Talk:List of films

Spaceballs
There are some Spaceballs quotes on Wikipedia. Maybe they should be moved off that page to Wikiquote, with links from one to the other? - fagan

Unquotable quotes
I find that a lot of the films have many quotes which either aren't particularly quotable, or mean nothing out of context, see The Matrix for an example. Boffy b 12:46, 26 May 2004 (UTC)


 * The delight of many of the memorable lines does lie in knowing their context, and quoting them would usually occur between people who are familiar with the context.


 * "There is no spoon," or "Dodge This!" are certainly rather mundane lines… not all that striking or notable of themselves, but they become forever memorable to anyone who has seen the movie The Matrix.


 * "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" is apparently a single word of nonsense; of no plainly apparent meaning at all… and yet to someone who has seen the movie Mary Poppins, it can be said that it evokes a rich willingness to put up with, transcend, and even enjoy a great deal of apparent nonsense, and to exuberantly appreciate the magic of life. "Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down."


 * Those familiar with the context of things can usually delight in them far more than those who are not, and yet when there are oddly emphasized statements that are unfamiliar, one's curiosity can be aroused as to what that context is, and generate interest in finding out.


 * With movies and with others stories many particular lines become memorable because of their context more than anything else, and those who love the stories often delight in reminding each other of the context.


 * Often lines have far greater context than most people originally discern, and being reminded of them in such discussions one can sometimes begin to see the greater context of things. When one of the heroes of the matrix says to one of the villains… "Believe it or not… your still going to burn!" it has context far beyond that of the immediate situation of two individuals in conflict. It is an evocation of the forms of faith that assert that those who do evil and treat others as if they were worthless are going to face extreme consequences for it, whether they believe it or not.


 * Anything that promotes an awareness that everyone no matter how obscure has significance and can sometimes matter immensely to the progress of the entire world is a good thing… and any path that promotes the treating of anyone as if they and their feelings were absolutely worthless is as close to a manifestation of evil as many can come to clearly understand. That's why I for one have long loved Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, and am very pleased with the movie adaptations. They do not so perfectly express these ideas as the books do… but they at least make a far wider audience familiar with them.


 * I personally am inclined to tolerate a quite a bit of dross to insure that some true gems of thought and expression are not discarded or ignored. Yet, I am not entirely reluctant to call it dross when that is what it seems to me. I really don't think there is too much dross in The Matrix movie or quotes (though I feel there certainly was a lot of it in the later movies, especially the last). - Moby 16:50, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

Sorting with or without articles
There is a de facto difference of opinion of contributors as to whether to sort these film titles with or without considering the articles. Standard English sorting practice is to ignore them, but some lists (at least in Wikipedia) are beginning to treat them as significant (mostly those that have many foreign-word entries, which increases the number of articles &mdash; and confusion &mdash; by an order of magnitude). I have just resorted the list based on standard English principles (adapted to include foreign-language articles like les [French: the]), but perhaps this should be discussed. Anybody have opinions on which way we should go, and why? &mdash; Jeff Q 12:33, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * My personal take is to have articles be moved to the end; ex. Beautiful Mind, A -- Fog of War, The.   It's easier on the eyes, I've noticed the People list is doing it, so it only makes sense we should too; while I agree we should be consistent in our formats between wikipedia and so, but we should do what's right, and if you look at 'pedias list of films you'll notice they are on our current format, but on IMDb Beautiful Mind, A is just that - who's style is simpler on the eyes?  I volunteer to convert the current list to the new format if need be.  RoboAction 06:01, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * IMDb is curious in that its article titles also have the article-last structure, whereas Wikidom seems to favor unrearranged titles. But article-last certainly makes it easier to sort lists, so it makes sense here. Considering the underwhelming interest thus far, I'd say be bold, make the change, and see if anyone complains. I've posted a similar suggestion on the Television shows list talk page, too, and will execute it there if no one objects. &mdash; Jeff Q 06:24, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Format style

