It shows the dreamworks Animation print logo because it has the Comcast company byline. DreamWorks Pictures does not he that by one. 2600:100D:B07F:F536:4C85:9AC9:44CD:5CE0 (talk) 22:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That still doesn't make it a DreamWorks Animation production, but rather a DreamWorks Pictures production. There is no "Animation" subtitle in the poster's DreamWorks logo despite hing the "A Comcast Company" byline. So therefore, DreamWorks Pictures is the producer of this movie and not DreamWorks Animation, and the former is producing the live-action remake of the latter's animated film franchise. Mattgelo (talk) 03:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply] @Mattgelo what if on the official trailer that releases later shows the Dreamworks Animation logo. Wouldn't that mean it's a DWA production? 2600:100D:B07D:62E8:DDB:D25F:3184:E379 (talk) 02:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply] It would most likely show the DWA logo, probably with the SKG byline replacing the Animation byline. Mattgelo (talk) 05:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply] its 100% a DWA production. both Pictures and Animation are of complete separate entities; if this is produced by the Pictures subsidiary then it would mean its an Amblin Partners production, which both parties never confirmed it to be. HTTYD is wholly owned by DWA entirely, and it is their first live-action production. 122.3.200.197 (talk) 06:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply] @Mattgelo DreamWorks stopped using animation on there logo ever since Comcast bought them. 2600:100D:B081:CA97:E8A0:FFB6:A7FD:8620 (talk) 14:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply] @Mattgelo the director confirmed it with me on Instagram. I he a screenshot for proof. DreamWorks Animation produces it but Framework does the VFX. Professor Gengy (talk) 20:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply] @Mattgelo Dean Deblois (the director) replied to my IG comment saying the following words when I asked who was producing it DWP or DWA. Universal and DreamWorks(Animation) though the animation and VFX are being done by the very talented folks at Framestore. For further proof I he a screenshot of him saying that. you he a Discord account you can give me your username and I can add you and send you the screenshot if you would like. Professor Gengy (talk) 20:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply] Red Death[edit]The Red Death is set to appear in the film. Isn't he? 14.203.181.206 (talk) 11:00, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Plot?[edit]If it's a one-to-one (or near enough) remake, what's the done thing? Should we just Ctrl C+V the plot from the original film? Adeline.fm (talk) 21:23, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why we couldn't. However, looking at something like Funny Games (1997 film) and Funny Games (2007 film) (first shot for shot remake I could think of), the two articles appear to he plot sections that are written entirely differently, so perhaps there's something I'm missing. Taffer馃槉馃挰(she/they) 21:27, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] That's interesting! Hing checked a few others, like Hitchcock's Psycho, and the remake of it, they all seem slightly different between articles. I suppose we shall be re-writing it then. Adeline.fm (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] My best guess would be that A) repeating the same text twice would be pointless compared to the much more straightforward Further information: How to Train Your Dragon (2010 film) 搂 Plot Or B) Duplicating the plot section would introduce attribution issues, see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. I've encountered limited situations where edit attribution has been relevant, so I won't pretend to fully understand the nuances there. Taffer馃槉馃挰(she/they) 22:17, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] That's true enough, I suppose. Thanks for pointing me to that article, by the way, I'm still rather new to actually doing stuff beyond grammar fixes and such, so it's always interesting to find out some more about the site's intricacies. Adeline.fm (talk) 23:25, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Let's take into consideration the runtime. Even if it is actually an exactcopy of the original's story and script, which we cannot know for sure until it comes out and more reviews and media coverage arise, the film's runtime is 125 minutes, meaning there is almost half an hour extra with potential new elements or differences from the original. Regardless, we cannot just copy-paste the "plot" section from the original film. Joy040207 (talk) 20:01, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] It appears that @Dasallm盲chtigeJ has done exactly that. Pinging to bring them to the discussion. Taffer馃槉馃挰(she/they) 20:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Did not realize that. Thanks. Reverted edit. Also because he film has not been released in the US yet. Joy040207 (talk) 20:12, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Well, I wrote plot section for virtually every major Marvel film days before it came out in the US, and I never heard of this rule. But yes, both movies are virtually identical and it doesn鈥檛 divert from the original in any relevant way. Dasallm盲chtigeJ (talk) 05:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Plot summaries can be written after a world premiere. We must also abide by WP:SPOILER and WP:FILMPLOT. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Is this a recent thing? I did this literally dozens of times and was completely unaware. But good to know. Dasallm盲chtigeJ (talk) 08:58, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] You might want to check the archives of WT:MOSFILM. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 09:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Plot summaries should not simply be copy and pasted even if it is actually true that the film is "virtually identical" to the original. See Psycho (1960 film) and Psycho (1998 film). The latter is known for being a shot-for-shot remake of the original, so if this is the exact same case, and not just a case of people misremembering the original and thinking the remake is "identical" (we need enough reliable sources to make such a claim on Wikipedia), you can see that the plot summaries are written slightly different, as if we were talking about two different movies that tell the same story. Joy040207 (talk) 19:13, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]As indicated in the edit summary, Dasallm盲chtigeJ (talk 路 contribs) has seen the film itself. I will also note that Wikipedia is not censored. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Critical Reception[edit]So far Metacritic indicates the film received mixed reviews, while on RT the film has a certified fresh. Should we just wait till more reviews arise and are included in the article to reach a consensus on whether the reception was mixed or positive? Joy040207 (talk) 18:57, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Other discussions on how we should handle the critical reception in the lead like the one on Talk:Batman & Robin (film)#Reception in the lead come to mind. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:16, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Plot section semicolons[edit]Regarding the plot section, while I agree with most of the recent changes, I he a concern about the semicolons. As stringing together multiple fragments with these semicolons is not needed, I would suggest making an attempt to remove them and revise some paragraphs as necessary. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:40, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]