This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
User:Czar made a major error by moving this draft into the English Wikipedia article mainspace. None of the reliable sources on the entertainment industry (THR, TheWrap, Variety, Deadline, etc.) or the animation industry (CartoonBrew, Animation World Network, Animation Network) has reported that Frozen 2 has moved into actual production. Based on the most recent reports from reliable sources, it is still in development. As anyone familiar with the development of animated films is well aware, often what happens is that a major star (in this case, Kristen Bell) is sometimes attached to the project very early (as actually occurred with her on Frozen) and agrees to record his or her voice track relatively early, at the same time other unknown actors (or even crew members from around the studio) are recording scratch voices for the animatic/Leica reel based on early drafts of the screenplay. That says nothing about whether the film will ever be greenlighted by the studio's senior management for actual production. The way to determine whether the film has escaped development hell and entered actual production is when the studio officially commits to a release date and begins to announce the identities of cast members (that is, A-list or B-list actors who are working on replacing the scratch voices in the animatic), and the studio's personnel begin to release photos and posts on social media hinting about the film they are currently working on. For example, that's what happened with Moana, and several Disney animators have already disclosed on social media that they are busy because the film is in production. In contrast, Gigantic has a release date but it's slipped from March to November 2018, and the studio has been conspicuously silent about the cast. Once they fix whatever issue caused the release date to slip, then they will start casting stars and loudly announcing them to build buzz around the film. -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 18:45, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Frozen 2 is the fourth animated CGI musical film and a sequel of Frozen (2013).
I don't want to move it yet until I get a consensus. Because the poster and trailer clearly say "II", but the title of teaser trailer is "2". Should we just wait and see? - Jasonbres ( talk) 17:48, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
This is clearly a big 'much-a-do-about-nothing' situation here. The film is clearly titled Frozen II, and can simply state that it was sometimes referred to/marketed as "Frozen 2" (which in all actuality is the exact same thing as the Roman numeral formatting). This is a discussion that shouldn't be a big enough issue to have to reach a consensus. Marketing and official titles are two separate things.-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 18:51, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
almost all official posters in the cinemas that are in English are put as Frozen II plus is listed in box office Mojo also as Frozen II, same thing in IMDB and IMDB pro, we also have the official toys and Lego sets listed as Frozen II; so I think it should be listed as Frozen II and than put "also listed in some places as Frozen 2" ........................ and I apologize for not using my log in, I had my hard drive kaput for about 3 months before able to get a new hard drive and I am not sure what is my exact name and hate being forced to create a new name 2605:E000:A4C8:EB00:D3A:170B:BED2:C04B ( talk) 05:47, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
I nominate Frozen II. Most sources, including the onscreen title in the movie itself, is Frozen II. It is a rarer exception to see it called Frozen 2 for nonces who don't know II means 2. 205.175.118.112 ( talk) 21:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved, no prejudice against another RM when more info regarding common name is available. ( closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 19:35, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Frozen 2 →
Frozen II – Because that is how the title is stylized on the movie poster.
DReifGalaxyM31 (
talk)
17:08, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
I am well-aware that the infobox instructions say score composer only but this doesn't make sense in a musical where the major source of music is the songs not the score. I think WP:IAR applies in this case. See other examples of filmed musicals such as My Fair Lady (film), The Sound of Music (film) or Oklahoma! (1955 film) where practice is to list the songwriters.
Also looking at the talk page archives for the infobox it appears that there is some support for treating musicals differently from non-musical films in that the song composers in musicals have a major credit at least equal and sometimes higher to the score composer whereas in non-musicals the credit for songs is usually a minor credit. See also Template talk:Infobox film § RfC: Is it relevant to list all composers for the film's music score and songs?. The current instructions are not taking into consideration the unique role songs play in a musical but reflect the minor role songs play normally in most films. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 19:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
The discussion above about how to title the article discusses the II vs 2 in the title. Poster art and some sources use II, Disney fairly consistently says "Frozen 2" in text descriptions about the film and "FROZEN II" in the poster art for the film. How to represent the stylization in the intro is contentious. Disney does not stylize the title as "Frozen II". If we wish to represent how Disney shows the stylization we should accurately describe it and not misrepresent it. The small caps are significant to how they stylize it just as the II represents 2 in the text titles. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 19:20, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
The proper solution here is that somebody need to open another WP:RM discussion to move this article to "Frozen II". Six months later it's now clear that "Frozen II" is the correct title for the film, and we just need to move it. So, somebody please just open another RM on this!! -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 16:39, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. We have clear consensus that this is the most WP:COMMONNAME. Cúchullain t/ c 19:51, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Frozen 2 →
Frozen II – The argument regarding Frozen II vs Frozen 2 has been going on too long. A lot of reviews, websites (the
official Disney one says 2 in the tab title). On the other hand, the poster, RT, metacritic and movie theatre websites (such as
cineplex), as well as the other half of reviews are saying II. The movie comes out in like, 3-4 days, can we please finally settle this. Someone said to open an RM, so here we go.
