talk) 07:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is [[FUBAR]] 

message: Now, it appears to me that what is regarded by many as the film's main saving grace is how true it is to the novella. I've actually read the story, and the thing that hit me was how different it was to the film... Some scenes in the film, like the guy getting locked in the shed, are nothing more that throw-away muses of the narrator in the book warranting nothing more than a couple of lines. Also, I don't recall seeing so much walking in the book. Obviously, when you create a screenplay, you have to change elements of the story so that they "look" right, but it seems as though key bits have been left out whilst other more trivial stuff has been featured. The "Black smoke" (the key weapon in the Martian's arsenal) is barely touched upon. also, the reason that the highly localised invasion of the south east of England is regarded as a war of "Worlds" is partially due to the development(by the Martians) of heavier than air flight during the course of the conflict, thus potentially enabling the hostilities to spread to other countries. 
I'll go back and re-read the book just to make sure that I am not going loopy... Paul-b4 (talk) 12:30, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Accuracy 

message: I removed the section about Pendragon's statements about the Dark Horse settlement on their web site; I can't find it on the current web site, and can't find any reliable source elsewhere.
I did find a few mentions which imply that it was true, but without a source that we can cite, I think it has to go. To be honest, it's probably too much detail in any case, the remaining paragraph pretty much sums up what happened. Mark Grant (talk) 06:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: This has been out and in a few times. Anyways, the settlement announcement page is archived at web.archive.org, as listed in the citation; now the news source and the primary source agree.  If a WP:RS is found which refutes, we'll revisit.  Yet another argument for avid use of WebCitation to capture pages used as sources in articles - it's for easy future revivification of dead links, and they don't have an embargo period!  --Lexein (talk) 20:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dark Horse 

message: I noticed that someone changed the intro from 'mostly negative' reviews to 'mostly mixed'; I can't see any justification for that change, though I wonder whether that line should be in the article at all as it's rather subjective unless you only look at articles which give some kind of star rating. Rotten Tomatoes, for example, has four reviews and three of them look negative to me. Mark Grant (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negative reviews 

message: The Flynn book is used as a source for the film's budget of "approximately $25 million" (p.111). It also states "somewhere in the mid 20-millions" (p.108). Neither figure is listed as a quote, nor are sources cited. The book is self published: Galactic Books (hosted at a free hosting provider) hosts only Flynn's books, Galactic's address (Owings Mills,MD) is the same city as that listed by Flynn, and I'll let the partially correct but also abusively wrong   "Michael Valdivielso" review of the book at Amazon speak for itself. Bottom line: is this a WP:RELIABLE enough source for the film's budget?  Discuss. --Lexein (talk) 21:41, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  John L. Flynn book 

message: Pendragon did dispute with Dark Horse. Historical fact, not "agenda." Yes, it's resolved. And sourced. So, we report the whole thing, sourced, neutrally. Wikipedia is WP:NOT a battleground, nor a P.R. outlet.  All companies have warts.  It is in _everyone's_ best interest not to shy away from the simple, unvarnished verifiable, sourced, truth. Here, it makes Pendragon look good, for publicly acknowledging the end of the issue. IMHO.  Another example: Vonage.  That company once tried to, but stopped, attacking that article, but instead has tried for NPOV wherever possible, no matter how bad the reported news. If I have read the article history correctly. Discuss. --Lexein (talk) 22:19, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ok, pick a different word than "Dispute" 

message: The magazine was a print pub which moved online, and is still published, with an editorial staff. It really is in the Mammoth Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, so it has at least that much notability. --Lexein (talk) 00:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I remain unconvinced, since the original story has been removed from their website - the idea that this guy actually thought he could get name actors of that caliber for sometime this poor is laughable, though. However, if you can find another source that backs up the claim, I'll consider it. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:36, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  SFCrowsnest - not summarily unreliable 

message: *I don't see a quote from the film's director as undue weight of any sort. If it's balance that's needed, discuss that. I've expanded the quote, just in case that was the issue. 
*Separately, I don't see SFCrowsNest as non-notable. The review comment was a positive comparison.  
A bit of help, preserving the integrity of this article, would be appreciated. --Lexein (talk) 03:42, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Followup: I asked over at WP:RSN and SFCrowsNest received support there as a source, though two similar SF zines and webzines are listed as "better" sources. --Lexein (talk) 16:44, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  July 2012 IP deletions 

message: I think it would be good to create a new article based on War of the Worlds - The True Story, considering there is now enough information. I will create the article now and upload it. If you guys think it should remain on this article please write below.--Warner REBORN (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for new article 

message: The usage and primary topic of H. G. Wells' War of the Worlds (film) is under discussion, see Talk:H. G. Wells' War of the Worlds (2005 film) -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 08:41, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: "H. G. Wells' War of the Worlds (film)"

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:H. G. Wells' War of the Worlds (2005 film) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 08:59, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Article says this is "the first of three reworked direct-to-video film versions." Another is H. G. Wells' War of the Worlds (David Michael Latt film). What is the third? Goustien (talk) 03:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Three direct-to-video?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on H. G. Wells' The War of the Worlds (Hines 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://eveofthewar.com/articles/9421/DVD_Review:_H._G._Wells'_The_War_of_the_Worlds,_Pendragon_Pictures_(Late_in_depth_breakdown_review)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061130005104/http://www.war-ofthe-worlds.co.uk/war_of_the_worlds_hines.htm to http://www.war-ofthe-worlds.co.uk/war_of_the_worlds_hines.htm
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/5rrQrVh6J?url=http://www.waroftheworldsmovienews.com/Variety.html to http://www.waroftheworldsmovienews.com/Variety.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) 03:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified