Talk:Dasavathaaram

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Dasavathaaram was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
WikiProject India / Tamil Nadu / Cinema (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Tamil Nadu (marked as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject Film (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.
 

Comparisons with Sivaji[edit]

Shall I (or anyone else) add a box office comparison of Dasavatharam with Sivaji to show how well Dasavatharam is faring than Sivaji in the overall box office? Manojlds (talk) 14:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

You may as well do so, but you seem to be treading the wrong path by sourcing your blog. This doesn't work. Please learn and contribute more constructively. The best way to go about adding to the article is by having suitable reliable references that are verifiable. Hope this helps. Mspraveen (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, i have done it, edit or remove it as you deem appropriate Manojlds (talk) 17:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

External Links[edit]

Why cant i add a dasavatharam review to the External Links of the page? Am not trying to promote my site, i just felt that as an ardent Kamal fan would like my views to be seen and also get the opinions of others. I also run a poll that i would like many to participate in. I dont see any wrong in adding such links in External links part Manojlds (talk) 15:49, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but that would be termed as spam. Please refer to the manual to get more information on what and what not should be in the External links section. Hope this helps. Cheers! Mspraveen (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry Mspraveen, but you are mistaken. Reviews are indeed allowed to be added as per the manual (please read the first sentence of the manual carefully). You can also check out the pages for other movies on wikipedia. Such links CANNOT be used as a source or citation, but they can be added as external links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ionlygreat (talkcontribs) 23:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Protection[edit]

Could someone protect this page from those improfessional edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.57.179 (talk) 10:02, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Trivia[edit]

  • I noticed that it is stated in the Trivia that the earlier record number of roles played by a single person in one movie was help by Eddie Murphy for playing 8 different roles. Didnt Shivaji Ganesan play 9 different roles in Navarathiri?

Wiki San Roze talk 07:33, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Stalerottan technology??! WTF —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.166.2.243 (talk) 11:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Stalerottan technology?[edit]

What is this, exactly? A Google search turns up nothing, leading me to believe that it is either a mis-spelling, or simply doesn't exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakeboy76 (talkcontribs) 23:22, 25 November 2007 (UTC)


There is a mistake in the entire page, instead of summarising Dasavatharam, Marmayogi news are clipped in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sloganorgan (talkcontribs) 07:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Dasavathaaram Spam[edit]

Somebody is spamming this movie into the Chaos theory article, the last weeks. This is completely unacceptable. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

How Does Dasavatharam relate and reflect the Chaos theory and butterfly effect[edit]

Dear All .I kindly request you to please watch the movie and then read this article for better understanding.


DASAVATHARAM Deals With Butterfly Effect and Chaos Theory


Before Anything lets try and compare the ten roles of Kamal Hassan to the ten avatars of lord Vishu:

One thing we had noticed is why people didnt get the real subtext and reason for the various roles and hence the title. If you knew the real dasavatharams of Lord Vishnu and their characters you can appreciate the script more. Let me explain, starting with the best adapted role:

1. Krishna avatar - Vincent Poovaraghavan Lord krishna is actually a dalit, he is dark-skinned [shyamalam]. He saved draupadi when she was being violated and he was the actual diplomat in mahabharatham. Lord krishna dies of an arrow striking his lower leg. Now look at how vincent was introduced.. he appears when asin is about to be molested and he saves her like draupadi. Vincent is the dalit diplomat, fights for land issue [soil issue to be exact] and dies from the metal rod striking his leg. Oh even five of vincent's men are drugged at P. Vasu's.. sounds familiar???

2. Balarama avatar - Balarama naidu This is an easy given. as the name suggests and the role personifies you can easily get it.

3. Mathsya avatar - Ranagaraja nambi nambi is thrown into water in an act of trying to save lord from being thrown into sea, though vainly. what more clue do you want?

4. Varaha avatar - Krishnaveni paatti During the mukunda song, krishnaveni paatti does varaha avatar in the shadow puppetry. The frame freezes on it for a second. there is the clue. Moreover, in varaha avatar lord actually hides earth so as to protect life forms. Here too krishnaveni hides the germs - life form inside the statue so as to protect.

5. Vamana avatar - Kalifulla khan remember in vamana avatar, lord vishnu takes the vishvaroopa, that is the giant form! Hence the giant kalifulla here symbolises vamana avatar.

6. Parasurama avatar - Christian Fletcher Parasurama is actually on an angry killing spree and killed 21 generations of the particular kshatriya vamsa. Hence the real KILLER… Guess what thats what our Fletcher is! He comes around with the gun [modern upgrade for axe] and kills everyone around. I have to check if he kills 21 people though.

7. Narasimha avatar - Shingen Narahashi first of all the name itself is a play on the words singam [means lion in tamil] and narasimha [the avatar being symbolised]. Lord Narasimha manifests himelf to kill the bad guy and he also teaches prahaladha. In the movie, he shows up to kill the killer fletcher! and is also a teacher.. Lord Narasimha had to kill the asura with bare hands and hence the martial arts exponent here.. get it?

8. Rama avatar - Avatar Singh Lord Rama stands for the one man one woman maxim, kind of symbolising true love.. Here Avatar portrays that spirit by saying that he loves his woman more than anything and wants to live for her.

9. Kalki avatar - Govindaraj Ramasamy As you know, the hero in kaliyug can be none other than the Kalki avatar!!!

10. Koorma avatar - Bush This is the most loose adaptation I couldn't clearly comprehend. But if you look at the real koorma avatar, the lord is the turtle/tortoise that helps in stirring the ksheera sagara and bringing out the amruth. This essentially creates war among the devas and asuras. Similarly today Bush facilitates war between you know whom… May be Kamal also indicates that this avatar is a bit dumb like the tortoise…


Dasavatharam is a brilliant and bold effort which talks about the physics of Karma,Chaos theory and cycle of life. Dr.Kamal Hassan's words about Dasa on the internet: "This theory is under the skin of the film and you will find little veins, tissues and muscles, every layer of it. One is the chaos theory — we are all connected to everyone in the world. None of our acts will be without effects. One act will collide with another. It is like what you learnt in physics — where one object crashes into another object and produces something else. This is basically our sensibilities, insensibilities, crime, disregard for society and good deeds. In religion, it is called good karma. It all comes around because there is some physics to it but we are not talking about it in bombastic terms as people will come for entertainment and will understand it in the process".


Simple terms,what chaos theory is: Consider this example: A man Mr.A is sleeping inside his car which is parked in the parking lot of a big shop. Suddenly another man Mr.B wakes him up nd asks for 25 cents. Mr.A runs his hand through his pockets (for say few secs less than a minute and gives him the coin). Mr.B thanks him and walks towards the shop and suddenly notices a driver, trying to back off his car is just about to hit another car(near the entrance of the shop) which is stationary. So he shouts"hey..hey ..stop the car" and saves the two cars from any damage. Now,if Mr.A had said"Sorry I dont have any change" to Mr.B,then B would have probably gone to another person to ask for money and the accident could have been unavoidable . So A was in a way reponsible to the change in life patterns of B and the owners of the 2 cars. This is chaos theory.

Dasa talks about this chaos theory by showing how different characters are responsible for the change in life patern of scientist Govind and goes a step further by showing how Govind is reponsible for the change in life patterns of these characters (For instance Avtaar singh is cured of cancer because of Fletcher who comes into picture because of govind.If not for them, he would have undergone the operation and would have never been able to sing for the rest of his life. Similarly Khalifulla khan and the other 200 people wouldnt have been alive if they were not asked to stay in the mosque for investigation regarding govind's case). All this has been beautifully captured in the movie.So there is no question of unwanted extra roles or anything of that sort.All the 10 characters are well etched and very important!!

Next, Dasa also talks about the physics of Karma. What exactly is it? Example: You are watching a boxing match. Both are deadly fighters.You are thoroughly entertained while watching 10 rounds of gory violence. Then few days later you see two of your very close friends fighting over an issue. The fight goes to the next level where they start hitting each other with say cricket bats. This is violence too.But you can definitely not find it entertaining this time. Your instinct would be to stop the fight. This shows that you ARE bound to experience something equal and opposite (as in physics)to what you experience now , either immediately,or in the near future. What if you suddenly get to die before experiencing the effects of your action? Well,Thats where life cycle comes in and you will experience the effect in your next birth. This is what Karma is about. You have the free will to do what you want.But the effects are bound to follow you.

Dasavatharam deals with this brilliantly. Assuming Govind is the rebirth of Nambi, they are totally the opposites. Nambi dies having faith in god,but Govind is an atheist. So it balances the so called Karma equation. This also applies to asin(though the other way round) 12th century asin is ready to give up her belief in Lord Vishnu for the sake of her husband. But andal is a stonch believer in god who always tries to safeguard the statue.

The Tsunami can be thought of as the butterfly effect of the statue that was drowned in the 12th century, or a natural occurence that resulted in a miracle by saving millions of lives or whatever. But it also imples that it made govind and andal reunite in front of the same statue where they were seperated 800 years back!!

Finally, Dasavatharam says life is nothing but a cycle.You are bound to experience the effects of your actions either now, or in the future,or in your next birth. You are provided with the free will to do what you want with your current life. But your actions will not only affect you but also the peolpe around you resulting in a buttefly effect which might lead to unbelievable consequences in some part of the world. You have to experience the effects for what you have caused. Until then life keeps repeating like a cycle. Phew!!

Dr.Kamal has done an amazing job with the screenplay to present such a topic with speed,humour and amazing entertainment.What more can u ask for from Alwarpet Aandavar??

Some more theories not to bore you, but will definitely be interesting A Fantastic Movie by Kamal

http://podbazaar.com/view/144115188075857182

Too many doubts about correlation of the movie, Chaos theory and Butterfly Effect have come into Picture....!!!

The movie clearly states about Chaos Theory and Butterfly Effect [Kamal says it in his Speech in the Movie ]

The concept of "CHAOS THEORY" and "BUTTERFLY EFFECT", by itself is a complex concept, which mainly highlights the happening of huge unimaginable things because of least probable things...!!!!

Dasa although deals with these concept, but does not necessarily confuse anyone with it,,,, its mainly "YOU"... that plays a factor in how the movie gets along with "YOU".


To just brief about these Concepts,

Q: What is Chaotic System ? A: Basically a chaotic system is one wherein long term predictions are impossible.Like for example,if I push a car, I know that it is going to move and it will continue to do so if I go on pushing it on and on.However,in a chaotic system,this situation cannot be predicted over a long period of time. Weather for example is a chaotic system.No matter how good your instruments are,you simply cannot predict the weather with 100% accuracy over a long term basis and forecast it.

Q: What is the Butterfly Effect ? A: It is the most important component of a chaotic system.Basically,small perturbations results in amplifications which completely destroys the original nature of the system and makes prediction impossible. If a butterfly flaps its wings in Africa,it could result in a cyclone in USA.(Mark the word COULD).A highly dumbed down explanation of the butterfly effect is in the film Anniyan,where Vikram's sister dies because a liquor shop owner sells liquor on a dry day.


Q: OK, how does Dasa incorporate it ? A: In essence,Dasa talks about 10 characters who are inconsequential as such,but are integrated in a larger picture.Without Bush,the plane would have been called back.Without Shinghen, Govind would be dead.Without the tsunami,the world would have been destroyed.Even Krishnaveni Patti plays a very important role.If she had not put the vial in the idol,maybe Govind would have recovered it then and there and a powerful weapon would have been unleashed.The very fact that it went into the idol meant that it was being accelerated to its destiny.Without Kaifulla Khan, Govind would have never escaped;the list simply goes on.

Q:OK,so does the film talk about theism or atheism? A:Neither.It talks about how humans drive the destiny of the world.


The movie does Show " A Butterfly " flying across the screen after the Tsunami Attack, clearly indicating that the Tsunami is an Outcome of " The Butterfly effect ".


ALSOOOOOOO........


The butterfly COULD cause a hurricane.That's a huge probability. Would be a negligible probability. NOT a huge one. if that were true, we would have cyclones on an hourly basis as butterflies keep flitting all over Africa and u don't have so many cyclones to account for a HUGE probability. Chaos,relativity and quantum mechanics are so damn weird that you will think I am talking metaphysics and pseudoscience.

Like for example,according to quantum mechanics,there is a finite probability that you will fall right through a solid chair.And it is a PROBABILITY. Even 10 to the power -26 is finite :-) .

But yes, Quantum Mechanics does allow for weird situations.


THE CONNECTION !!!!!


check this link for a clear and complete explanation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect

In the above links u can see that butterfly's wings might create tiny changes in the atmosphere that may ultimately alter the path of a tornado or delay, accelerate or even prevent the occurrence of a tornado in a certain location..

So in dasavatharam that idol thrown into sea in 12th century is the cause for tsunami.... so everything is interlinked .The wiki entry also says that chaos could play an important role in plate techtonics. Which means even the 12th century incident is connected.

The 1st scene is perfectly connected to the climax, remember what Kamal says in the 1st scene, that he will not say "Om Nama Shivaya" , but Asin tells him to chant it , but still Kamal refuses , ( in this kamal in his story tries to tell that ) Nambi believes in his god more than anything, but Asin feels "Its ok if we change the god or chant other god's name, its life thats most important." Now if u see the climax its JUST OPPOSITE.... Kamal doesn't believe in god much and values lives of people the most.... but Asin deeply believes in god and that too this dialogue comes when both Asin and Kamal's hand is on the god which came from the sea , and it also means that they are getting united from the place they departed hundreds of years back ( Kamal and Asin).The connection between the 1st scene and the climax in the movie shows the generation circle combined with supernatural powers of GOD and destiny.....!!!


