Jump to content

Talk:Elemental (2023 film): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 61: Line 61:
:A lot of films that have had weak opening weekends have usually recovered and become successful. Saying a film is a box office bomb purely by its opening weekends even though it's still pulled in a profit by its second weekend is a good example of jumping the gun. Yes, many sources have claimed it's a flop, but most films have had weak openings before recovering. And no, this is is not a "subjective assessment" like you claim. This has been proven before. [[User:Adamtb24|Adamtb24]] ([[User talk:Adamtb24|talk]]) 04:04, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
:A lot of films that have had weak opening weekends have usually recovered and become successful. Saying a film is a box office bomb purely by its opening weekends even though it's still pulled in a profit by its second weekend is a good example of jumping the gun. Yes, many sources have claimed it's a flop, but most films have had weak openings before recovering. And no, this is is not a "subjective assessment" like you claim. This has been proven before. [[User:Adamtb24|Adamtb24]] ([[User talk:Adamtb24|talk]]) 04:04, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
::Further More, We are not gonna believe this Box-office disappointed yet. I'd say it's gonna Run for a Couple of Months before it will come to Disney+. Pete Docter says he wants us to be Patient. [[User:Lola Clementine|Happiness is Simple]] ([[User talk:Lola Clementine|talk]]) 08:40, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
::Further More, We are not gonna believe this Box-office disappointed yet. I'd say it's gonna Run for a Couple of Months before it will come to Disney+. Pete Docter says he wants us to be Patient. [[User:Lola Clementine|Happiness is Simple]] ([[User talk:Lola Clementine|talk]]) 08:40, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
::What about [[Turning Red]] then? The film performed a lot worse than this one yet it is not mentioned in the lede. Why does this film get the same special treatment despite another film completely failing in comparison to this? [[COVID-19]] doesn't apply here, it should be mentioned in the Turning Red lede as the explanation but all that there was on that article is block evasion. So tell me, how is there not an agenda to hide facts about Disney's films performing not so good? [[Special:Contributions/82.66.209.179|82.66.209.179]] ([[User talk:82.66.209.179|talk]]) 11:29, 1 July 2023 (UTC)


== Voice cast ==
== Voice cast ==

Revision as of 11:29, 1 July 2023

Lake Ripple's Non-Binary nature

The idea of a non-binary character was used for marketing/promotion to try and gain interest, primarily during Pride Month, any development surrounding this character being non-binary is not in the final film.

If it's not part of the movie, neither the dialogue nor character development, then it shouldn't be listed as a character trait in the description of the characters as it's irrelevant to how the character is depicted in the film.

The director making remarks about the characters outside of what is shown should either be considered under the marketing for the film OR in a trivia section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:802:DF01:E1FD:FAAC:96B1:C532 (talk) 18:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who the heck is "Matt Yang King"

Hey, who's Matt Yang King? You should take out the stuff that is unconfirmed. How do you guys know who voices Alan Ripple? Are you spies or something? Maybe "Ripple" isn't even his last name, and he's not really Wade's dad, maybe he's just his brother. Yeah, some websites stated that he is possibly Wade's brother, but I recommend YOU not to add anything, and just make it "TBA as Alan" no "Matt Yang King" or "Ripple". Unconfirmed stuff. How do you even know if "Ripple" is Wade's real last name? I know it was in his tag that reads "ELEMENT CITY INSPECTOR WADE RIPPLE. But Maybe it's fake, you never know. Also, what the heck is "Fern Grouchwood"? Where the heck did you get "Grouchwood"? Did you make that up? You put "Matt Yang King" on there like you're so sure, but maybe you're wrong. That's why you can't trust everything you read on Wikipedia. Silly Simonthings18. MariaKwanta (talk) 04:52, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Man why you going off about cartoon character names the movie ain't released yet fam chill out bro once it's out they'll have all the data compiled bro they'll have their data compiled 2806:261:417:7099:2136:E2C4:5D0C:684A (talk) 04:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Ripple is his brother, not father

The voice actor confirmed it in replies on his IG post 176.234.229.187 (talk) 09:30, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How is this a romace film

