Talk:In the Land of Blood and Honey

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.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles

Bosnia and Herzegovina Low‑importance

	Bosnia and Herzegovina portal In the Land of Blood and Honey is part of the WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Bosnia and Herzegovina on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Bosnia and HerzegovinaWikipedia:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaTemplate:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaBosnia and Herzegovina articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Factual errors

So much NATO / UN consultancy and yet Factual errors: Almost all uniforms, insignia, military equipment, weapons and vehicles of the Bosnian Serb Army shown in the movie, are completely inaccurate and never seen in the war in the former Yugoslavia. Whilst some wardrobe pieces (e.g. ranks and insignia) are fully imaginary items, most other military props are obviously of non-local origin (mostly came from former Soviet Block armies, notably Hungary, where most of the filming took place). Practically all of the shown 'Bosnian Serb' distinctive sleeve insignia, are actually from the surplus of The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Army and were, as such, never worn by Serbs in the Bosnian War.

Also, for such one sided effort of victimization of civic war where all sides suffered, she should loose the UN ambassador status. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.175.94.247 (talk) 01:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarized Script

News accounts have surfaced that the script for the movie was stolen from a Croatian journalist, Josip J. Knezevic (Joseph J. Braddock westernized name). A suit has been filed in US District Court in Chicago. Also named in the suit is Edin Sarkin, the producer, whom Knezevic met with. There is an account in the Dec. 6, 2011 Chicago Sun Times. 71.139.246.212 (talk) 03:07, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Claims by Mitrovic

The long paragraph written about TV Pink owner Zeljko Mitrovic does not seem significant enough to warrant a such a mention in the production section because 1) Film pre-production is an arduous process in which many locations, sets, and studios are scoped out. Apparently, this one is news because the owner of the company, quote, did not want to be a part of something that would put Serbs in a bad light. That is literally the whole story. 2) This information only came from Mitrovic himself, who has been known to be a controversial figure who embellishes stories. All articles I looked at on this subject get their story from a "Belgrade based" media 3) I fail to see the significance that a pre-production scouting event (one of many) needs such a long paragraph. --Jesuislafete (talk) 05:58, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First off, I cut the paragraph down in half. Secondly, most of your complaints are based on heavy-duty editorializing. Obviously in your world "Belgrade based media" equals "false reporting", "Mitrovic" equals "self-aggrandizing person who embellishes".... And that's fine. But that's "Jesuislafete World". In the wider world there is not necessarily an equal sign between those terms and no such assumptions apply. Those are your personal POVs, but they're completely irrelevant in this discussion.

As for this discussion about whether the 'Mitrovic episode' deserves a mention, I can't believe you're even questioning this. On what grounds do you want to remove it? From the media reports, it is clear that Pink's movie division was approached by the film's producers. When discussing "Production", this fact alone is worthy of mention - big time local media tycoon and a major Hollywood film production doing business together - that alone most certainly warrants a sentence or two. Not to mention the added twist where the big time local tycoon refuses to do business with the big time Hollywood star because he says he doesn't agree with the content of her film politically, ideologically, historically or however and even releases a press statement accusing her of having prejudices against his nation.Zvonko (talk) 06:31, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There you go showing off your bad faith. 1) I never said Belgrade based media equals false reporting--show me where I said that. I was saying that all of the reports were in Serbia and other Serbo-Croatian countries because they all had the same story from the same Belgrade paper. The fact that no one but that media in Belgrade bothered researching shows that this was only a story in SerboCroat media and tabloids--no one in the United States carried this story. 2) Mitrovic's past behavior needs to be called up in question when he is the ONLY party who released a statement to the media giving such a derisive statement saying Angelina hates Serbs.

Secondly, do not talk to me like that. You are beyond hypocritical. I can say every single one of your snide remarks right back at you living in "Zvonko World" and what would that accomplish?

Thirdly, this is not a major Hollywood film--not even close! Where did you get this idea? It has an abysmally small budget and is opening in limited theatres! I don't expect everyone to have a knowledge of Hollywood film production, but come on. Please do some research.

Not to mention the added twist where the big time local tycoon refuses to do business with the big time Hollywood star because he says he doesn't agree with the content of her film politically, ideologically, historically or however and even releases a press statement accusing her of having prejudices against his nation.

You want to know something funny? I actually did not erase your entire paragraph when I first saw it. Even though I did not think it was relevant (and was completely one-sided), I originally narrowed it down to two sentences with no quotes from Mitrovic, but then I decided it would be better to delete the whole thing. You know why? Because I figured since it was irrelevant, there was no need to have an example Serb/Serbs embarrassing themselves and their country yet again with more nationalistic rhetoric. But you know what now? I think I'll leave it be. --Jesuislafete (talk) 07:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What a gigantic waste of time. A plastic plant would wither next to you.Zvonko (talk) 07:35, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What perfect example of a personal attack. Instead of responding in a mature fashion befitting a Wikipedia editor on the topic at hand, you belittle a fellow Wikipedia editor. You have no reasonable response so you resort to taunts. Continue responding so and I will report you. --Jesuislafete (talk) 03:46, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In one post your tone is sneeringly putrid, in the next you're crying foul.... Is there anything resembling a point in all this superfluous chitchat coming from your side? As far as I'm concerned we've finished the discussion about the matter at hand. There's really no need for you to share your sarcastic remarks about your editing thought process, your viewpoints on "Serbian nationalist rhetoric", and your deep concern for "Serbia's public image". Zvonko (talk) 08:19, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb Movie Ratings Spam