If you watch it closely u can also find another actor who has done double action other than Asin and Kamal. Asin's father Sahasranamam [12th Century], in the beginning he says to Nambi "Panchatchira manthirathai sollitu vaango mappillai" and at the End [After tsunami] he says "Avar enna jathiyo inga vaanga paati ". Another Eg. of Chaos Theory and circle of life.


Little more insight into the film:


Nambi explanation

Okay, this is slightly outside the chaotic system driving the film as a whole.From what I could gather he says that this story is about ideologies like God,the madness surrounding such ideologies and decides to tell the story of the Shaivite-Vaishnavite conflict to show how people go crazy in the name of God as an example.

As a loose end,it gets tied up in the end,when the Ranganathar idol is thrown out of the sea due to the tsunami which highlights the cyclic nature of life.Actually the Nambi character highlights both Chaos and Karma which I explained.That is the brilliance of this film,there is so much to see and understand.

Another explanation(and this is slightly far fetched--- as explained earlier) is that Govind is in fact the reincarnation of Nambi. As Nambi he couldn't protect God and died in the name of God.In order to fulfill his Karma,he is reincarnated as Govind Ramasamy who ultimately saves the world from destruction.The idol in the end somewhat hints to this theory; his story began with the idol and it ends with the idol. As far as the connection with Nambi character and events in 12th Century goes... The connection is based on the "Butterfly effect ".

When Govind and Andal goes to the bury the idol in the sands, Andal will stumble on a particular stone couple of times...This is the same stone as the one from 12th Century hen Kothai rips her Thaali and flings it at Kulothunga Chozan...it will end up hanging on the stone. So, the implied message here is Andal is Kothai reborn in the 21s century. During the encounter with Santhana Bharathi in the sand quarry, it is repeat of the incident from 12th century. Instead of Kulothunga Chozhan, it is the Sand Mafia which tries to inflict damage on the land. This movie is a brilliant juxtaposition of independent characters whose paths cross, if only briefly, which is stunning example of Chaos Theory.

The idol that is drowned in the sea along with Rangarajan in 12th century by Chozha king results in a fault being developed at the bottom of the ocean and creates tremors more than 800 years later. These tremors result in the Tsunami. This again is a classic case of Butterfly Effect wherein a seemingly inconsequential event (the drowning of the idol) saves Tamil Nadu from being wiped out off the face of the earth.

But actually kamal has not left anything for our imagination... Explanation struck the right chord, Kamal does tell to Asin in a dialogue that idol which gets sunken back then gets struck between the tectonic plates under the sea and causes tsunami... Many people missed this dialogue i guess. Kamal's accent was so very perfect Tamil, that many people missed it.... Being perfect Is a Problem by Itself !!! :)

Although the explanation is a least possible theory, that is what "Chaos Theory" And "Butterfly Effect" are all about. Its not just the statue that caused the tsunami, but it just started a large chain of effects which kept multiplying exponentially and finally lead to it after 800 years....!! Why just say this concept is perfectly illogical... it is possible... thats what i have been explaining all the while !!!

The story line is that things going wrong are made to be right which involves many people and countries knowingly or unknowingly.

Knowingly:

-Bush, Manmohan Singh, Govindh, Fletcher, Balaram Naidu, Mallika Sherawath.

Unknowingly:

-Nambi's drowning to death with the heavy statue causes simple changes to the seabed that causes a devastating tsunami 800 years later [Acc. to Chaos theor it is possible.... although it is least probable... It is possible.. so nothing TOTALLY WRONG About it ] -Poovaragan(actually saved kamal unknowingly---when poovaragan enters kamal and asin were caught by those manal kollayargal.There poovaragan distracts the gang helping kamal to escape), - Avatar Singh(gave way to Fletcher to escape in the airport unknowingly), - Japanese(saved govind from fletcher,he knows he is saving but he doesnt know about the play and was there only for revenge), - Kallifulla and family(saved govind unknowingly)........ -Vincent is a dalit leader of a lower caste( the so called ) but saved an Iyengar Girl ......and at the end becomes the con of the Iyengar Paati !! - If Shingen Narahashi's sister was not killed, Fletcher could have killed govind and used the virus for wrong purpose..

This is based on Chaos Theory..!!!!!