EDIT: Just a side note that the on-screen title is FROZEN II. QueerFilmNerd talk 22:51, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)" What other film articles have determined to use as their names does not inform this one. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 06:03, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
as I notice that some people fight over saying 3 ( indicating they read the official plots? ) or 6 ( I guess going by Frozen I being a 2013 film and Frozen II a 2019 film? ) years since Elsa's coronation
Since it is established that the events in Frozen 2 occur three years after Frozen, where then within those three years do the events in Frozen Fever and Olaf's Frozen Adventure fall in? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 ( talk) 07:23, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Frozen Fever takes place during during Anna's first birthday after the events in Frozen 1, and since we know that her birthday is on summer solstice, it must takes place around June 21-22 of the following year, so almost one year later (we know that Frozen 1 takes place in July). Olaf's Frozen Adventure, om the other hand, takes place on the first Christmas after Frozen 1, hence only a few months later. Ninahi8 ( talk) 09:48, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
@ Bartallen2: I removed that section for now pending consensus to include it. I'm notifying you here in case anyone else has thoughts on it. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 05:16, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
But, the attack did happen IN the Vue theatre where Frozen 2 playing - thus, it's related to the film, as many outlets have reported -; Vue took action, due to outside where the attack had occurred. As it should be stated, as some had reported too, that the violence had occurred during a screening of Frozen 2 - irrespective, it occurred at the theatre. Also, several outlets such as BBC, Variety, The Independent, The Telegraph, Business Insider, and Metro had stated that the attack occurred during a Frozen 2 viewing on opening-night, as well as several eyewitness reports whom stated it occurred within the Frozen 2 screening - inside. With several reports, including from The Scotsman, that it had occurred inside the Frozen 2 screening, as it was reported several individuals ran into the screenings - so you can't simply shut it down by stating "doesn't belong here".-- Bartallen2 ( talk) 08:39, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Not notable? It has been covered by a variety of outputs, most recently today by Deadline.com - unless you're suggesting a riot with machete's and gang affiliation is fairy common at theatres? -- Bartallen2 ( talk) 15:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Incorrect, several sources and eye-witness stated that the gang fight happened during a screening or outside a screening of Frozen 2, hence why you can isolate that - and very few have stated that was the reason why Blue Story was banned and officially there's been no connection to the film, as stated by West Midlands Police; hence the uproar. -- Bartallen2 ( talk) 16:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Complete double standards, if this happened during a showing of Joker it would be mentioned in the article's opening paragraph.
This is a coincidental event that happened at one instance that Frozen 2 was shown. Totally unrelated to Frozen 2 itself, just the venue. If this were some coordinated thing that happened at a significant number of Frozen 2 showings to protest film content, there might be a case that it involved the film. This event is not even close to that sort of link. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 19:30, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
FYI, the riot didn't happen at at screening of Blue Story, it just got banned because it was a gang film (but was reinstated a couple days later). If anything the attacks have more to do with Blue Story rather than Frozen 2. If the attacks just happened to also to occur where people were lining up for Joker, I'd say it doesn't belong there either. Unrelated to Frozen. QueerFilmNerd talk 23:07, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I'm glad that you've pointed out that the riot didn't happen at a screening of Blue Story, as many of the teenagers had come out of the Frozen 2 screening, which a variety of Wiki-users failed to establish. The attacks have nothing to do with Blue Story - as much as Frozen 2 -, as the police have stated, there was no connection, ergo, why Vue have been lambasted for the decision to cancel screenings. The Birmingham disorder had arguably more - publication and factual statements-wise presently, at the very least, to do with Frozen 2 than Blue Story, although no cause has been established - just questionable statistics from Vue, which have no merit; hence the investigation. Showcase, as you pointed out, reinstated the film due to criticism and the fact they found no correlation between the violence and Blue Story at all. Several publications have stated that the attackers went into the Frozen 2 screening (inside the actual screening as The Independent have stated), or that it was during the queuing process. -- Bartallen2 ( talk) 16:24, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Tonight, I got a chance to glance through the new Art of Frozen 2 book at one of Chronicle Books' retail locations in San Francisco.
