Talk:Pinocchio (1940 film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is this second paragraph really needed? It seems like more of a review than anything useful. Imdwalrus 20:02, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Fair use gallery
I am pretty sure a fair use gallery is not allowed on wikipedia. But instead of reverting each other I will ask a second opinion. Garion96 (talk) 17:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, it's not. See User talk:Garion96#Poster. I removed them again. Garion96 (talk) 19:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
- I made it a gallery because it looked like crap before doing so. I assume it's not the fact that it's a gallery that invalidates fair use, but rather the images themselves, right? Powers 19:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. Fair use is allowed "to illustrate the movie in question or to provide critical analysis of the poster content or artwork". One image is indeed to illustrate the move in question. But there was no talk about all the other images. That it was in a gallery just made it more stand out to me. Garion96 (talk) 20:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
- The artwork is critically analyzed by it's inclusion in the gallery. Stop removing valid material that would stand up in a court of law!--Nick Dillinger 12:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. Fair use is allowed "to illustrate the movie in question or to provide critical analysis of the poster content or artwork". One image is indeed to illustrate the move in question. But there was no talk about all the other images. That it was in a gallery just made it more stand out to me. Garion96 (talk) 20:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
- I made it a gallery because it looked like crap before doing so. I assume it's not the fact that it's a gallery that invalidates fair use, but rather the images themselves, right? Powers 19:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately not, images can't justify themselves. Yes, one can infer a point about the evolution of the poster from them, but such a point is never discussed, and definitely not at a significant enough length that would justify fair use under out image policies. ed g2s • talk 19:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
- "As seen below the poster used to advertise and promote the film have changed significantly over the years." is not a significnat part of the text, and definitely not worthy of 16 images. Please don't try to game the system. This is not an excercise is writing as little as possible to justify the images, but using as few (copyright) images as possible to illustrate the article. See WP:FUC #1. ed g2s • talk 11:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Early version
In Bill Peet's great autobiography, which provides many insights into the early years at the Disney studios, the author goes into a lot of detail about the making of Pinocchio, as that was the first movie he had a significant role in, and it seems there was indeed a film in the making very different from the one that turned out. Peet was hired to work on the movie for his creative submissions of creatures to populate "Monster Island," and when he got to work he worked on the Monster Island segment. He (or someone he knew) also helped animate the scene where Geppetto et al are swallowed by Monstro. Eventually these segments were torn off the storyboards by Walt Disney in one of his furious rages and they never appeared in the final product. Should this be included in the article? I would think so. It's been years since I read it but if anyone owns it, Bill Peet's autobiography would make a great source. Brutannica 01:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
This info is summarized on the Bill Peet page. Brutannica 01:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Plot
The page needs at least a plot synopsis... Cbrown1023 02:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] John Williams & 'When You Wish Upon A Star'
At about 4:30 of the theme to Close Encounters of the Third Kind by John Williams there is a familiar sounding music piece which sounds like the opening to When You Wish Upon A Star. Can anyone who owns the soundtrack or has the movie verify? --Ouzo 21:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah I noticed it too. I always said to myself it couldn't be a coincidence. The first seven notes, maybe, but the next seven notes too? No way. Those fourteen notes are some of the most distinctive (when played at even rhythm, at least -- all quarter notes. Williams' variation lengthens one of the notes but it's still obviously recognizable) in musicdom and I couldn't believe it was done by accident. Several weeks ago, I was looking at the Close Encounters article you linked, and discovered that the movie Pinocchio actually plays a role in the plot of the film. The allusion was, therefore, absoultely intentional. Good ear! Powers T 01:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)