Talk:The Pink Panther (2006 film)

Plot synopsis

I trimmed the synopsis a little bit, but I think it still needs pruning. Most wikipedia movie articles have much briefer plot summaries. However, the guidelines say 500-700 words, so this one isn't actually excessively long. Nevertheless, it still seems really wordy to me. If anyone wants to know the whole story they can rent it. If nobody objects within a few days, I guess I'll go ahead and cut it down some more. Any thoughts on this subject? 207.59.144.42 06:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

I deleted a statement in the Trivia asserting that Martin's writing credit was due to him ad-libbing lines. While he did indeed improvise a great deal on the set, as is evidenced on the DVD's featurettes, he also wrote the final draft of the screenplay itself. Here is an interview in which he mentions it: http://movies.about.com/cs/cheaperbythedozen/a/cbtdsm121003_2.htm Matheson 07:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Ninski: Hey how come the trivia part about the animation got deleted?

Weapon

The weopon in his bag is a flail, not a mace, Although Clouseau calls it a "harmless mace". "The flail is often incorrectly called a mace."

Mr. Quertee 01:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

malformed sentence

"Clouseau immediately gets on the case, and despite his lack of skill, is actually able to make some progress. Meanwhile, Bizu, a person who hates the coach, gets shot by someone at the head." Something wrong but I have not seen it so do not know which way to edit it. Midgley 22:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Prequel/Sequel

If you wanted to know correctly, a prequel is something that comes before something.

Actually a prequel is a story that comes before another story that was made previously. For example, the new trilogy of Star Wars wouldn't be a prequel if George Lucas didn't create the original trilogy first. Oh, and remember to sign your posts with four tildes. They're the ones that look like this: ~. EuroJordan 18:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

French Version

I noticed on the DVD when you turn to Audio Options and put the movie in French. I noticed that the words were sync with their mouths. And they are as well on the English version. Is it possible that they filmed it in both French and English or did they photo-shot their mouth movements, later on.Jim Bart 03:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Early casting reports

I have added to the trivia section an item that Mike Myers and Chris Rock were both up for the role and Myers had actually been signed to play Clouseau but pulled out. This is legimate information as both were reported in the media. However I do not have sources immediately at hand, therefore I added a "citation needed" tag; if anyone can provide links to online reports on this I'd be grateful. 23skidoo 22:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Award

Didn't this film win an award? On the DVD cover, it says "Award Winner".24.207.214.60 19:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

It looks like it. It says Film Advisory Board Inc. Award Of Excellence and on the back is a statement by the same company that reads " "... SHEER ENJOYMENT FOR ALL THE FAMILY"- Janet Stokes, Film Advisory Board Inc." This is the first DVD I've seen with an award from that company so I don't know if it's worth putting in the article but we sure can do it. I'll add it but it may get deleted. EuroJordan 18:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Criticism

I've noticed that there is no section for critical response, and really nothing negative about the movie at all on this page. The article feels like the back of a DVD cover, not an encyclopedia article. I notice that IMDb shows a 4.9/10 rating for the film, and yet this page makes the film seem like an overwhelming success. Critical responses sections are seen on many other film pages in Wikipedia, so why not this one? - 69.158.161.238 23:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree; this entry needs to have a section solely for criticism. Jason.cinema 18:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Cantonese Woman translation

I'm not sure if it's relevant or not but for comical purposes I think a translation of the Cantonese woman's true words should be revealed. She says something alone the lines of

"What are you saying? At 3:30 you arrest me for what reason? Why did you arrest me? I didn't do anything at all so why did you arrest me? You must be an idiot or something! Everything you're supposed to do you don't do, why did you arrest me?"

I'm sorry, that really makes no sense. EuroJordan 18:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC) By the way, sign your posts with four tildes (~)

Haha, that's actually kind of funny. Solving the case through a mistranslation... 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 17:23, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Pink Panther (2006 film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://edition.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/06/07/film.panther.reut/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:07, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Studio and distributor

XSMan2016 changed some well-sourced info in the infobox using an unreliable source. Unless a better source is provided for these changes, the original, better-sourced content needs to be reinstated. As I've said several times, the IMDb is not a reliable source, and it can't be use to back up content on Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:30, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I personally wouldn't consider it edit-warring if you were to revert it to the previous version. IMDb is insufficient as a reference and I'm not sure what amount of discussion is going to resolve that. XSMan2016 needs to find a more authoritative source. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:27, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, it can't hurt to give him a little time to find a better source, and maybe he'll be less likely to revert if there's been some kind of discussion. XSM complained that I wasn't listening to him, and I can kind of see how he might feel that way. Communicating through edit summaries isn't very personal. I never really discussed this in the past, since there seemed to be nothing to discuss. But if we have the discussion, maybe it will lead to a calmer article in the future. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Admirable. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:58, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

@XSMan2016: it's been almost a week, and you haven't added a better citation. I think seven days is probably long enough of a grace period to wait, plus you haven't joined this discussion. I don't want to set off an edit war, but the article is currently citing an unreliable source in contradiction to a reliable source. I think we need to fix this soon. So, if you don't add a better citation soon, I'll re-add the AFI source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Ugh. If you look at the new source provided by XSMan2016, it's just a mirror of the IMDb. It even uses basically the same URL. I think we need to restore the AFI citation, which is a reliable source. Cyphoidbomb, what do you think? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:56, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

For the benefit of XSMan2016 there should be no presumption that simply because english.entgroup.cn exists, that it is a reliable published sources or that it is in any way superior to IMDb. WP:RS wants reliable published sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy. If XSMan is unprepared to explain why this site should be considered reliable, it should be assumed to be unreliable for lack of established reputation. I've never heard of it. I don't see that it's ever been discussed at RSN. NRP, have you heard of it? If no, then the AFI ref should be restored. XSMan, you should be aware that there are thousands of sites that exist only to harvest (or "scrape") content from sources like IMDb and present it as unique content. While we're on it, there are also thousands of Wikipedia mirrors, many of which don't give any attribution. We have to use our critical thinking skills to learn to recognize these sites. This is why we stay with sites that have established reputations. Major mainstream sources like newspapers, magazines, Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, AFI, BBFC, are typically suitable. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:02, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

It might be reliable for Chinese box office data, given that it was cited here by the Global Times. However, the English film data looks like it's a mirror of the IMDb. Compare the release date info: IMDb, Entgroup.cn. Exact match. Both sites credit Dan DeTitta as "shopper": IMDb, Entgroup.cn. I fail to see how they found this info unless they mirrored it from the IMDb, because the IMDb says this is uncredited, and there's pretty much nothing indexed on Google that has his name except the IMDb. So, Chinese box office data: maybe; English-language film info: no. It's certainly not enough to overrule the American Film Institute, which I will reinstate. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Box Office Mojo credits Columbia alongside Sony: link. In the interests of compromise, I cited that instead of AFI. I hope we can finally move past this now. I've been trying to cite the infobox data on several articles, and it's a major challenge to keep people from changing it based on the IMDb or original research. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:10, 30 October 2016 (UTC)