Talk:Attack the Block

	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 British cinema task force.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Attack the Block 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

Picture needed

a picture, maybe poster or promotional shot for the main section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.102.212 (talk) 22:31, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done.Twobells (talk)

Country of production

Let's see if we can set this straight now. It's actually quite intricate so nobody in this conflict needs to feel ashamed. But as always, the best way to solve a dispute is to do proper research. This is what I've gathered:

Attack the Block's poster says "Studio Canal Features Film4 and UK Film Coucil present a Big Talk Pictures Production". This means that Big Talk produced the film and the other three companies financed it. I find it reasonable to include the nationalities of all four companies as countries of production. Whether this is the best way to do it or not is a different discussion though, more suitable for other pages. And as I will show beneath it is irrelevant for this case.
According to this article, the film was produced by Big Talk and co-financed by Film4 and Optimum Releasing. That the UK Film Council wasn't on the train yet at that point is normal procedure, but Optimum instead of StudioCanal Features had me confused for a while. I know that Optimum is the British subsidiary of the French major StudioCanal, but I also know that the French company never is followed by the English word "Features". I also know that just recently, Optimum changed their name to StudioCanal UK, but that appears to have happened soon after the release of Attack the Block, and the poster also mentions Optimum presumably in the role of distributor.
Then I discovered the missing piece of this puzzle. StudioCanal is owned by the multimedia giant Vivendi. At Vivendi's website, the following can be read in characteristically French English: "in the UK, StudioCanal will contribute, via StudioCanal Features – the production arm of its subsidiary British Optimum". This means that StudioCanal Features is the production arm of StudioCanal's British subsidiary, and it was called StudioCanal Features already when the parent company was called Optimum. The movie is in other words to 100% a British production.

Quite an adventure I have to say. Smetanahue (talk) 09:58, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm happy with the evidence you've collected.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 14:43, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Several other websites only refer to this countries production as UK as well. Variety, Allrovi, The Guardian. That's enough. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:44, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not fussed either way and don't wish to break up a harmonious conclusion, but the June 2011 issue of Sight and Sound lists this as France/United Kingdom in the production credits. yorkshiresky (talk) 17:29, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the lengthy discussions and sources are not adequate for Ndelboy. Once again I have to stress how one company out of several being French does not make this a French film. It has no French director, cast, crew, theme, it is by it's very aesthetic and direction, in comparison to other British films, a UK film and 3 of 4 companies funding it are British. It has no right to be called a French film anymore than it the executive producers have to be listed in the infobox or even really discussed. It is thoroughly, through and through a UK film. It is not Leon and I can't believe I'm having to discuss this again. If you continue to put France back Ndelboy I will have to, per guidelines, just remove the country altogether. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Attack the Block. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 02:36, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Attack the Block. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.film4.com/features/article/the-look-attack-the-block
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/article/17452/UK-Box-Office-May-13---May-15-2011
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bigtalkproductions.com/?p=1866
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.melies.org/dargentwinners.asp
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426090756/http://austinfilmcritics.org/2011.html to http://austinfilmcritics.org/2011.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.saturnawards.org/nominations.html

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) 14:08, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]