Talk:Paramount Animation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wish Police[edit]

http://www.reelfx.com/entertainment/work/-wish-police I found this on reel fx. Crazybob2014 (talk) 21:25, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They are not doing good in the animation industry UberahamAl (talk) 18:08, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I need some help here...[edit]

Can you help me with adding the co-production partners? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.235.48.206 (talk) 14:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This Wikipedia page is a horrible mess[edit]

This had go to be one of the most misinformative Wikipedia pages out there. First of all Monsters Trucks and Sherlock Gnomes were never announced to be or worked by Paramount Animation. Not in the articles, not in the trailers and NOT IN THE MOVIE. Here is some proof with the openings of Sponge Out of Water and Wonder Park compared with the aforementioned two. https://twitter.com/SebAnimation1/status/1177108455649357825?s=19

Second Sonic the Hedgehog movie and Clifford the Big Red dog were never announced as Paramount Animation films. Well looks like someone finally came to senses and removed them lmao.

Thirdly the "films in development" part is hilariously false. Trey Parker and Matt Stone never said they were going to make films with Paramount, let alone Paramount Animation. They even opened a production studio Important Studios, just so they can make movies alone. And who is to say these films will be animated. That article on S"pongebob Spin-off films" only touched extremely lightly on them and nothing else. There is more I will go through, but every time I edit these "Projects" out, someone places them back in. I'm even being threatened to be blocked, if I don't stop. Somebody smart, please HELP!!! Ginika1555 (talk) 14:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't want to have your edits removed despite having reliable sources? Start a discussion on the article's talk page citing said sources, if any discussion on the edit summary isn't enough to convince other editors. I just happen to be friends with the twitter user you cited who also kept telling me that Sonic and Clifford are not Paramount Animation movies.
As for the upcoming SpongeBob and Parker-Stone films, I guess you could also discuss whether there statements were actually a legit announcement or just a comment (I had a similar situation back then over at the Illumination article about the possible Shrek reboot comment made by the CEO, it was eventually settled down as "a comment" citing WP:CRYSTAL, and if there was actually a Shrek reboot in the works, why would Universal keep it a secret?) -Gouleg (Talk • Contribs) 19:34, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paramount Animation[edit]

Moved from WP:AN (permalink)

Somebody removed the new official logo and replaced it with the old one. Could you please set things straight. Here is a link to an article proving that this is the official logo. Let me give you two. https://deadline.com/2019/09/paramount-animation-wwe-studios-rumble-1202738722/ https://variety.com/2019/film/news/paramount-animation-star-skipper-trademark-logo-1203339812/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ginika1555 (talk • contribs) 16:37, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The logo should not be on the Commons. I have uploaded a copy here and labelled it for fair use. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2019[edit]

Change Luck's release date for February 12, 2021 since there's a link for Box Office Mojo saying an untitled Paramount Animation Film there and PA7 now has that release date ArcticDog96 (talk) 07:18, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. QueerFilmNerdtalk 08:14, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Paramount Animation[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Paramount Animation's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Deadline1":

  • From Clifford the Big Red Dog (film): D'Alessandro, Anthony (May 28, 2021). "Marvel Movies Move Around In 2023 As Disney Makes Release Date Changes". Deadline.
  • From Rocket Pictures: Fleming, Mike (March 8, 2012). "Rocket Pictures Plots 'Gnomeo & Juliet' Sequel, With New Tunes By Elton John". Deadline. Retrieved March 9, 2012.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:46, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anomalisa[edit]

Is Anomalisa really a Paramount Animation production? Because I don't remember ever being cited during its theatrical run and Academy award bid -Gouleg🛋️ harass/hound 15:38, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have questions about that myself. I don't even know if the source they used was actually reliable in any way. 2600:6C51:627F:4D5:A15F:C755:F4C4:F1D7 (talk) 07:54, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See AFI catalog.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 01:01, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Under the Boardwalk will announce a release date and recieve a G rating.[edit]

On July 23, 2022, Under the Boardwalk will announce the film's release date and recieve a G rating by the MPA. Animation231 (talk) 00:50, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed article split[edit]

Hello, @Indagate and @BMA-Nation2020. I have noticed that feature films sections is undergoing reconstruction, as the box office grosses/critical reception of Paramount Animation's films have their own subsections in the Reception section. I have a proposal: what if an article was created for Paramount Animation's films? ZX2006XZ (talk) 15:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, page doesn't really seem long enough for a page split Indagate (talk) 17:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But a critical response section is required since it had enough on the film list. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 15:34, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, agree about moving reception data out of the filmography table, just doesn't seem to need splitting yet Indagate (talk) 20:02, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for everything I just want to fix and help.[edit]

@Waxworker 173.68.84.93 (talk) 20:17, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Filmography section[edit]

The filmography section needs to be expanded. When looking at the filmography pages for Disney Animation, Pixar, Blue Sky, Sony Animation, DreamWorks, Illumination, and Warner Animation Group, they all include not only the directors of films, but also the writers and producers. Even the filmography for Nickelodeon Movies includes writers and producers. So in conclusion, I figure that the filmography section for Paramount Animation should be expanded to include writers and producers, as it already lists directors/composers. ZX2006XZ (talk) 13:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sounds fair, writers especially are a major part of the production so should be included. Indagate (talk) 13:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Paramount_Animation&oldid=1218391926"