Talk:Cinema of the United Kingdom

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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. NA This article has been rated as NA-importance 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

To-do list for Cinema of the United Kingdom:	edit · history · watch · refresh
General material needed on all periods: Section needed on start of industry 1913–27. What caused the production recession circa 1977? British companies vs American investment/co-productions. Image of iconic UK film (screenshot or poster) for each main section.
Priority 2

Contents 1 UK cinema categories 2 Missing biographies 3 Article name 4 Too many references 5 Welsh-language Cinema 6 The Full Monty...? 7 List of British films 8 Fair use rationale for Image:BridgetJonesDiaryMoviePoster.jpg 9 Fair use rationale for Image:BridgetJonesDiaryMoviePoster.jpg 10 Fair use rationale for Image:Red shoes.jpg 11 Fair use rationale for Image:Saturday Night Sunday Morning.jpg 12 Image copyright problem with Image:BriefEncounterPoster.jpg

[edit] UK cinema categories

I've listed everyone in the Noted Directors section under Category:British film directors, and replacing the section with a ref to the category. If the category ever gets too large we could create a separate Notables article. I suggest we do the same for: Noted actors section, List of Black British actors, List of Asian British actors, Studios section. Actors can be listed under Category:British actors and Category:Cinema actors (and one of Category:English actors, Category:Welsh actors, Category:Scottish actors and Category:Northern Irish actors). Studios go under Category:Movie studios. Jihg 12:59, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

Well, it seems I misunderstood the current policy on categories: one should not put something in both a category AND its parent category. So we shouldn't use Category:British actors directly, just combinations of the more specific categories. Jihg 20:31, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

See also Category:Black British actors, Category:Asian British actors and Category:British film studios. Jihg 13:24, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

One issue with having sub-categories though is that it can 'make invisible' those people who are placed in them. We now have asian and black but I'm not aware that we have white (for example), thus someone browsing via the cat lists will get a biased view of things and those people in the subcats suffer what is, in effect, racism. This is almost certainly not the intention, but is the effect. --Vamp:Willow 13:58, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I appreciate your concerns, but I think we can avoid any problems by ensuring that these British actors are not only categorised as black or asian, but also as British, English, Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish actors. This makes them as visible as other British actors. As for having black and asian categories at all (but no white category), this reflects something many readers will be interested in, given the current realities of the film industry and British society. This seems the most NPOV way to approach the issue. Jihg 14:44, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Missing biographies

When I removed the huge list of actors from this page, there were a few who didn't have biography pages. I list them here in case anyone feels they should: Graham Stark, Lionel Jeffries, Wilfred Hyde-White, Suzanne Packer, Martina Laird, Angela Bruce, Adrian Lester, Richard Blackwood, Steven Cole, Louis Emerick, Trevor Laird, David Harewood, Diane Parish, Kim Vithana, Pooja Shah, Ameet Chana, Paven Virk, Preeya Kalidas, Saraj Chaudhry. Jihg 10:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Article name

I've moved this from History of cinema in the United Kingdom to the clearer Cinema of the United Kingdom. This brings it into line with other articles, like Cinema of the United States, Cinema of Italy and Cinema of Japan. Jihg 12:27, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

I don't know why these articles are all called "Cinema of..." Cinema of the United Kingdom is a pretty ugly title. No-one will search for "Cinema of the United Kingdom", they'll probably type in "British cinema"; if you search for that though this article comes about 10th on the list of results, after Cinema of Hong Kong. It would make more sense if the articles were called "British Cinema", "Australian Cinema" or whatever. JW 13:57, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Many were renamed this way to avoid confusions like "Spanish Cinema" - does this mean the country or the language? "Cinema of Spain" is clearer, though I agree its not as nice. Many articles and categories throughout Wikipedia have been named this way for the sake of consistency. Jihg 23:00, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Too many references

The list of references was far too long, so I removed the Sight and Sound articles etc. Are any of them paricularly relevant to the article?