My initial impression is that the press kit PDF shares a number of paragraphs with the Art of Frozen 2 book, especially the quotes from various Disney artists. At some point, it would be preferable to take citations that currently point to the press kit and replace them with citations to the book whenever possible. -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 06:36, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Can we change "criticism focused" in the third paragraph of the introduction to "criticism was focused?" The sentence does not mention criticism at all prior to this phrase, saying that the film received mostly positive reviews, which makes it odd to say "criticism focused" as there was no criticism mentioned, only implied through the phrase "mostly positive reviews." If there were "mixed reviews" then "criticism focused" would make more sense as the fact that there was criticism at all would be more present in the reader's mind, but because reviews were mostly positive changing it to "criticism was focused" seems better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhenry97 ( talk • contribs)
First, I want to thank User:TropicAces for vigorously reverting those edits. Second, the reason why User:Jedi1970's edits are incorrect is that they violate Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability. You need a reliable source in compliance with WP:RS for such information. You cannot publish original research on Wikipedia. If you want to publish original research on the Internet, go start a blog.
Disney is being very tight-lipped about the film's budget---probably because it took them five years to make the thing. Peter Del Vecho has already publicly admitted in interviews that it was using all the studio's resources at the end, so the budget must be huge. We just don't know how huge. -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 18:30, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
* The theory that water has memory is known in Homeopathic Medicine; * Unlike the movie Frozen, Frozen 2 makes no references to either chocolates or sandwiches; — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 ( talk) 11:56, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Frozen 2 soundtrack debuted at #1 on Billboard 200. Frozen's soundtrack debuted at #1 on Billboard 200 in 2014. There I think this fact should be mentioned in the relevant column. Tillu Talla ( talk) 12:15, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Is that necessary? I mean, the number II can always be written as 2. Unless the digit-2 form has been used in promotions and marketing etc. this does not seem worth noting. 2A00:23C5:FE0B:700:4D77:5E0D:AC8E:F0C1 ( talk) 14:51, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
I think that they must have used Roman Numerals for the title of the movie. RaniaKamilia2512 ( talk) 04:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Frozen II has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Table of contents is formatted incorrectly. 128.3.32.224 ( talk) 21:53, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I think it is necessary for Frozen II because this semi-protected expires on February 25, any IP users can edited any of these articles. But because the film is highly popular and still running in box office and awaiting for release in Disney+ as well as DVD/Blu-ray, the semi-protected edits needs to extend time, or at least requesting pending changes protection for this article, same as 2013 Frozen film in order to ensure that quality of this article. Any thoughts about my suggestion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.69.53.66 ( talk) 09:34, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I remember in the final scenes of the movie, Anna is the Queen of Arendelle. The article still states that Anna is the Princess of Arendelle and Elsa is the Queen, neither of which is true. Moreover, Kristoff is the King of Arendelle. Shouldn't the be altered? Jake The Great! | 📞 talk 14:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
If Disney has any plans to produce a third sequel, could that be mentioned in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 ( talk) 08:12, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk · contribs) 00:46, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Kingsif (
talk)
17:27, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Wingwatchers ( talk), Chompy Ace ( talk), and Pamzeis ( talk). Nominated by Pamzeis ( talk) at 01:25, 16 July 2021 (UTC).
Hello Wingwatchers. After completing my preliminary copyedit I always ask questions about the article to ensure that my edit reflects the intended meaning and is clear in doing so. Please reply to each point by indenting below each one like you would a conversation; items will be struck out once they have been answered. Please ping me with {{ U}}, {{ ping}}, or {{ re}} as I have a lot of items on my watchlist. My copyediting process can be found here. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC) |
[...] and that he figured that they would be involved on another project related to Frozen, though he had no idea whether it might be.Emphasis in original, strong emphasis added. Is this supposed to be what? If "whether" is the intended word, it's an incomplete thought and the sentence would need to be finished.
