Talk:Them!

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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-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

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article. Feel free to add your name to the participants list and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

Since Them! is just a redirect to Them! (1954 film) is there any reason not to make the main article Them!? --60.225.2.209 12:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

No there isn't. But since the page Them! already exists, I think the move requires administrator privileges. Slowmover 18:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

The top summary says Jack Warner cancelled the proposed 3-D version due to cost fears. The production section says the 3-D was cancelled because the 3-D camera malfunctioned. I also read an article that quoted one of the staff as saying it was filmed in 3-d but only edited for the flat version. Does anyone actually know the reason that Warners production records all list this as a 3-D film yet it is not. Philbertgray 16:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Warner's production records do NOT list this as a 3-D film, in fact, if you go through the daily reports on the film, it's quite clear that they shot it flat. Tests were to be shot in color and 3-D shortly before pre-production. Color tests were shot, but the 3-D rig malfunctioned. The next day, a memo was sent out that 3-D was scrapped. In any case, WB was unsatisfied with the color results and slated it as flat and black and white.

Budget was probably one thing, but the bigger picture was that when the film was in production, 3-D had already started to mean Box-office poison. Trade mags carried the "color" and "3-D" moniker on their charts up until the day the film was released only because they were not updated with new information. The Photoplayer 05:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC).

Hey, thanks for the info - changed opening summary to reflect your remarks. Souunds like you may be a 3-D fan. Finally got to see Robot Monster and Cat-Women of the Moon in Dual strip 3-D. I was surprised that the 3-D actually was pretty decent in Robot Monster. But Cat-Women - what a mess!! Thanks again for the info. Philbertgray 12:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, Robot Monster is especially well shot, particularly for a crew that had never used the rig previously. Cat Women isn't so much poorly shot as it has poor technical aspects. Many of the opticals are out of sync, etc. It was near the end of the game anyway-- I'm surprised they even bothered shooting it in 3-D. Glad my info helped. -The Photoplayer 16:02, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] color conflicts

I corrected the conflict regarding the color. Warner Brothers records indicate the color was cancelled because they were not satisfied with the results. Change top summary secction and lower color reference regarding title section

• The part at the beginning about color and 3D needs to be reworded. It is very difficult to read. You may also consider moving it to a more relevent section of the article. Trivia, for instance. Fleagle11 20:20, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Postmodern youth-cultural trivia

I'm not sure how something is "indirectly referenced", it either is or isn't. I've also asked for some cites and changed the awkward title Alastairward (talk) 19:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External Links?

I'm new to Wikipedia and wish to discuss the proper use of an external link on film sites including this one.

Is it permitted to enclose an external link for a site where the film in question is reviewed and presented? The external link points to a site run by a published film writer, director, actor and television personality in Tokyo, Japan (English language).

I am trying to keep the link to The Cinemated Man alive and well because it is informative, useful and the author is a recognized authority.

But each day the links are removed under the guise of 'personal website'. The Cinemated Man site is published by blogspot and the editors are removing it for that reason or claiming the edit is 'spam'.

First of all, it is clearly not spam.

Secondly, even though is is published by blogspot, it is not a daily blog but rather a film review and presentation site. The site is non profit and contains no ads of any kind - not even ad sense, it is informational and is not a 'social networking' entity such as Myspace or Facebook.

Finally, the inclusion of The Cinemated Man link on Wikipedia is a helpful resource for those interested in the films in question. Keeping the link alive can only add to the wealth of resources at Wikipedia. Deleting it can only narrow Wiki's scope.

Also, the external links to Google Video, which has the film in its entirety are also being removed by the same editors for the same reasons. Humbleradio (talk) 01:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)