 * Currently wikiquote community has not established a layout-format to be used for Films. If you would like to join the disucssion check out Wikiquote talk:Templates.  You'll be able give your 2 cents and positively contribute to wikiquote.  [Notice:] if you want to begin a NEW ARTICLE see if a certain format is to be used; ex. see: Schindler's List -- The Fog of War -- Unforgiven -- Taxi Driver for an idea RoboAction 00:59, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * The four pages mentioned above only present one particular set of formatting principles used, not coincidentally, by RoboAction. I would suggest that any new page editors instead review the more robust set of examples listed in the Film & TV Shows discussion mentioned above. It includes a list of TV and film pages with several formats contributed by many editors, including RoboAction, Kalki, Jeandré, myself, and others, as well as many anonymous users. &mdash; Jeff Q 10:09, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Thank you Jeff Q for the note on my error; I do not want to impose a unilateral format. I believe that a variety of views and opinions will eventually create better material.
 * Do see what I mean at my sandbox, I am looking forward for inputs - PEACE - RoboAction 00:08, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Just checked out your sandbox, RoboAction. I don't think your formatting will suffice for some of the lengthier quote pages we already have, but it looks excellent for most other current ones. I've left specific comments on its discussion page. &mdash; Jeff Q 00:45, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This list should be deleted
Why does this list exist when all of the film articles are in Category:Films anyway? There could be a List of requested films for articles that don't exist yet, and the films that do exist should all be categorized. How often (and how) does somebody find the articles in the category but not on this list? Having two places where the same information is listed is pointless and leads to confusion. This list should be deleted. 64.62.166.247 01:31, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * This list existed long before Categories became de rigueur with the MediaWiki 1.3 upgrade. But you raise a good point. We should probably only have only place for a list of films, and should change the Main page and other links to to go there. &mdash; Jeff Q


 * I take back my earlier statement. After looking at the Categories:Films page (which I don't know how to create a working link to for index pages like the Main page), I realized that its format is more maintenance-oriented than encyclopedic. Furthermore, the fact that its content is automatically generated is excellent for collecting existing pages, but lousy for creating new ones in the manner usually recommended in Wikidom. I'd say that, until the Category system matures, we leave things as they are. &mdash; Jeff Q 04:10, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm just back from watching a movie at the theatre, and I agree that though Categories are definitely going to be useful, they are not yet fully developed. I myself am still a bit confused about some issues in using them, and as yet have few definite ideas on how they should be organized. RoboAction and LGagnon seem are very actively contributing Category labels to existing pages, but I am at the point where I'm just starting to remember to use them when I create a page. The problem of setting up a link to them other than through the automatic links at the bottom of a page is something that I have encountered, and it seems that various manually created list pages will still be useful or necessary for some time to come. ~ Kalki 04:54, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Excessive red links
There seems to be an increasing trend for people to add titles to this page and to Television shows without ever bothering to create articles for the titles. Anyone can do the former; Wikiquote needs people to do the latter. It takes virtually no effort to add a title to this page once one has compiled enough quotes to create a decent article for a film.

Unless people strenuously object, I am planning to remove ALL of the titles without existing articles on Saturday (18 December). There is no advantage to having them sitting there and obscuring the useful links. &mdash; Jeff Q 06:54, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I agree with your request - ALL red links should be removed - but maybe we can cut and paste them to a different location (etc.[ List of films/needed ]). PEACE ~ RoboAction 21:33, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't know what to do about these. If someone takes the trouble to add them, does it really mean that they're requesting these movies? You'd think so, but I'm skeptical about the motives of someone who adds dozens at a time. Are they just asking someone else to do all the real work? If so, I'd hope to encourage them to contribute material instead. Also, where should one put such a list? Request-type pages in Wikipedia typically go into a special namespace, to avoid looking like they're part of the main reference work, but that's more overhead than Wikiquote seems to have yet. But it does seem reasonable to post requested pages somewhere. If I do the removal, I'll put the "requested" titles where RoboAction suggests or some other logical place, so we won't lose them. (It can always be changed later.) Anyone else have suggestions? &mdash; Jeff Q 23:53, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I have been thinking of making a similar page listing of names for people: but anticipating casual vandalism of so many red links, I think it best that such lists NOT become or remain active lists, and a notice put at the top some minimal standards expected of new pages, including at least a quotation: some people are not even putting these in, perhaps not realizing that all the article pages are made for quotes, not for information about people or works, like the Wikipedia is. ~ Kalki 02:33, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I have been in another rather busy spell lately, and not always checking in here as often as normally like to, but in reference to my previous comment: I have been collecting up name lists of famous people, from various sources, and might be ready to post somethng in the next day or two as a starter. I intend it to be simply a list of candidates for inclusion though, to spark interest in people who might wish to collect up quotes of various people. The header of such pages should include recommendations that no one make any name an active link, until they actually have material ready for a page. Similar lists could be made for films, and TV shows. I think literary works should remain primarily as sections within authors pages though, unless they become especially large, and no such prior list created for them. ~ Kalki 04:51, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I've imported all the dead end - Red links to List of films/requested. I think we need more information for users on how to create articles, as in, examples they can see as to what an article may look like when finished, expectations.  ~ RoboAction 20:05, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Merger with List of films/requested
I am proposing to merge List of films/requested into List of films by creating a separate "Requested" section below the main list. (See Television shows for an example of what the result would look like.) For readers, this would make it easier to notice when a film is already in the list, helping to avoid duplication between the two lists. For editors, this would make it easier to move titles between the live-article list and the to-be-created-articles list. If no one has any objections to this plan, I will execute it sometime after 24 April. &mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 00:02, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have now merged the former List of films/requested into the main list, as promised. As I expect that we will delete the "requested" article, it may be a good idea (or even necessary, under some interpretations of the GFDL) to include the edit history of that article, which contributed so much material of current list. So here it is:


