Talk:A Christmas Carol (2009 film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Future This article has been rated as Future-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

[edit] Crystal ball

This film may be too far in the future to warrant an article at the present. According to Variety, "A Christmas Carol becomes one of several high profile projects for Carrey, who hasn't determined which he'll make next, or how many he'll be able to complete by next summer, when studios are bracing for possible labor stoppage." I would suggest deletion without prejudice against recreation when this film actually approaches production. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:11, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

As long as we stick to verifiable facts that are attributed to reliable sources, we aren't crystal balling. It's a high profile film that's been confirmed. -- MisterHand 20:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

It's not just a matter of WP:CRYSTAL, but WP:CFORK as well. There is nothing more than an announcement at the present, and there is no valid criteria for actual production. Thus, this article could remain a stub for an unnecessarily long time. It's basically "overkill" to create a film article for every announcement that's made because not all projects will enter production, even high profile projects. Films like Gears of War are deleted because there is nothing more than an announcement. The quote from Variety indicates the uncertainty of this film taking place right away because Jim Carrey has several projects from which he can choose. You say that the film is confirmed, but this does not at all mean that the film will be made. There are numerous issues that projects encounter before actual production -- script issues, budget issues, et cetera. It's okay to have coverage, but if production of a film is not certain enough to warrant its own article, it should be placed under the umbrella of a broader article. A couple of examples of the redirects are Knight Rider (film) and Logan's Run#Remake. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Unlike the other films you've mentioned, this one currently has an attached director and a star and is in the process of casting. Of course, if the project falls apart (as is the case with your examples) then it would be appropriate to get rid of it. But at this point all indications are that it's going forward. Plus, there's no good place to put the coverage since there are several Carol films and a paragraph on this film wouldn't really fit in any of the existing articles. -- MisterHand 11:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The Variety sentence contradicts your claim that all signs indicate that it will be made, as Carrey has not decided what project he would pursue next -- he also has Ripley's Believe It Or Not!, I Love You Phillip Morris, Me Time, and Sober Buddies from which to choose, so the stubby nature of any of them in regard to others is highly likely. James Cameron planned to make either Battle Angel or Avatar a while ago, but since he went with Avatar, Battle Angel was deleted. Also, there are examples of films with directors attached that haven't taken off yet: Zack Snyder with Army of the Dead and Sucker Punch, M. Night Shyamalan with Avatar: The Last Airbender, Robert Rodriguez with Barbarella or The Jetsons or Land of the Lost (he hasn't decided yet), Guillermo del Toro with Deadman and Tarzan, Neil Gaiman with Death and Me, Paul W.S. Anderson and Jason Statham with Death Race, Anderson with Spy Hunter, Edward Zwick and Daniel Craig with Defiance, David S. Goyer with The Invisible Man and Scanners and Super Max, Tom Tykwer and Clive Owen with The International, John Woo with Ninja Gold, Darren Aronofsky with Noah, Roman Polanski with Pompeii, Sylvain White with Castlevania and Ronin, Shekhar Kapur and Nicolas Cage with The Sadhu, Gregor Jordan with The Tripods, Martin Campbell with Unstoppable, and Michael Mann and Leonardo DiCaprio in an untitled project, and Martin Scorsese and DiCaprio with The Wolf of Wall Street. Not to mention the multiple announced projects under Neil Marshall: Outpost, The Eagle's Nest, The Sword and the Fury, The Ninth Legion, Sherlock Holmes, and The Descent 2. Among these are several films that have actors attached as well, but no certainty about actual production at this point. I do keep track of these things, you know, and it shouldn't be an approach of "Let's create an article because there are no signs it won't take place." That creates a lot of unnecessary stubs. One last example is Spy Hunter#Film adaptation, which had John Woo as the director and Dwayne Johnson as the star. But the project is currently in development hell. As for placement, I don't see why the information can't be placed at the end of A Christmas Carol#Dramatic adaptations since the article only has a 2/3-line paragraph, and it should also be stated that Carrey has not chosen to actively pursue A Christmas Carol out of his choices. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:46, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Erik. Having an director attached doesn't mean anything. Look how many directors were attached to the Superman project for the last 20 years before it was finally made. How many directors were attached to Ripley's Believe it or Not"? Crew can be replaced at any moment in the film making process, especially when a film has yet to enter production, or even set a date. No, production says the film will be almost certain to get made and released, not a director attached, or a writer, or a producer for that matter.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

In this case, Zemeckis isn't just a gun for hire, he's a producer and actually driving the project. Like I said above, let's keep an eye on this one and if it does enter development hell we can redirect or delete appropriately. -- MisterHand 01:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

That's not the idea behind crystal ball. What makes this a high profile film? It's only been known since Friday. Zemeckis isn't a god, him being attached to films doesn't make them just happen. He still has to secure money, find the rest of the cast, finish the script for one. Set a production start date. Set a release date. It doesn't help that your lead even says the Carrey hasn't stated this is his next project or not. Considering the fact that he may decide to do something else, and be replaced because a potential new schedule could conflict to what Zemeckis wants to do. This should be mentioned on Zemeckis' page and Carrey's page; it doesn't warrant an article at the moment.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Bignole is right. Film announcements suffer from recentism -- a project can be revealed, then nothing happens with it for months at an end. That's the case with the films I mentioned before. It's somewhat a knee-jerk reaction to create a film article when something is announced, then nothing happens for a while. It can be headline of the week, but it's difficult to determine if people are still talking about the project by next week or next month. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

I've requested a move to A Christmas Carol (2009 film) because the IMDb entry is actually this, and not the 2008 one that was listed in the article. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd just merge it back into A Christmas Carol or whatever relevant article may exist on the films/adaptations as a whole. If this film does go into production, then it can warrant a page. At the moment, it seems to violate CRYSTALBALL and possibly WP:NF. (And definitely the latter if the latest emendation goes through.) All we seem to know right now is some early prepro crew, one actor *maybe* and that it will be filmed a la Polar Express. That's not really enough for an article anyway - this can easily be fit into a subsection of the source material's article. If it never is released, then it will still be notable as a section of that article, and if it does go through, a split can occur then. Girolamo Savonarola 00:51, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Production?

From Carrey's description, it seems that he has finished his voice over for the character. I believe this might speed up production, ad it might be released by the holiday season. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.210.168.207 (talk) 00:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)