Finally a Tamil Movie of a world class type

Tags[edit]

There are no sources for the plot summary (second paragraph of the lead) or the plot section, not even from the producer's site. The "information" should be deleted from the article unless a source is provided. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 12:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

It isn't a case of defending the stance of this article, but I'd say that if several featured film articles like Mulholland Drive (film) can do away with the plot section without sources/references, then I wonder why this article would need one. Clarifications will be appreciated. Mspraveen (talk) 12:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Just because the FA review "committee" missed blatant violations of Wikipedia policies, doesn't mean we have to do so here. Does this fall into WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 13:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

10 roles[edit]

I'm afraid I can no longer remove the unsourced, possibly relevant, commentary on the 10 roles, because of WP:3RR. I self-reverted my 4th revert. Can others help, or do we need to protect this article against irrelevancies. AGAIN. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

It is under my purview now. Further to let you know, the 3RR applies to edit wars but not for POV-related vandalism. I've warned the users involved suitably based on their actions. Should you happen to notice any similar vandalism, please consider using suitable warning templates. Thanks for your efforts in fighting POVs and dubious unsourced contributions. Mspraveen (talk) 08:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Dasavatharam - it's not about Chaos Theory or Butterfly Effect[edit]

Dasavatharam doesn't speak about chaos theory or butterfly effect. There is not a single point in the movie to substatiate that claim. Kamal says at a point in the movie that "there is a concept in modern science which attributes the flaps of a butterfly to hurricanes but this is a story that shows a butterfly flying amid hurricanes". It's a well-knitted human story on the lines of Periyar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Observer314 (talkcontribs) 17:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I commented on this a long time ago, and was ignored. It's about what I would call the coincidence effect, which seems in keeping with what I know about the Hindu concept of reincarnation; that people and things which once interact, will continue to interact, even in the next incarnation. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Actually Kamal did say "Chaos Theory". But I think the dialogue had an error. He said Chaos Theory but gave an explanation of the Butterfly Effect. The movie may not be exactly based on those two but it surely interlaces the two with the story (see the paragraph about Dasavathaaram on the Butterfly effect in popular culture article). Eelam StyleZ (talk) 21:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Budget?[edit]

Whats the real budget of Dasavathaaram? Each time I view Dasavathaaram's article it changes from 60 crores to 120 crores to 80 crores and so on.Xxxsacheinxxx (talk) 15:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments before GA review[edit]

I'm not reviewing this article, but thought the editors might find this "pre-review" useful.

  • I just noticed (again) that the plot consists of close to 2000 words. This is, 1100 words more than what style guidelines for films. Agreed that the plot consists of several inter-woven short stories, but IMO, overshooting the target by 1100 is atrocious. May the editors do the needful so as to facilitate easier transition to a GA.
  • IMDB is sourced twice as a reference. IMDB is not considered anymore as a reliable source. I also noticed use of LOTW as a reference. I'm unsure of its reliability and verifiability. Rest of the sources appear fine to me. Though there are some which aren't exactly reliable (like MaduraiMachan.com, FilmSutra.com and ExtraMirchi.com), but as long as they aren't cited for controversial information, I think they are fine. The GA reviewer may consider this otherwise.
  • The article lacks an infobox poster. I'd suggest to have one for the infobox and remove the one for the soundtrack. Either of them will sort of convey the same information.
  • Otherwise I felt that the article is quite comprehensive for a GA.

Good luck! Mspraveen (talk) 03:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanx. I'll do everything within the next 24 hours before submitting it. Can you give me an idea of how much non-free photos I can add? Universal Hero (talk) 10:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
You're quite welcome! :) Non-free should ideally be utmost two, IMO. Poster will anyways constitute one. Ideally, if an additional one needs to be used, then the prose should back it up well, say something on the lines of discussing a particular production element. But GA reviewers don't quite make a big fuss if there are 2/3. But since the goal of the pedia is to reduce non-free fair-use images, the lesser the better. Good luck and holler me back if you need any assistance. Mspraveen (talk) 11:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

This article is to become GA? GA is a long way off. The plot section has to be thoroughly revised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.99.137 (talk) 08:50, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dasavathaaram/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

A quick look through the article reveals several concerns:

#Much of the plot section is a word-for-word copy of http://www.pr-inside.com/dasavatharam-ten-reincarnations-revealed-r647077.htm. I am unsure which site copied from which, though.

It's obvious that the site concerened has copied Wikipedia Universal Hero (talk) 10:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
How is that obvious? Both have the same date of publication, and the plot information was added to Wikipedia by an IP editor. GaryColemanFan (talk) 14:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
  1. The plot section is far too long.
    This has been mentioned before. The film is full of intervowen stories, and reducing its size will make it sound rather trivial. Universal Hero (talk) 10:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
    It's possible to reduce wordiness without removing important content. GaryColemanFan (talk) 14:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
  2. The entire article needs a thorough copyedit by someone with a strong grasp of the English language.
  3. There are far too many copyrighted images to claim under fair use, especially since the article does not comment on them. They are used merely as decorations, which are not covered by fair use. In addition, the fair use rationales are very weak and probably would not hold up to a legal challenge.
  4. The infobox picture has no fair use rationale.
  5. Lord of the Web appears to be a blog site. What makes it a reliable source (see WP:RS)?