 * (cur) (last) 00:06, 27 Apr 2005 Jeffq (Posted notice that this list is superceded by List of films#Requested section.)
 * (cur) (last) 18:19, 22 Apr 2005 194.192.22.33 (&rarr;S)
 * (cur) (last) 04:03, 21 Apr 2005 Skizzler (&rarr;D)
 * (cur) (last) 17:18, 19 Apr 2005 Jeffq m (Fmt'd "Weird Science"; moved "Sixteen Candles".)
 * (cur) (last) 12:30, 19 Apr 2005 206.78.165.5 (&rarr;K)
 * (cur) (last) 12:29, 19 Apr 2005 206.78.165.5 (&rarr;T)
 * (cur) (last) 12:27, 19 Apr 2005 206.78.165.5 (&rarr;W)
 * (cur) (last) 16:32, 16 Apr 2005 69.140.181.232 (&rarr;A)
 * (cur) (last) 10:04, 13 Apr 2005 68.218.195.235 (&rarr;M)
 * (cur) (last) 20:09, 10 Apr 2005 Jeffq (Moved Blazing Saddles, The Care Bears Movie to main list; added The Guru.)
 * (cur) (last) 11:00, 6 Apr 2005 Slgrandson (&rarr;C - (One of my favourites from the 80's...so CUTE!))
 * (cur) (last) 23:15, 5 Apr 2005 Jeffq (Moved to main list: Magnificent Seven, When Harry Met Sally)
 * (cur) (last) 23:07, 5 Apr 2005 Jeffq (Removed "24" (it's much better known as a TV show).)
 * (cur) (last) 02:33, 31 Mar 2005 69.156.147.7 (&rarr;0-9)
 * (cur) (last) 17:58, 26 Mar 2005 RPickman (&rarr;M)
 * (cur) (last) 23:20, 24 Mar 2005 Jeffq (Moved to main list: 50 First Dates, Conspiracy Theory, Daredevil.)
 * (cur) (last) 13:09, 24 Mar 2005 RPickman (&rarr;D)
 * (cur) (last) 23:33, 12 Mar 2005 Jeffq (&rarr;B - Moved Black Hawk Down to main list.)
 * (cur) (last) 08:36, 4 Mar 2005 Jeffq (+Dreamers; typo fix.)
 * (cur) (last) 20:42, 27 Feb 2005 24.16.236.171 (&rarr;H - added hitch)
 * (cur) (last) 03:05, 21 Feb 2005 Jeffq (Moved Network, Punisher to main list.)
 * (cur) (last) 00:30, 20 Feb 2005 172.192.53.15 (&rarr;N)
 * (cur) (last) 15:33, 14 Feb 2005 67.85.86.175 (&rarr;B)
 * (cur) (last) 17:24, 13 Feb 2005 198.124.234.99
 * (cur) (last) 17:22, 13 Feb 2005 198.124.234.99
 * (cur) (last) 04:09, 13 Feb 2005 Jeffq (&rarr;H - Removed both Grinches.)
 * (cur) (last) 02:58, 13 Feb 2005 Jeffq (+Grinch 1966. -Devil's Advocate. More title fixes. Standardized bullet spacing.)
 * (cur) (last) 02:37, 13 Feb 2005 Jeffq (&rarr;A - +Adv of Superman; fixed some titles)
 * (cur) (last) 00:16, 13 Feb 2005 65.26.233.252 (&rarr;P - added 1)
 * (cur) (last) 09:45, 12 Feb 2005 Jeffq (&rarr;E - +Eating Raoul)
 * (cur) (last) 20:32, 6 Feb 2005 Jeffq (&rarr;X - -X-Men 2)
 * (cur) (last) 20:31, 6 Feb 2005 Jeffq (Added "List of films" link for easier moving.)
 * (cur) (last) 20:03, 6 Feb 2005 RPickman (&rarr;X)
 * (cur) (last) 19:15, 6 Feb 2005 213.202.159.24 (&rarr;T)
 * (cur) (last) 16:32, 5 Feb 2005 65.26.233.252 (&rarr;B - added 1)
 * (cur) (last) 06:37, 30 Jan 2005 202.138.112.243 (&rarr;G)
 * (cur) (last) 09:10, 28 Jan 2005 Jeffq (&rarr;S - -Shall We Dance (now in main list))
 * (cur) (last) 17:42, 25 Jan 2005 209.158.202.162 (&rarr;S)
 * (cur) (last) 17:41, 25 Jan 2005 209.158.202.162 (&rarr;T)
 * (cur) (last) 17:37, 25 Jan 2005 209.158.202.162 (&rarr;T)
 * (cur) (last) 19:54, 23 Jan 2005 Jeffq (Removed titles w/ created articles.)
 * (cur) (last) 00:27, 22 Jan 2005 Clouds Raven (&rarr;E)
 * (cur) (last) 23:08, 18 Jan 2005 24.26.101.247 (&rarr;A)
 * (cur) (last) 09:52, 10 Jan 2005 Jeffq m (Link spelling fix.)
 * (cur) (last) 22:16, 9 Jan 2005 65.184.240.25 (&rarr;A)
 * (cur) (last) 18:59, 9 Jan 2005 RoboAction m (&rarr;A - remove Alien, after User:84.128.0.21 expanded it)
 * (cur) (last) 18:57, 9 Jan 2005 RoboAction m (&rarr;T - remove True Grit after being expanded by User:RPickman)
 * (cur) (last) 18:55, 9 Jan 2005 RoboAction m (&rarr;W - move * Wall Street to List of films)
 * (cur) (last) 03:44, 5 Jan 2005 RoboAction m (&rarr;0-9 - remove 13th Warrior N add to List of films)
 * (cur) (last) 01:36, 2 Jan 2005 RoboAction m (minor change to header + move quoted movies & add unquoted...)
 * (cur) (last) 16:35, 1 Jan 2005 RPickman (&rarr;N -added 1)
 * (cur) (last) 16:34, 1 Jan 2005 RPickman (&rarr;C -added 1)
 * (cur) (last) 22:50, 31 Dec 2004 RPickman m (&rarr;T -1 added)
 * (cur) (last) 15:46, 21 Dec 2004 RoboAction (moved from the Talk page, ooops)

&mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 04:19, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Creating new pages -- discussion and vote notice
Many people are having problems creating a new page. There has been some progress in this area (some FAQs posted with various tricks, help page failure allows starting a page with one click, etc.), but virtually no documentation regarding it. Input box is a new mediawiki feature intended to make article creation more streamlined, as well as helping create correctly boiler-plated articles. I have started a discussion, and a vote, at Help talk:Starting a new page, and I urge everyone interested to join it. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 19:47, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Reorganizing film sequels
I propose splitting up the film "series" pages and giving each film its own page. Aside from the fact that this is standard practise for indexing films, consider the fact that not every film in a series is written or directed by the same person. This might seem like a long and tedious task, but many of these pages need heavy editing and formatting anyway. ~ Juxtaposed 20:01, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Notes section
I notice in the intro text, there's an instruction to read a Notes section (complete with anchor link) before adding something. However, this isn't any Notes section on the page. Nothing in the page history has an edit summary of "Removed notes section" (but then, why would it?), so it isn't easy to see when it was removed (if it existed at all). Does anyone happen to know when the section existed so that it can be restored, or should we work out a new set of notes to add? &mdash;LrdChaos 20:55, 1 April 1006 (UTC)

25 Thousand Tents
This documentary explores the steadfastness of the Palestinian people in their struggle to survive and return to their homeland Palestine. It documents the lives of Palestinians currently stranded in Al-Tanaf detention camp in no man's land between the Iraqi-Syrian borders. It explores the lives of Palestinians who first found refuge in Iraq following the Zionist occupation of Palestine and the expulsion of its people in 1948. Following the US invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003, they have been forced to flee and find refuge elsewhere once again. This film gives voice to the suffering and heroism of Palestinians as they tell of personal experiences, the hardships they endure, what led them to flee Iraq, as well as their aspirations and hopes for the future.