There is also special dubbings released for the movie Moana, which gathered in the space of two years from its release a Tahitian, a Māori, and a Hawaiian version, a special Northern Sami dubbing was released for Frozen 2 titled Jikŋon 2.Edited by requester, emphasis in original. Aside from the grammatical error at the beginning, splitting the sentence now makes mentioning Moana extraneous. The sentence before might have to be re-edited so that this one is relevant. Was the success of localised versions the reason why there was a Northern Sami dub released? Please do not edit this yourself while we try and figure out what is trying to be said here.
The local crew filmed the Lopezes in their New York City apartment, and footage of their meetings with other production crews was captured from one or both sides of the conversation or from the teleconferencing technology directly.Already edited, edited by requester. Why is it important to know that footage was captured from all these different sources?
@ Wingwatchers: Looking forward to your response. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
@ Wingwatchers: The critical response section needs the most work. I suggest following the "guidelines" listed at WP:RECEPTION. To start, avoid the use of quotes. Rotten Tomatoes says that there are about 330 approved reviews to choose from. This section only made room for 10. One main thing I would advise following is the first rule: "Organize the section by thematic element." Split each paragraph into a certain topic (praise for its animation, soundtrack, score, and voice performance, and criticism for its story and music). Remove all those quotes and add more reviews. Examples may include here on Baby Driver, The Grand Budapest Hotel, Old, and Inside Out. Chompy Ace 22:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
As of this edit on 8 July 2021, the article had some very minor issues but was well-written and mostly made sense.
Three months later, I noticed that it no longer makes sense. Virtually every single prose sentence after the lead paragraphs has at least one error (usually in word choice, verb tense, punctuation, or capitalization), most sentences have two to five errors (of which at least one is critical), and several sentences are incomprehensible word salad. The worst example of the last category is this line: "The Los Angeles Times concluded that the re-procedure within the initial declinal were observably due to the unprecedented success from the first film."
Any objections before I revert back to the last good version from four months ago? -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 15:45, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Frozen II has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Themes and Analysis section is poorly written. Can we have someone with a literary background give it a shot? The language is muddled and unfocused. I am having trouble following the train of thought. There are several sentences that are unsourced. This movie was thematically layered and full of symbolism. Certainly the writer is correct that there is a conversation about social justice and that should be the focus, but also there are themes about mythology, symbolism, mono myth, emotional growth and family dynamics. 99.47.183.71 ( talk) 01:18, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
User:Czar made a major error by moving this draft into the English Wikipedia article mainspace. None of the reliable sources on the entertainment industry (THR, TheWrap, Variety, Deadline, etc.) or the animation industry (CartoonBrew, Animation World Network, Animation Network) has reported that Frozen 2 has moved into actual production. Based on the most recent reports from reliable sources, it is still in development. As anyone familiar with the development of animated films is well aware, often what happens is that a major star (in this case, Kristen Bell) is sometimes attached to the project very early (as actually occurred with her on Frozen) and agrees to record his or her voice track relatively early, at the same time other unknown actors (or even crew members from around the studio) are recording scratch voices for the animatic/Leica reel based on early drafts of the screenplay. That says nothing about whether the film will ever be greenlighted by the studio's senior management for actual production. The way to determine whether the film has escaped development hell and entered actual production is when the studio officially commits to a release date and begins to announce the identities of cast members (that is, A-list or B-list actors who are working on replacing the scratch voices in the animatic), and the studio's personnel begin to release photos and posts on social media hinting about the film they are currently working on. For example, that's what happened with Moana, and several Disney animators have already disclosed on social media that they are busy because the film is in production. In contrast, Gigantic has a release date but it's slipped from March to November 2018, and the studio has been conspicuously silent about the cast. Once they fix whatever issue caused the release date to slip, then they will start casting stars and loudly announcing them to build buzz around the film. -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 18:45, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Frozen 2 is the fourth animated CGI musical film and a sequel of Frozen (2013).