This would be a good start, although more may need to be done once this is fixed. I will place the nomination on hold to allow for these concerns to be addressed and/or discussed. Any comments and/or questions can be left here, as I have placed the page on my watchlist. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)


I have addressed a few issues

  1. Plot section is long - Not addressed
  2. Too many non-free images - Unnecessary images removed
  3. No fair use for Info box picture - Fair use added and image size reduced to comply with WP:NFC. Fair use also added to Soundtrack Album cover image and image size reduced to comply with WP:NFC.
  4. reliable source - Not addressed

Other issues addressed

  • Album infobox type changed to code:soundtrack
  • Changed references to two colums as the list was long

My sugessions

  • It is recommended that the track listing be chnaged from a table to bullet points. Take a look at The Beatles for example

Bharathprime (talk) 10:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

There has been little response to the review. One week has passed, and major problems still exist: the plot is too long, the prose is weak, the images do not meet the fair use guidelines, and I'm still not convinced about the Lord of the Web site. Altogether, the article does not meet four of the six GA criteria, so I am going to have to fail it. I suggest that the list that I left above be used to direct future improvements to the article. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:20, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Page name[edit]

I just moved the article back from Dasavathaaram (film), per WP:NAME. Arjun, could you explain why you moved it in the first place? I see no need for the qualifier. Is there a similarily popular topic of the same name? --AmaltheaTalk 19:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I moved the article to Dasavathaaram (film) because of the presence of a similarly popular topic of the name Dasavatara. The word "Dasavatara", is rendered as "Dasavataram" in South Indian languages like Malayalam. They are sufficiently similar for a move to be warranted. I propose the creation of a disambigaution page, or the addition of the "for" template at the start of each article disambiguating/linking them to each other. For rules and guidelines please consult WP:NCF. Cheers! Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 02:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
In my opinion, mistakenly typing "Dasavathaaram" when looking for "Dasavataram" seems unlikely enough that the article should definitely remain here, without the qualifier.
If you feel that enough people actually will type this name while searching for Dasavatara and that a disambiguation page makes sense it can still be created at Dasavathaaram (disambiguation), with a {{dablink}} hatnote pointing there.
But of course I know nothing about transliterations in general or Malayalam in particular, so I might be very wrong. :) --AmaltheaTalk 15:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I've added a for template at the start of the article disambiguating/pointing to Daśāvatāra. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 03:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm still not quite getting it. Is "Dasavathaaram" really a variant or possible transliteration of Daśāvatāra? Because if it isn't then I don't think that it's a plausible typo to search for "Dasavathaaram" when you meant to type "Dasavataram".
Also, why haven't you created Dasavataram yet? --AmaltheaTalk 17:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Dasavathaaram is a very common transliteration of Dasavataram written in Malayalam. In fact if you write this film's name is the Malayalam script, it reads exactly the same as 'Dasavataram'. (ie. both Dasavataram and this film's name are spelled exactly the same in Malayam (and possibly in the Tamil script too)). Hence the for template. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 03:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the creation of Dasavathaaram (disambiguation) and having a {{dablink}} hatnote pointing there: Since there are only two articles with such similar names, a dablink would not be necessary. dablinks, I think are used primarily when there are 3 or more article with similar names needing disambigaution. In this scenario, I feel a for template works best. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 03:38, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Arjun is over rwcting. A possible heavy Hindu believer. That article shouldn't be a part of this. Universal Hero (talk) 17:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, it makes sense to me. I don't know the film and have only now skimmed over the article, but the film was obviously named after Daśāvatāra and has strong connections to that principle, through the avatars of Kamal Haasan.
I still am convinced that the film will be the likely search target for anyone who types in "Dasavathaaram", so it shouldn't be moved. If reliable sources can be found however that describe the relationship between the characters and the avatars (like [1] or [2], only reliable) then that should be added to the article too, since it seems important for its interpretation.
So, to answer your objection, it seems like this article already is a part of "this". --AmaltheaTalk 13:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Dubious budget figure[edit]

This article gives the budget for the film as $12.5 million (60 crore rupees then at exchange rate of $1 = 48 rupees) based on a singular interview given by the producer. I believe this figure is nonsensical considering the small scale of Tamil film industry. Even Bollywood films do not have this level of budget though their markets are much larger and significant on a global scale. I however agree that this film was the biggest hit in Kamal's career and the second biggest hit ever in Tamil film industry after Sivaji that released in 2007. Moreover, boxofficemojo.com reported that this film grossed over $16 million worldwide in the first 4 weeks. Anwar (talk) 08:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

