Talk:2.0 (film)

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2.0 (film) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 4 days

Film: Indian

	Film portal 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
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

India: Cinema Mid‑importance

	India portal 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.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).

Box office collection in info box

it should be changed to 665 crores

https://www.boxofficeindia.com/report-details.php?articleid=4721

box office india being a reliable source according to WP:ICTFSOURCES

there are many speculation on the final collection but the estimate of 665 is verified by other independent trackers like pinkvilla and cinetrak Prasanna203 (talk) 14:17, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Prasanna203: Your 'Box Office India' source [1] dated 14 February 2019 says 656 crore. The current one is also from 'Box Office India' [2] and it says 699 crore. Since your one is from 2019, it is possible the aggregate one is latest and displayes the latest figures. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding highest grossing indian films

2.0 and bahubali collection straight away mentioned as 699.89 and 599.72 why the partiality shown by wiki for these 2 southern films.anyone can answer hindi films collection taken lowest and highest(Example 548 and 584 mentionedas 548-584) for these 2 films low collection only taken.for Example why you cant taken bahibali as 599-650 highest reported and 2.0 699.89 to 800 highest reported. Rule should be same for all Rajesh1900 (talk) 08:34, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rajesh1900: There is no partiality. We always use ranges. The 2.0 article also had a range "699.89 to 800", but the source (International Business Times) that supported 800 crore was deemed unreliable at WP:RSN/WP:RSP per WP:CONSENSUS, hence it was removed. Most of south Indian films used IBT as one of the sources quoting a higher range, which is why it got removed in many articles when IBT sourced content were deleted en masse per consensus. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:50, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific Criticism

We need a new section to talk about the misinformation spread by this film.

The subject of the film, mobile phone radiation affecting birds, is just an urban legend, and is not endorsed by scientists. This article published by National Audubon Society addresses the topic, and also mentions the impact created by this film (2.0) in spreading the conspiracy theory further. https://www.audubon.org/news/no-5g-radio-waves-do-not-kill-birds

Indian ornithologist, Asad Rahmani, former director of Bombay Naturalist Society, who also headed the parliament panel to study the ill effects of mobile phone radiation on birds, said "There is no scientific proof between electromagnetic radiation and absence of sparrows."

The panel was set up after a Parliament member raised the issue of ill effects of mobile towers on birds in the Lok Sabha. After an exhaustive study of the published scientific papers – the 88-page report carries a bibliography running into 55 pages – the panel concluded that there are no long-term data available on the environmental impacts of electromagnetic radiation and studies on the impact of radiation on birds and other wildlife are almost non-existent in India.

Source of the above info: https://www.deccanherald.com/india/rajni-movie-20-does-cell-phone-705685.html

In addition to creating a new section to talk about this, the reference numbered "e" in the Notes section has to be removed, as the links there are just sensational articles, ignoring actual science. Amaravind (talk) 07:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the fact that the theme of the movie is totally unscientific, the ornithologist character who is the antagonist in the film, utters several statements which are factually wrong, and those need to be pointed out too.

1. He claims Arctic Tern visits Vedanthangal Sanctuary in India, which is not true, as it doesn't visit India.

2. He claims that Jacobin Cuckoo controls the monsoons in North India, and that monsoons fail if the birds do not migrate in a year.

The depictions of birds are incorrect too. Birds from other continents are all shown in Chennai, with barely any Indian birds being depicted in the film.

I am not sure if I myself can link my article here, but all of these have been covered in this article: https://www.filmcompanion.in/features/tamil-features/straight-out-of-whatsapp-university-a-birdwatchers-reading-of-shankars-20-rajinikanth-jigarthanda-doublex-akshay-kumar Amaravind (talk) 07:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]