I don't want to move it yet until I get a consensus. Because the poster and trailer clearly say "II", but the title of teaser trailer is "2". Should we just wait and see? - Jasonbres ( talk) 17:48, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
This is clearly a big 'much-a-do-about-nothing' situation here. The film is clearly titled Frozen II, and can simply state that it was sometimes referred to/marketed as "Frozen 2" (which in all actuality is the exact same thing as the Roman numeral formatting). This is a discussion that shouldn't be a big enough issue to have to reach a consensus. Marketing and official titles are two separate things.-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 18:51, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
almost all official posters in the cinemas that are in English are put as Frozen II plus is listed in box office Mojo also as Frozen II, same thing in IMDB and IMDB pro, we also have the official toys and Lego sets listed as Frozen II; so I think it should be listed as Frozen II and than put "also listed in some places as Frozen 2" ........................ and I apologize for not using my log in, I had my hard drive kaput for about 3 months before able to get a new hard drive and I am not sure what is my exact name and hate being forced to create a new name 2605:E000:A4C8:EB00:D3A:170B:BED2:C04B ( talk) 05:47, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
I nominate Frozen II. Most sources, including the onscreen title in the movie itself, is Frozen II. It is a rarer exception to see it called Frozen 2 for nonces who don't know II means 2. 205.175.118.112 ( talk) 21:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved, no prejudice against another RM when more info regarding common name is available. ( closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 19:35, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Frozen 2 →
Frozen II – Because that is how the title is stylized on the movie poster.
DReifGalaxyM31 (
talk)
17:08, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
I am well-aware that the infobox instructions say score composer only but this doesn't make sense in a musical where the major source of music is the songs not the score. I think WP:IAR applies in this case. See other examples of filmed musicals such as My Fair Lady (film), The Sound of Music (film) or Oklahoma! (1955 film) where practice is to list the songwriters.
Also looking at the talk page archives for the infobox it appears that there is some support for treating musicals differently from non-musical films in that the song composers in musicals have a major credit at least equal and sometimes higher to the score composer whereas in non-musicals the credit for songs is usually a minor credit. See also Template talk:Infobox film § RfC: Is it relevant to list all composers for the film's music score and songs?. The current instructions are not taking into consideration the unique role songs play in a musical but reflect the minor role songs play normally in most films. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 19:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
The discussion above about how to title the article discusses the II vs 2 in the title. Poster art and some sources use II, Disney fairly consistently says "Frozen 2" in text descriptions about the film and "FROZEN II" in the poster art for the film. How to represent the stylization in the intro is contentious. Disney does not stylize the title as "Frozen II". If we wish to represent how Disney shows the stylization we should accurately describe it and not misrepresent it. The small caps are significant to how they stylize it just as the II represents 2 in the text titles. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 19:20, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
The proper solution here is that somebody need to open another WP:RM discussion to move this article to "Frozen II". Six months later it's now clear that "Frozen II" is the correct title for the film, and we just need to move it. So, somebody please just open another RM on this!! -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 16:39, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. We have clear consensus that this is the most WP:COMMONNAME. Cúchullain t/ c 19:51, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Frozen 2 →
Frozen II – The argument regarding Frozen II vs Frozen 2 has been going on too long. A lot of reviews, websites (the
official Disney one says 2 in the tab title). On the other hand, the poster, RT, metacritic and movie theatre websites (such as
cineplex), as well as the other half of reviews are saying II. The movie comes out in like, 3-4 days, can we please finally settle this. Someone said to open an RM, so here we go.
EDIT: Just a side note that the on-screen title is FROZEN II. QueerFilmNerd talk 22:51, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)" What other film articles have determined to use as their names does not inform this one. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 06:03, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
as I notice that some people fight over saying 3 ( indicating they read the official plots? ) or 6 ( I guess going by Frozen I being a 2013 film and Frozen II a 2019 film? ) years since Elsa's coronation
Since it is established that the events in Frozen 2 occur three years after Frozen, where then within those three years do the events in Frozen Fever and Olaf's Frozen Adventure fall in? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 ( talk) 07:23, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Frozen Fever takes place during during Anna's first birthday after the events in Frozen 1, and since we know that her birthday is on summer solstice, it must takes place around June 21-22 of the following year, so almost one year later (we know that Frozen 1 takes place in July). Olaf's Frozen Adventure, om the other hand, takes place on the first Christmas after Frozen 1, hence only a few months later. Ninahi8 ( talk) 09:48, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
@ Bartallen2: I removed that section for now pending consensus to include it. I'm notifying you here in case anyone else has thoughts on it. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 05:16, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
But, the attack did happen IN the Vue theatre where Frozen 2 playing - thus, it's related to the film, as many outlets have reported -; Vue took action, due to outside where the attack had occurred. As it should be stated, as some had reported too, that the violence had occurred during a screening of Frozen 2 - irrespective, it occurred at the theatre. Also, several outlets such as BBC, Variety, The Independent, The Telegraph, Business Insider, and Metro had stated that the attack occurred during a Frozen 2 viewing on opening-night, as well as several eyewitness reports whom stated it occurred within the Frozen 2 screening - inside. With several reports, including from The Scotsman, that it had occurred inside the Frozen 2 screening, as it was reported several individuals ran into the screenings - so you can't simply shut it down by stating "doesn't belong here".-- Bartallen2 ( talk) 08:39, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Not notable? It has been covered by a variety of outputs, most recently today by Deadline.com - unless you're suggesting a riot with machete's and gang affiliation is fairy common at theatres? -- Bartallen2 ( talk) 15:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Incorrect, several sources and eye-witness stated that the gang fight happened during a screening or outside a screening of Frozen 2, hence why you can isolate that - and very few have stated that was the reason why Blue Story was banned and officially there's been no connection to the film, as stated by West Midlands Police; hence the uproar. -- Bartallen2 ( talk) 16:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Complete double standards, if this happened during a showing of Joker it would be mentioned in the article's opening paragraph.