• Cox, Alex. 'Britain is Big Enough'. Sight and Sound Volume 13 Issue 1, pp 6-7
• Gilbey, Ryan . 2002. 'Reasons to be Cheerful' Sight and Sound. Volume 12, Issue 9, p 38
• Gilbey, Ryan . 2003. 'Written on the Body'. Sight and Sound. Volume 13, Issue 9, pp 16-18
• Hofman, Kaja. 'Does my gun look big in this?' Sight and Sound Volume 12 Issue 3, pp 10-11
• James, Nick. 2002. 'Nul Britannia'. Sight and Sound Volume 12 Issue 10, pp 14-17
• McNab, Geoffrey. 2003.'Eager Beaver'. Sight and Sound. September, Volume 13 Issue 9, pp 20-25
• McNab, Geoffrey. 2002. 'That Sinking Feeling'. Sight and Sound Volume 12 Issue 10, pp 18-20
• Newman, Kim. 2002. 'Endurance'. Sight and Sound Volume 12 Issue 10, pp 26-28
• Pidduck, Julianne. 1997. 'Travels with Sally Potter's Orlando: gender, narrative, movement'. Screen 38.2, Summer 1997 pp 172-189
• Williams, Linda Ruth. 2002. 'Escape Artist'. Sight and Sound Volume 12 Issue 10, pp 23-25

The list is still too long... Jihg 23:12, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Welsh-language Cinema

Hedd Wyn (The Armageddon Poet) was nominated for Best Foreign-language film (1994), as was Solomon a Gaenor (Solomon and Gaenor)- there were two versions of this film (one in English, and the other in Welsh) -which starred Ioan Gruffudd and nominated for the Oscar 2000. Other recent Welsh language films of interest include 'Un noson Ola Leuad' and 'Gadael Lenin'- which was the first film made in the former USSR by a Western film crew.

[edit] The Full Monty...?

There are an awful lot of films mentioned in the British Cinema in the 1990s section, but the Full Monty isn't. I'm far from a film buff or expert but am I right in thinking in its day it was one of (or the) highest grossing British films ever, and so is surely deserving of a mention above almost unheard of (or forgotten) films such as Enchanted April, The Wings of the Dove or Topsy Turvy. I also wonder if a paragraph on Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish films would be wise? Dogfood 16:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The Full Monty is notable, but the article is meant to be about the industry in general and not just a run-through of famous films, which is what these things are often in danger of ending up as. Topsy-Turvy and the others are mentioned because they illustrate a general trend in the industry, not because they are necessarily famous. Someone has just added a mention of The Wicker Man, which is also a notable film, but the paragraph now contradicts what the article was originally saying because its just been tacked on and not put into context. There been a lot of famous British films over the years, which could be included, but that's not really the point of the article. I don't think Get Carter is mentioned either, despite the poster at the top, or The Italian Job, The Go-Between, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Brazil, Life of Brian or probably a hundred others. There is a List of British films which is meant to be restricted to some of the more notable ones.

In the past when people have just added a film, I've tended to work them into the text so that they actually illustrate a point. I even did this with Sex Lives of the Potato Men, which doesn't really deserve a mention. Maybe I'll add The Full Monty when I can think of a way of putting it into context. JW 10:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of British films

Does anyone know what happened to the List of British films? The article linked to it, but it seems to have been deleted. JW 12:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BridgetJonesDiaryMoviePoster.jpg

Image:BridgetJonesDiaryMoviePoster.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 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 05:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BridgetJonesDiaryMoviePoster.jpg

Image:BridgetJonesDiaryMoviePoster.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 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 22:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Red shoes.jpg

Image:Red shoes.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 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) 09:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Saturday Night Sunday Morning.jpg

Image:Saturday Night Sunday Morning.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 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) 04:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:BriefEncounterPoster.jpg

The image Image:BriefEncounterPoster.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• Image:DVD-Blimp.jpg
• Image:Chariots of fire.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)