Cast

Producer ,Written and Directed by: Samer Salameh Ala'a Alsadi

Assistant Director: Abed Alnaji

Editing: Ala'a Alsadi

Photography: Samer Salameh

Mixage: Mnar

Comment: Mnsoor Alslte

Commentary extracts from “In The Presence of Absence” by Mahmoud Darwish

Interviewer: Khayria Zubaydi Maya Helwani

Subtitles : Omar Almane

THE FILM LINK: http://vimeo.com/alaaalsadi

hi there

can you tell me the name of the english movie which is based on badminton,

as far as i remember the boy is in the movie is vey good in badminton and he meets a girl who is also interested in playing badminton buut her team is not able to win any match

so the boy decides to help the girl by actually dressing up like on and so he helps the girl win the tournament

can you please help me find the name of this movie

blunder
hide and seek is listed srry. Hobblez23 15:13, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Kick-Ass
Somebody Should Put Up Quotes From The Movie Kick-Ass & (soon 2 b Kick-Ass 2: Balls To The Wall)

Quotes
I don't know what I'm doing here. I should be listening in class.

Split this page?
This is a pretty big page, and it is only going to get bigger year after year. I would split it now, into three or four subpages. Does anyone agree/disagree? BD2412 T 21:34, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I have no objections to such plans, but the structure of the divisions might be debated — and whether the suggestions should be on pages with the listings of developed pages, or on separate pages. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 22:05, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I would just divide it into alphabetical sections, probably A-H, I-P, and Q-Z. Since the requests are sorted alphabetically just like the existing entries, I would keep sections for requested titles on the same alphabetical page as the corresponding existing titles. BD2412 T 23:07, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Since the previous split was done without further discussion, I have rearranged it per my proposal. As noted in the page moves, it makes more sense to have shorter lists but keep existing and requested on the same page, so additions can easily be moved and duplicates can easily be seen. BD2412 T 13:36, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

highest grossing Bollywood movies 2018
Bollywood is very fashionable and glorious industry Here every day fashion has change also Bollywood movies is very popular in all over the world. Last year most awaiting Tollywood movie Bahubali 2 had released and this movie were top Indian movie of 2017, Also this movie reached 1500 cr. Last month of 2017 Tiger Jinda Hai movie has released and this movie also reached top three list of Top Indian movie of 2017. Also this film become highest grossing Bollywood movie of 2018. Now 2018 is running and some Bollywood movies already has been released and some most movies is ready to release. In this year Padmaavat, Padman and Sonu ki Tinu ki Sweety perform very well. Fans like the most of these films but some films could not impress to movie fans. Here is some list of highest grossing Bollywood movie 2018 :- 1- Padmaavat	Deepika Padukone, Ranveer Singh, Shahid Kapoor	Sanjay Leela Bhansali	190	300.92* 2- Sonu Ke Titu Ki Sweety	Kartik Aaryan, Nusrat Bharucha, Sunny Singh	Luv Ranjan	20	105.35* 3- Raid	Ajay Devgn, Ileana, Saurabh Shukla	Rajkumar Gupta	35	81.95* 4- Padman	Akshay Kumar, Sonam Kapoor, Radhika Apte	R Balki	20	81.61 5- Pari	Anushka Sharma	Prosit Roy	2041.01	25 6- Hate Story 4	Urvashi Rautela	vishal Pandya	18	21 7- Aiyaary	Sidharth Malhotra, Rakul Preet, Manoj Bajpayee	Neeraj Pandey	25	18 8- Hichki	Rani Mukherji	Siddharth Malhotra	12-15	17.75* 9- 1921	Zareen Khan, Karan Kundra	Vikram Bhatt	--	15.92 10- Mukkabaaz	Vineet Singh, Zoya Hussain	Anurag Kashyap	--	9.85 Source

Categorization and alphabet
Is there some specific reason why this list is categorized as or is it just remains of some oddity that should be fixed? In Category:Lists, all the alphabetic sublists like List of films (A–C) are nice and comfy under F. (I'd be bold and fix it but right now I'm just studying the structure of en.wq as a potential template for developing et.wq, trying to find out what makes sense and what doesn't, so I prefer to be cautious.) --Ehitaja (talk) 17:31, 2 February 2019 (UTC)