For the moment, I suppose we listen to sources and let it be as its is believed in popular belief. Universal Hero (talk) 11:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Is that an excuse? I am not saying the film is a flop. I am saying the scope was limited than you think. Just think before beginning a revert war again. Anwar (talk) 11:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
It would help, if you present your stats on a userpage and let people check over it, instead of adding one-liners. Please also use Indian money values. Thanks. Universal Hero (talk) 11:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Deadlinks[edit]

There are two deadlinks in which I couldn't find any archived versions on web.archive.org that need to be addressed:

MuZemike 18:43, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dasavathaaram/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


Toolbox

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    Which Meena is referred to in the casting section, there appear to be two actors of that name.
    There is some broken formatting in the Soundtrack section.
    The prose is very poor and nowhere near GA standard. It needs thorough copy-editing for grammar, spelling, style, clarity and readability.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Behindwoods, apunkachoice, www.extramirchi.com are not RS
    There are at least six tagged dead links
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    The plot section is too long. Consult the guidelines at WT:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    I have nominated File:Posterdasavatharam.jpg at WP:Possibly unfree files/2010 April 4#File:Posterdasavatharam.jpg as derivative of a copyrighted work.
    I query the non-free use rationale for File:Dasavatharam sherwat.jpg. How exactly does this image help readers understand the plot section?
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    OK, a lot of issues to address. The prose, the dead links, the over long plot section, dubious sourcing, the images. On hold for seven days. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:01, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
    No edits have been made since my review, so I will not be listing this article at this time. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Please add this table to the article[edit]

Global Box Office Tally
Territory Screens Screen
%
Gross
(INR crore)
(lifetime)
Gross
%
Trade
Note
Tamil Nadu 275 21% 88 44% Hit
Andhra Pradesh 260 20% 40 20% Hit
Kerala 85 7% 14 7% Hit
Karnataka 80 6% 12 6% Hit
Rest of India 410 31% 6 3% Flop
Domestic Total 1,110 85% 160 80% -
Malaysia 58 4% 10 5% Hit
USA 42 3% 8 4% Hit
UK 19 2% 6 3% Hit
Rest of the World 71 6% 16 8% Hit
Overseas Total 190 15% 40 20% -
Global Total 1,300 100% 200 100% -

Adding this table gives a clear picture of the film's performance, from all versions, in several markets. As the film has been declared flop in Bollywood, it is unlikely to reset any record. It is unfortunate. The film fell 50% every week in both domestic and overseas markets.

Dear anonymous table creator: If this info is to appear in the article, you will first need to provide your source for the numbers. AtticusX (talk) 07:46, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
I notice you've changed some numbers in the table, but you still haven't provided a reference to your source so your data can be verified. AtticusX (talk) 20:24, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Box office tally looks dubious[edit]

Enthiran is reported widely in vernacular media to be the largest grosser in Tamil film industry. Sun TV published quarterly results disclosing the total cost of Enthiran to be INR132 crore and total income INR179 crore. It also means the box office figure on Dasavathaaram is faulty (not INR250 crore) and needs research. Until then, it should be removed from the article.Kollyfan (talk) 17:21, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I have reduced the box office tally to INR200 crore based on new source. Even this looks inflated, so still searching for new sources. Kollyfan (talk) 07:09, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Dasavatharam screen count is about 1,000. This is less than half of several Bollywood films. So, there is no way this film could have grossed even INR200 crore. Still trying to find new sources.Kollyfan (talk) 07:17, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I have reduced the budget to INR40 crore based on new source. This looks closer to reality.Kollyfan (talk) 07:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia states that secondary sources which are reliable should be preferred to primary sources. So, do not go by phrases like 'the film could not have' without providing proper sources. And don't compare the Bollywood and Kollywood industries to say absurd statements. The Hindu and Times of India are definitely reliable sources and should not be removed from articles. The film's estimated budget is 60 crores and gross is 250 crore as stated by reliable sources. If you wish to change them, contact either Hindu or Times of India and ask them where they get their numbers from. Also, Sify.com is not reliable for financial figures. Do not change things unnecessarily. You require a few days to adjust to wikipedia's policies. Until then, do not make any major changes in Wikipedia using primary sources. Secret of success (talk) 22:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Stop pushing POV here. Only The Hindu speculated (without source) INR250 crore as revenue. Remember Enthiran is the biggest grosser in Tamil, not Dasa. Taran Adarsh estimated Enthiran's gross at INR255.5 crore. So, Dasa must be lower than that. If you wish to quote higher figure, contact either Hindu or Times of India and ask them where they get their numbers from. Until then, do not make any major changes in Wikipedia without proper source.Kollyfan (talk) 10:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
If the Hindu requires a source, then why don't Taran Adharsh's numbers require one?? Enthiran gross is not 250 crore. Its been stated by many officials that it is at minimum 375 crore and it is the highest grossing Indian film. You seem to be wanting to extend a worthless discussion. Secret of success (talk) 17:41, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