This is a coincidental event that happened at one instance that Frozen 2 was shown. Totally unrelated to Frozen 2 itself, just the venue. If this were some coordinated thing that happened at a significant number of Frozen 2 showings to protest film content, there might be a case that it involved the film. This event is not even close to that sort of link. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 19:30, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
FYI, the riot didn't happen at at screening of Blue Story, it just got banned because it was a gang film (but was reinstated a couple days later). If anything the attacks have more to do with Blue Story rather than Frozen 2. If the attacks just happened to also to occur where people were lining up for Joker, I'd say it doesn't belong there either. Unrelated to Frozen. QueerFilmNerd talk 23:07, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I'm glad that you've pointed out that the riot didn't happen at a screening of Blue Story, as many of the teenagers had come out of the Frozen 2 screening, which a variety of Wiki-users failed to establish. The attacks have nothing to do with Blue Story - as much as Frozen 2 -, as the police have stated, there was no connection, ergo, why Vue have been lambasted for the decision to cancel screenings. The Birmingham disorder had arguably more - publication and factual statements-wise presently, at the very least, to do with Frozen 2 than Blue Story, although no cause has been established - just questionable statistics from Vue, which have no merit; hence the investigation. Showcase, as you pointed out, reinstated the film due to criticism and the fact they found no correlation between the violence and Blue Story at all. Several publications have stated that the attackers went into the Frozen 2 screening (inside the actual screening as The Independent have stated), or that it was during the queuing process. -- Bartallen2 ( talk) 16:24, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Tonight, I got a chance to glance through the new Art of Frozen 2 book at one of Chronicle Books' retail locations in San Francisco.
My initial impression is that the press kit PDF shares a number of paragraphs with the Art of Frozen 2 book, especially the quotes from various Disney artists. At some point, it would be preferable to take citations that currently point to the press kit and replace them with citations to the book whenever possible. -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 06:36, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Can we change "criticism focused" in the third paragraph of the introduction to "criticism was focused?" The sentence does not mention criticism at all prior to this phrase, saying that the film received mostly positive reviews, which makes it odd to say "criticism focused" as there was no criticism mentioned, only implied through the phrase "mostly positive reviews." If there were "mixed reviews" then "criticism focused" would make more sense as the fact that there was criticism at all would be more present in the reader's mind, but because reviews were mostly positive changing it to "criticism was focused" seems better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhenry97 ( talk • contribs)
First, I want to thank User:TropicAces for vigorously reverting those edits. Second, the reason why User:Jedi1970's edits are incorrect is that they violate Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability. You need a reliable source in compliance with WP:RS for such information. You cannot publish original research on Wikipedia. If you want to publish original research on the Internet, go start a blog.
