Talk:Lage Raho Munna Bhai/Archive 1

message: Does everyone agree that it would be better if trivia were merged with sections which deal with that type of triva? Nobleeagle  [TALK] [C] 04:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: Don't worry about it if the article is getting long and please do not REMOVE information into nothingness simply because the article is getting long. Lots of Featured Articles are WAY longer then this, I think the way the article is progressing, we can submit it to WP:GAC soon with a bit of work. Nobleeagle  [TALK] [C] 05:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Long 

message: Can anyone find sources relating to Production of the film, almost every other good film article has a good section. All that is needed is sources, I'll work on the actual text to go in the article if you want. Nobleeagle  [TALK] [C] 05:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's nothing on production of this movie. Didn't even find info on when they started filming or script development. Is there maybe some kind of companion book made or maybe, someone has bought the DVD and "production info" is part of the extras? Anyone? --Plumcouch Talk2Me 12:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production 

message: Does anyone know the Canadian Certification for Lage Raho Munna Bhai, I'd imagine it would be PG, the same as the United States, but I just want to check. Nobleeagle  [TALK] [C] 05:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canadian Certification 

message: Does anyone know the policy for putting film screenshots on Wikipedia? Let's make a list here of what screens would be necessary. Nobleeagle  [TALK] [C] 05:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Template:Film-screenshot can be used as a fair use rationale.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dwaipayan's right. But we need to take care that the number of such screenshots remain limited. Reg. the preparation of a collage using the copyrighted images, I'm pretty sure it is not allowed. :Image:Gandhicomparison.jpg is quite borderline, I think.--thunderboltz(Deepu) 13:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh...I thought it wouldn't matter much because one's been released into Commons...anyway, if it's borderline then it's still manageable. I think we just need a couple of screenshots for synopsis, one for a broader range of cast and one from some song for the soundtrack section. I took a look at some different articles and they tend to possess even more shots. Nobleeagle  [TALK] [C] 04:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshots of the film 

message: Is the "Bhai" part of the name? Is that why it isnt translated in "Carry on Munna Bhai"?--thunderboltz(Deepu) 14:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Munna Bhai

message: I have passed this article as a Good Article under the relevant criteria. Congratulations to the lead editors, and keep up the good work! Regards, Anthonycfc [T • C] 00:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Anthonycfc [T • C] ! -Classicfilms 04:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:GA|Good Article]] nomination 

message: I own the "official" NTSC dvd release from EROS Int'l,  and it is, as stated in the article, something of a travesty. The NTSC release is 29.970fps, converted from a 25.008fps (yes, really, 25.008) PAL DVD, and it is badly interlaced and there is distortion to the extreme left of the frame, which has been "compensated" for by centering the frame in such a way that the leftmost 15% of the picture is not visible during viewing. The program stream has been improperly handled otherwise, causing chapter seeking to fail about 90 minutes into the film (at the vob boundary), and causing timing information to be unavailable to the DVD player. There is also distortion at the beginning of the second vob due to a damaged or missing key frame. There are problems with the audio that I find it difficult to characterise, but among other things I believe that the surround channels are missing from most of the audio track.
It is a shame that this wonderful film is being served so badly by it's distributor. EROS is developing a well-deserved reputation for destructive handling of the films entrusted to them for distribution. If you wish to purchase this film try to acquire the PAL version, which is much less badly damaged than the NTSC version.
131.215.115.31 19:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DVD 

message: Since the information in "general background" is repeated on a number of pages, I will move it to the Munna Bhai series page. -Classicfilms 16:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Munna Bhai series page

message: One of the reviewers says it is a "a sparkling example of qualitative cinema". I am not sure qualitative cinema is a term. Qualitative is usually used only in contrast to quantitative, and in this respect, all cinema is qualitative. I suppose the reviewer wanted to say "quality cinema". Wouldn't something like "a sparkling example of qualitative [sic] cinema" be better? -- Longhairandabeard 20:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you google the phrase, "qualitative cinema" you'll find a number of entries which use it such as this one - so I wouldn't rephrase it - if you find a better quote from this review and want to substitute it, that is fine as well. -Classicfilms 21:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess it is a term then.. huh.. -- Longhairandabeard 22:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Qualitative Cinema?