Talk:Neighbors (2014 film)

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

Premiere

It had its premiere at SXSW where it opened to positive reviews with Zac gaining praise for his portrayal

Bestzacfan (talk) 22:52, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2014

I've never done this, so if I am doing it wrong, I apologize. I just saw a typo that put an extra "f" in Zac Efron's name, and was trying to correct it... 173.16.142.246 (talk) 23:36, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing it right! Thanks for catching that, I've fixed it.
Gloss • talk 00:43, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

Opening Weekend

The distributors are playing games with previews and opening dates, so much so that the film has an unusual 9 day opening weekend, increasing the chances of getting a high ranking at the box office for it's opening weekend. Film critic Mark Kermode discusses this in blog (video) (on the BBC website, and he's also a critic with the Guardian newspaper). If the UK box office gets a mention, this unusual might need to be explained.[1] This also makes the release dates more confusing. Anyone have sources to suggest they did the same super extended opening weekend tricks in the US? -- 19:14, 13 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.76.91.214 (talk)

UK box office analysis by Charles Gant. Neighbours came in at #1 in the UK box office ... but not really, "preview inclusive tallies" details in the article. --109.76.84.65 (talk) 15:58, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/markkermode/posts/The-Dating-Game

Plot

I don't believe the plot section is too long. I want details, not less details. Who says a plot summary has to be brief? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.196.159.140 (talk) 18:53, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILMPLOT does. If you want to know all the details of the film, go watch it, it is still in theaters. STATic message me! 20:21, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply
]
Wikipedia's policy says
here, "Wikipedia treats fiction in an encyclopedic manner, discussing the reception and significance of notable works in addition to a concise summary." WikiProject Film's consensus is that a plot summary of between 400 and 700 words is concise. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:01, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

Not to be confused with - the TV show Neighbours!

The TV show Neighbours is one the most famous TV shows in Australian history, and anyone in UK or Australia would think of that when searching for this. 203.4.164.1 (talk) 02:55, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is Rogen's second-highest grossing non-animated film, behind only Knocked Up.[12 It should be behind The Green hornet though i think in coming weeks Neighbors will pass it to become the highest anyway. But this IS Efron's second highest grossing live action behind high school musical3. Also it's his highest grossing (live action) movie in US and highest debut(live action). thank you NeighborsFan (talk) 14:57, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Generally favourable reviews

There has been a series of (mostly IP) editors stating "It has received favourable reviews from critics..." in the Lead of this article.

zzz (talk) 07:57, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

How is 70% distinctly mediocre? It's the majority of reviewers that think the film is good. "Generally favorable reviews" doesn't indicate critics loved it and they acclaimed the film. It just indicates that the majority find it to be watchable. Also the lead section is supposed to be a summary of the article per
WP:LEAD. MyNameIsASDF (talk) 17:34, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
Apparently we disagree about what constitutes a "mediocre" critical reception. What is indisputable, is that the statement "It has receieved generally favourable reviews from critics" is misleading at best, since over a quarter of the reviews were in fact "generally unfavourable". So, an accurate, neutral statement would be "The film received a mixed critical reception". I have no objection to adding this (or words to that effect) to the lead - it would provide a nice contrast to the film's commercial success.
zzz (talk) 16:51, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Requested move 30 November 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved no consensus to move per HATNOTE and to a lesser extent SMALLDETAILS, but also because the Indian Film has already been redirected to a NATURAL title, further reducing the risk of confusion here. (non-admin closure) Tiggerjay (talk) 19:21, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Neighbors (2014 film) → Neighbors (2014 American film) – To distinguish from the unrelated 2014 film of the same name. 2A02:C7D:561D:1D00:D9CC:D7E8:8A24:28EE (talk) 11:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose, the other film has different spelling and a subtitle, a hatnote works fine here. Nohomersryan (talk) 13:18, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Neighbours (2014 Indian film) is only different by a "u" and in the UK the American film is being marketed with a "u" exactly the same as the Indian film. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, in the UK it's called "Bad Neighbours". There is no version of the Rogen/Efron movie known as Neighbours. Nohomersryan (talk) 16:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see, you are correct
Neighbours 2 doesn't have "Bad" in the UK, but Neighbors 1 does have "Bad" in the UK. I still think however that this is going to cause problems. The fact is that it is a (2014 American film) and the "u" or not won't be observed by every source. In any case the Indian film definitely needs to keep (2014 Indian film). In ictu oculi (talk) 16:53, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
Neighbors 2 does have "Bad" in the UK. Unreal7 (talk) 00:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Unlikely to cause confusion as the British English title of the film is "Bad Neighbours," as noted above.
    Chase (talk | contributions) 18:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Neighbors (2014 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

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).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:40, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Media Effects

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2024 and 2 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Oreiskin (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Bstuger (talk) 21:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Neighbors_(2014_film)&oldid=1219455990"