Talk:Peter Jackson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peter Jackson article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.

Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
(If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.
Flag Peter Jackson is part of WikiProject New Zealand, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Talk:Peter Jackson/Archive 1

Contents

[edit] Too much focus on LOTR

The biography implies that the only important thing he has ever done is Lord of the Rings... while obviously the trilogy was his most important project, many people think Heavenly Creatures is a better film, and his early horror movies have a big cult following. A better chronology might be:

  • Early life (childhood etc)
  • Low budget films (Bad Taste, Meet the Feebles, Braindead)
  • Heavenly Creatures
  • Breaking into Hollywood (The Frighteners, general career stuff)
  • LoTR
  • King Kong
  • What he's up to now.

A section on influences might be good as well, or this could be incorporated into the early life section. --Helenalex 05:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Jackson himself divides his life that way, as cited. If you wish to expand though, why not go ahead? Wiki-newbie 15:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I probably will - just wanted to make sure that no one was hugely attached to the current organisation. I don't see that Jackson supposedly dividing his life that way means that we should, and anyway, what context did he say that in? Was he talking financial, time-wise, how Hollywood treats him...? The opinion of a biographical subject on what parts of his/her life are or aren't important shouldn't determine how the biography is written. --Helenalex 23:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I like Helenalex's organisation and titling; it certainly makes much more sense. Ziggurat 00:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. I've added a whole lot of stuff about his early career, as I think this isn't widely known outside horror movie cult circles and New Zealand. I would have liked to come up with a better name for the 'arthouse' section - I was going to call it Heavenly Creatures, but then I remembered Forgotten Silver, which sort of fits in there. --Helenalex 04:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Valley

What is 'The Valley' that's listed in the filmography? It's not on IMDB, it doesn't have a Wiki page, and I've never heard of it. If it was an unreleased home-made movie (and from the date it surely has to be) it shouldn't be on the list. --Helenalex 04:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

You can see the movie and some information on http://tbhl.theonering.net/peter/film_valley.html . It is not a home made movie, but anyway it is a short movie, so not very important. Cate | Talk 11:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Um... this links to a page on Valley of the Stereos, made in 1992 and only co-produced by Peter Jackson. Is this what you meant to link to? --Helenalex 11:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Ooops. ok. It is an other movie: (see the top of http://tbhl.theonering.net/badtaste/makingof.html), so I will delete the link from the list, is it OK?. Eventually we could list in "early life", with the title of the other early projects. Cate | Talk 13:19, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, "The Valley" IS listed on IMDB : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0314831/ 81.190.36.200 21:24, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
I think a reference in 'early life' would be most appropriate. The filmography should be limited to things which had a cinematic, video or dvd release. Being entered in a short film contest doesn't really count. --Helenalex 00:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I've seen Valley of the Stereos in the cinema. I think it showed as a short film preceding Brain Dead. --Tirana 00:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Zealand spelling

I just noticed a revision where "favourite" was changed to "favorite". I am sure the editor was well-meaning, changing it to the national variety that he or she is used to. (I primarily use American spelling conventions myself). The Wikipedia manual of style, however, suggests that an article about a New Zealander should use New Zealand spellings. Moreover, spelling should be consistent across the article and I noticed that most words were written according to NZ/UK conventions. I have thus reverted that edit, and tried to normalize other inconsistencies. (As I said, however, American English is my native tongue, so I may have missed some.) --Taranah 00:19, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Order of Merit

PJ is categorized as a Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit, but the award is not mentioned in the article. If it can be sourced (likely from a G'ovt web page) it should be included perhaps in the awards section which just lists his oscars right now. Eluchil404 11:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biased view

The topic written has somewhat of a biased view towards Peter Jackson. It brings up numerous positive points and gloats about his success, while never addressing his numerous criticisms. 142.41.215.138 05:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Considering most of his films have 80% and up on Rotten Tomatoes, I think the article need not give undue weight to a minority. If you can actually bring up reliable sources of critisism, please do so, but frankly they'll be very hard to find. It's not like he was ever involved in a Twilight Zone: The Movie style incident. WikiNew 09:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Look, obviously your a big fan of Peter Jackson, as you edit and discuss his pages all the time, so don't bring your biased view into this, even the greatest directors have criticism. Many of my favourites are heavily critized. What's the point in having critics if the bad reviews are ignored? Peter Jackson is hardly anywhere near the greatest director, anyway. 142.41.215.138 07:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Not that, it was that given this is a biography of a living person you have to be very, very, careful of what you write. Like I said, PJ has never been in a Twilight Zone incident. As for negative reviews, add them, but balance them to represent the consensus. Frankly I'm merely following policy, nothing to do with being a fan, or else I could have you blocked for a personal attack. Please try to assume good faith. WikiNew 11:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous person, your argument seems to be that if someone edits and discusses a director's page, they must therefore be a big fan, and therefore they are biased. By that logic all Wikipedia pages must be biased. I think there is probably room for mention of some common criticisms of Jackson's work - length springs to mind, as well as the dodgy racial stuff in King Kong, but I don't think it's a big deal either way. And I definetely think that anyone who makes major criticism of a page should be prepared to fix the problems they have identified rather than just hiding and sniping. --Helenalex 22:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Get a new picture!

Peter Jackson has lost quite a bit of weight since the featured picture of him has been taken. Someone upload a new one! Thomas M 06:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Go and get one. Wikipedia requires free images. WikiNew 18:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)