This source claims Dasavatharam grossed INR100 crore after four weeks (not two weeks).Kollyfan (talk) 12:53, 20 June 2011 (UTC) Also, Box Office Mojo reveals that the film grossed $16,227,750 by 6th July (three weeks after release). So, it means the INR100-crore-in-a-fortnight claim is false.Kollyfan (talk) 16:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

For your kind information, The Hindu is one of the most trusted newspapers in the world and it is definitely more reliable than this Hinducinema.com thing. Hindu states 250 Crore and Economic Times says 'over 200 Crore'. If you wish to remove these links and add unwanted references for extending fake data, what on earth are you doing in Wp? You have some rules and regulations to follow and also, you seem to be changing data based on your assumptions. That sounds like original research and that isn't allowed here. And finally, Box office mojo states the Foreign Total of the movie to be $16,356,962. Secret of success (Talk) 18:09 pm June 22 2011 (UTC)

File:Oh Oh Sanam Dasavathaaram 30sec Sample.ogg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg

An image used in this article, File:Oh Oh Sanam Dasavathaaram 30sec Sample.ogg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 17 November 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:32, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dasavathaaram/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Daniel Case (talk · contribs) 04:49, 8 September 2012 (UTC) I have printed this out and will hopefully reach a decision tomorrow. Daniel Case (talk) 04:50, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

OK. Sorry for the delay of an extra day or so.

This article, about a film that was clearly a major event in Indian cinema, has been nominated for GA twice before in the four years since its release. I can see why the author/nominator wanted to get it to GA. Some issues from the previous two noms have been cleaned up, most notably the plot summary, which now clocks in at less than a thousand words. And there has been some work on the images.

But regretfully I must fail it a third time.

The main issue from the first two noms, the prose, is still a huge problem. Much of it still reads like it was either translated from other languages or written in English by a non-native speaker. As a result we have a lot of bloat and redundancy. On my printout there are large sections circled in red where I just stopped giving specifics as there were so many places where the language could be smoothed out. Some of it may just, for all I know, be Indian English, but other things like "visiting guests" (are there any other kind?) are problematic whatever variety of the language takes precedence. There are also inconsistencies like US and USA being used interchangeably, and then the full "United States of America" being used at one point.

In addition, some sections have a tone and usage which sounds more like a news story than an encylopedia article. That suggests to me that there may have been some copypasting going on at some level, perhaps not so much here but in the original language, perhaps.

And discussing copyright issues brings up the other problem: the images. There were fair-use issues in a previous review. They have been partly addressed, but not completely.

Some can easily be fixed—the onesheet image can and should be reduced to 300px, since that's the acceptable size for such images as it will never be displayed inline at any larger size. But others cannot. I am not sure yet whether the image of the idol can qualify as free. Indian copyright law, as summarized at Commons, says that images of three-dimensional artwork (and yes, something built for use on a film set counts as artwork) can be freely photographed as long as they are "permanently affixed" in a public place. We don't know whether the idol shown has not, in fact, been struck since the production. Or if not, whether it's displayed somewhere the public has access to. Without knowing these things, I cannot comfortably say that image is properly licensed as CC by its original uploader.

This leads into the problem of images, generally, or rather the lack thereof. Ironically, given my above complaints, this article can get away with using more fair-use images. There is a general limit of four per article on a copyrighted visual work. I am amazed that in an article about a film where the cowriter and star plays ten different roles, including some outside his ethnicity, that not only is there not a single picture of him in one or more of those roles, there isn't a single picture of him outside the infobox (and I only know it's him on the onesheet because I clicked on his name to go to the article). Surely there are publicity stills available?

And even if we want images beyond those four we have other options. We commonly use free images of the stars or creators in film articles. There's only the one picture of Haasan, but there's a whole category at Commons of images of our leading lady that we could use.

So, for all these reasons, it fails. It's comprehensive and well-cited (although I will put a {{fact}} on the one paragraph-ending sentence about the soundtrack being available in four languages, as I'm sure that's an oversight) but its prose needs a lot of work (if the nominator desires, I will implement a full copy edit based on my hard-copy review), and it could use more images and better justify the ones it does use. Daniel Case (talk) 17:22, 10 September 2012 (UTC)