HOW? 184.185.152.3 (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many sources calls it rom-com film, so it is a rom-com film. LancedSoul (talk) 17:59, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Box-office Performance

So we know the Performance is Poor at the Moment. We should keep an eye out what's the Latest Earnings of the Box Office later. Happiness is Simple (talk) 20:31, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Social media reception

Here I am @Nyxaros: at the talk page. Since when do we include a source that has cherry picked tweets to summarize "social media reception". We don't. It's synthesizing unreliable sources (tweets) to come up with an overall conclusion. I wasn't the only one that contested this inclusion of yours. What is your rationale for including this? The Metacritic deletion was just collateral damage, though it could be argued that it's unnecessary. Let the reviews speak for themselves. Mike Allen 00:31, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They are both sources reporting content in the mentioned areas. Regardless of whether or not a source should be used on the page based on tweets from general audiences and some critics, the source states "positive reviews", that's not synthesizing when we include it in this article as the source itself literally names this claim. If we act from your opinion then we shouldn't use the consensus and Metascore of RT and MC either because they also cherry pick reviews to sum up the reception and come up with an "overall conclusion". They also include websites and publications that we've labeled as "unreliable". On a side note, you kept reverting with MC source multiple times, you should've read and checked what you were reverting. ภץאคгöร 09:02, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Positive reviews from a select number (like what, under 10?) of random tweets. What are you not understanding? Mike Allen 13:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you are going to question the source just because it used select number of tweets, you should check these random tweets, which are written by people including a Critics' Choice member and an editor of Collider. As I've stated, the other sources do "select numbers" too, and this is not the place to discuss why they do it. You have to decide if it's in line with MOS:FILMCRITICS and/or it's "quoting an author from a reliable source citing public commentary". Other than that, there's no problem. ภץאคгöร 19:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do I watch the movie?

2300 98.10.136.168 (talk) 11:31, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can watch this movie in movie theaters. Seinfeld429 (talk) 12:34, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2023

Change the run time to 1 hour and 43 min or 103 minutes Indyquaza135 (talk) 23:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. The source states 109 minutes - BBFC.co.uk] Mike Allen 23:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Box office bomb

I have made many edits about this films box office performance. The reasons for reversion were weak. Either "box office could improve" or "too early". These are both subjective assessments. I have provided many, even too many apparently sources to back my claim of a box office bomb. No one reverting my edits has provided sources portraying the films box office as successful or just not bad. At best this film earnings were disappointing (yahoo) at worst they were a disaster (global village space). Both sources call it a flop or bomb. Why this is too early for us but not for most RS's I don't know. Can we at least keep the fact that this is the lowest grossing opening weekend for a Pixar film. A fact that most articles mention. PalauanLibertarian🗣️ 20:44, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of films that have had weak opening weekends have usually recovered and become successful. Saying a film is a box office bomb purely by its opening weekends even though it's still pulled in a profit by its second weekend is a good example of jumping the gun. Yes, many sources have claimed it's a flop, but most films have had weak openings before recovering. And no, this is is not a "subjective assessment" like you claim. This has been proven before. Adamtb24 (talk) 04:04, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Further More, We are not gonna believe this Box-office disappointed yet. I'd say it's gonna Run for a Couple of Months before it will come to Disney+. Pete Docter says he wants us to be Patient. Happiness is Simple (talk) 08:40, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What about Turning Red then? The film performed a lot worse than this one yet it is not mentioned in the lede. Why does this film get the same special treatment despite another film completely failing in comparison to this? COVID-19 doesn't apply here, it should be mentioned in the Turning Red lede as the explanation but all that there was on that article is block evasion. So tell me, how is there not an agenda to hide facts about Disney's films performing not so good? 82.66.209.179 (talk) 11:29, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Voice cast

It could be noted that Flarrietta is a customer at The Fire Place. Also here is a link on the Immigration Official: https://pixarpost.com/2023/05/elemental-sneak-peek-american-idol.html 65.130.217.56 (talk) 03:46, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]