Template talk:Universal Horror

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Film Portal
This non-article page is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Template
This article has been rated as Template-Class on the quality scale.
NA
This article has been rated as NA-importance on the priority scale.
This article, category, or template is part of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to horror film and fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Template This article has been rated as Template-Class on the assessment scale.

Ack! This template is way too big!!! I've created a monster. I trimmed it down. If you want to add those movies, please start another template. Steve-O 11:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

agreed Estrose 13:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, it's long, but you're overlooking some major films if you trim it down too much. THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA and INNER SANCTUM series should be included since they're major entries in the series. Universal made a LOT of horror films and many are not represented here-- I can understand not wanting to add the sci-fi titles, but do you really want to overlook the entire '40s caché? Thephotoplayer 21:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] template

how about creating seperate templates for them, and linking them in the template? Know what I mean? I think the template could be just for series, another for other Universal horror films would be good. Also, it seems that most of those films mentioned aren't even created yet. Was Phantom of the Opera a series or just one film? Steve-O 23:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Black Cat and other Poe films

Smiloid 23:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)I've added a section on Universal's Poe trilogy, although they technically do not constitute a series in terms of narration, they are worth noting and may be considered a sort of "trilogy" by fans and it may behoove us make them more easily accessible hereSmiloid

[edit] Bloated again, overly complex

The House of.. and Abbot and Costello films are each repeated under numerous monsters, while they do feature the 3 main monsters there's a reason why it's called "House of Dracula" for example, the title monster has the most concentration of the story and for simplicity sake for the viewer in trying to avoid confusion i've trimmed the title films where they need to be. The Frankenstein, Dracula, Wolfman Universal Legacy Dvd sets have these films with their respective title monsters as well. The only exception is the dual title Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. --12.72.31.207 03:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Series

I find the template very problematic. House of Frankenstein, House of Dracula, and Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein have more to do with The Wolf Man than do Werewolf of London or She-Wolf of London. Also, what about the Captive Wild Woman series and The Hunchback of Notre Dame?--Scottandrewhutchins 20:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

  • I noticed this issue as well. House of Frankenstein, despite the title, is more a Wolf Man film, etc. I think the best way to approach this is to create a "multiple monsters" category and that is what I will do per WP:BOLD. I also adjusted the Dracula and Wolf Man headers because those sections listed films in which other similar monsters were featured (although the three Dracula films form a trilogy, Dracula himself appears only in the first; the two werewolf films listed with The Wolf Man have no connection to the Lon Chaney films) 23skidoo 04:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What the hell...

...does King Kong have to do with it! Fair enough, Universal were behind the 2005 remake, but apart from that he has nothing to do with the films of the 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s. I'm removing the Kong films right now. --Indie.Bones 18:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Indie.Bones

Captive Wild Woman has nothing to do with them either. I'm removing these aswell. Whoever it is keeps on putting them back when I remove them explain? --Indie.Bones 17:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Indie.Bones

When Captive Wild Woman and its sequels were released on VHS, they were released as part of the Universal Monsters series. [1] Therefore, they do belong here. Please do not remove them again, as the link speaks for itself. --Scottandrewhutchins 18:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
P.S.: I agree that King Kong does not belong, but that was here before I touched it. --Scottandrewhutchins 19:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, it was released as part of the Universal Horror series, but for the reason I've put on your talk page, it doesn't well and truly belong. --Indie.Bones 12:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)Indie.Bones

It belongs more than say, Abbott and Costello Meet Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, which you left on... --Scottandrewhutchins 16:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Split

I understand the relevence of this template, but it's relaly getting really long and huge. Should be redesigned? Or split up into more relevent templates? Andrzejbanas 18:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Silent Symbol

Is it really necessary to put a symbol indicating which films are silent? --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 15:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)