Serbian media reported that nationalist Serbs created a Facebook page and encouraged other nationalists to spam IMDB ratings with 1 star even before this movie was premiered (rating goes from 1 to 10 on IMDB). Spam subsequently resulted in a low IMDB rating for the movie. http://www.kurir-info.rs/vesti/drustvo/srbi-objavili-rat-glumici-andjo-ne-znas-sta-te-ceka-172994.php GKFWashington (talk) 00:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the following from the critical reception area : "The film received mixed, and eventually mainly negative reviews due to organized spam by Serbian nationalists who drove IMDb ratings down, as reported by Serbian daily 'Kurir'." This doesn't belong as an intro statement because it doesn't deal with reviews in general but with IMDB reviews . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pljuplju (talk • contribs) 03:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your removal even though I posted it. Whatever makes the article better, I am in for it. Thanks.GKFWashington (talk) 03:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of POV template

Removed POV template in line with requirements of WP:NPOVD under "Adding a page":

Note:This label is meant to indicate that a discussion is still going on, and that the article's content is disputed, and volatile. If you add this template to an article in which there is no relevant discussion underway, you need at least to leave a note on the article's talk page describing what you consider unacceptable about the article. The note should address the troubling passages, elements, or phrases specifically enough to encourage constructive discussion that leads to resolution. In the absence of an ongoing discussion on the article's talk page, any editor may remove this tag at any time.

-Kiwipat (talk) 20:27, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Synergy Hollywood, USA goerment

Mr Wahsington... maybe you can read again... or try to read and think... Do you have idea what you are talking about...

Talk pages of articles are meant solely for discussion on how to improve an article. Do you have a specific suggestion on how this article can be improved? If you do, please state that explicitly. Otherwise, please remember to keep general real-world discussions out of Wikipedia as it is not a soapbox. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 20:39, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some improvals

I shortened a phrase: "According to site IMDb, film received average rating of 3.2/10, based on a sample of 13,327 users(movie is spammed with bad rating from Serbia)" to "According to site IMDb, film received average rating of 3.2/10, based on a sample of 13,327 users" to improve quality of the text.--DustBGD89-3 (talk) 18:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're from Belgrade (Serbia) and your "improvals" are clearly deletion of factual material that you don't like, like Serbian spam of IMDB to lower Jolie's film rating. Please stop vandalizing this page and leave other editors to contribute. I will report you to Wikipedia Administrator and ask for your removal from this site if you continue vandalizing this page.50.98.106.29 (talk) 04:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Serbs Should Stop Deleting Improvements to this Article

I urge wikipedia to monitor this page. Serbian editors are vandalizing and deleting important sections that were properly referenced. I will, again, re-add reference to IMDB spam and also Allan Little's (BBC) and Angelina Jolie's response. Please monitor this page.50.98.106.29 (talk) 04:38, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The IMDb user ratings are not used in film articles because, as is obvious in the example of this film, they don't necessarily say anything accurate about the film. We use ratings from websites that aggregate reviews from nationally known critics and then we sample those individual reviews. IMDb users are not a controlled set and are an unreliable gauge as such. Therefore the low ratings as well as the reason behind the low ratings is something that it just not notable and has no place here. It would be prudent for all editors to remember that this article is about a film and that petty nationalistic squabbles from both sides contribute nothing to help a reader understand the actual film. Our job is to write about the film, not to teach history behind its story nor to interpret the political fallout. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 11:03, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Languages

There has been an ongoing edit war in the article's infobox regarding the languages spoken in the film; different IP editors have taken turns deleting either the Bosnian or the Serbo-Croatian from the infobox. Any political issues aside, verification can be made through multiple reliable sources (Variety, LA Times, USA Today, People) that both languages are reported as being spoken in the film. Some of the above sources refer to them as one combined language. There is no good reason to, then, delete either of the two languages from the infobox. I have placed a comment about this in the infobox itself but it doesn't seem to have much effect. Although I doubt that many IPs coming to this article have much interest in having a policy-based discussion on the talk page, I would appreciate it if all other editors would discuss here any proposed changes to that part of the article. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 14:10, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cast??

Um, I haven't seen the movie but I'm PRETTY sure it's not about celebrities like Katy Perry or Michael Jackson so if someone could change it back with the right information....:P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.216.31.83 (talk) 00:20, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete violations of WP:TALK

Talk pages of articles are meant solely for discussion on how to improve an article. Anyone is allowed to delete misuse of this talk page. If there is a specific suggestion on how this article can be improved, that's good. Please remember to keep general real-world discussions out of Wikipedia as it is not a soapbox. -- Brangifer (talk) 16:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on In the Land of Blood and Honey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:11, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on In the Land of Blood and Honey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:38, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]