Disney is being very tight-lipped about the film's budget---probably because it took them five years to make the thing. Peter Del Vecho has already publicly admitted in interviews that it was using all the studio's resources at the end, so the budget must be huge. We just don't know how huge. -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 18:30, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
* The theory that water has memory is known in Homeopathic Medicine; * Unlike the movie Frozen, Frozen 2 makes no references to either chocolates or sandwiches; — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 ( talk) 11:56, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Frozen 2 soundtrack debuted at #1 on Billboard 200. Frozen's soundtrack debuted at #1 on Billboard 200 in 2014. There I think this fact should be mentioned in the relevant column. Tillu Talla ( talk) 12:15, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Is that necessary? I mean, the number II can always be written as 2. Unless the digit-2 form has been used in promotions and marketing etc. this does not seem worth noting. 2A00:23C5:FE0B:700:4D77:5E0D:AC8E:F0C1 ( talk) 14:51, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
I think that they must have used Roman Numerals for the title of the movie. RaniaKamilia2512 ( talk) 04:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Frozen II has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Table of contents is formatted incorrectly. 128.3.32.224 ( talk) 21:53, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I think it is necessary for Frozen II because this semi-protected expires on February 25, any IP users can edited any of these articles. But because the film is highly popular and still running in box office and awaiting for release in Disney+ as well as DVD/Blu-ray, the semi-protected edits needs to extend time, or at least requesting pending changes protection for this article, same as 2013 Frozen film in order to ensure that quality of this article. Any thoughts about my suggestion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.69.53.66 ( talk) 09:34, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I remember in the final scenes of the movie, Anna is the Queen of Arendelle. The article still states that Anna is the Princess of Arendelle and Elsa is the Queen, neither of which is true. Moreover, Kristoff is the King of Arendelle. Shouldn't the be altered? Jake The Great! | 📞 talk 14:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
If Disney has any plans to produce a third sequel, could that be mentioned in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 ( talk) 08:12, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk · contribs) 00:46, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Kingsif (
talk)
17:27, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Wingwatchers ( talk), Chompy Ace ( talk), and Pamzeis ( talk). Nominated by Pamzeis ( talk) at 01:25, 16 July 2021 (UTC).
Hello Wingwatchers. After completing my preliminary copyedit I always ask questions about the article to ensure that my edit reflects the intended meaning and is clear in doing so. Please reply to each point by indenting below each one like you would a conversation; items will be struck out once they have been answered. Please ping me with {{ U}}, {{ ping}}, or {{ re}} as I have a lot of items on my watchlist. My copyediting process can be found here. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC) |
[...] and that he figured that they would be involved on another project related to Frozen, though he had no idea whether it might be.Emphasis in original, strong emphasis added. Is this supposed to be what? If "whether" is the intended word, it's an incomplete thought and the sentence would need to be finished.
There is also special dubbings released for the movie Moana, which gathered in the space of two years from its release a Tahitian, a Māori, and a Hawaiian version, a special Northern Sami dubbing was released for Frozen 2 titled Jikŋon 2.Edited by requester, emphasis in original. Aside from the grammatical error at the beginning, splitting the sentence now makes mentioning Moana extraneous. The sentence before might have to be re-edited so that this one is relevant. Was the success of localised versions the reason why there was a Northern Sami dub released? Please do not edit this yourself while we try and figure out what is trying to be said here.
The local crew filmed the Lopezes in their New York City apartment, and footage of their meetings with other production crews was captured from one or both sides of the conversation or from the teleconferencing technology directly.Already edited, edited by requester. Why is it important to know that footage was captured from all these different sources?
@ Wingwatchers: Looking forward to your response. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
@ Wingwatchers: The critical response section needs the most work. I suggest following the "guidelines" listed at WP:RECEPTION. To start, avoid the use of quotes. Rotten Tomatoes says that there are about 330 approved reviews to choose from. This section only made room for 10. One main thing I would advise following is the first rule: "Organize the section by thematic element." Split each paragraph into a certain topic (praise for its animation, soundtrack, score, and voice performance, and criticism for its story and music). Remove all those quotes and add more reviews. Examples may include here on Baby Driver, The Grand Budapest Hotel, Old, and Inside Out. Chompy Ace 22:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
As of this edit on 8 July 2021, the article had some very minor issues but was well-written and mostly made sense.
Three months later, I noticed that it no longer makes sense. Virtually every single prose sentence after the lead paragraphs has at least one error (usually in word choice, verb tense, punctuation, or capitalization), most sentences have two to five errors (of which at least one is critical), and several sentences are incomprehensible word salad. The worst example of the last category is this line: "The Los Angeles Times concluded that the re-procedure within the initial declinal were observably due to the unprecedented success from the first film."
Any objections before I revert back to the last good version from four months ago? -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 15:45, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Frozen II has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Themes and Analysis section is poorly written. Can we have someone with a literary background give it a shot? The language is muddled and unfocused. I am having trouble following the train of thought. There are several sentences that are unsourced. This movie was thematically layered and full of symbolism. Certainly the writer is correct that there is a conversation about social justice and that should be the focus, but also there are themes about mythology, symbolism, mono myth, emotional growth and family dynamics. 99.47.183.71 ( talk) 01:18, 5 November 2021 (UTC)