Talk:Harikrishnans

Who should be credited first?

As per usual across the many articles about films with both Mohanlal and Mammootty in them, we appear to be yet again embroiled in an idiotic back-and-forth over who should be credited first. Because this is a really important issue in our world. I have personally seen the intro to a print that listed Mammootty first. Unfortunately, I cannot link to it, as it is almost certainly a copyright violation. Onscreen credits are almost always sufficient for determining official cast billing, where Disney Hotstar is not, I say in reference to this ill-informed edit.

That said, we know that there are two prints of this film, one that is supposed to appeal to Mohanlal fans, and another that is supposed to appeal to Mammootty fans. So it is possible that a second print exists with Mohanlal credited first. However, the sources seem to say that only the last part of the film was changed, so unless it can be proven that a different intro exists with different credits, it would seem that the Mammootty priority should remain until a new method for determining "correct" (or more accurately "preferable to one fandom, unpreferable to the other") order is established. @Bonadea: what are your thoughts? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:26, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

The print in the film's official streaming service Disney+ Hotstar credits Mohanlal first. It could probably be the final version of the film as the other uncensored version is illegitimate. 137.97.117.212 (talk) 18:08, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

None of the films is "illegitimate". One was not approved for release by the censorship board. Big difference. We know for a fact that it was the filmmakers' calculated intention to release more than one version to pander to fans of either actor. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:31, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

It is illegitimate as per law. The Central Board of Film Certification is a government constituted body. Releasing uncensored portions of a film is punishable with 3-year imprisonment or fine or both as per The Cinematograph Act, 1952, hence it is illegal. Only the Disney+ Hotstar has the right to stream the film, if it is available anywhere else, it's obviously copyright violation. 137.97.189.205 (talk) 10:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Legality has no bearing on the intended presentation of the film, which I've already said. Copyright violation has no bearing either. If I happened to watch the bootlegged version of the film that credited Mohanlal first, you'd be saying "Cyphoidbomb's right, Mohanlal should be credited first!" Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

To this argument, The Hotstar version shows as 'For Pranavams International, Mohanlal Presents, Mammootty in, Fazil's, Harikrishnans'. It doesn't introduce Mohanlal as the actor, but the producer. So it credits Mohanlal first, doesn't stand.
Also I must say this is an intended use of words and same with both versions. - The9Man ^(Talk) 07:08, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: It makes every kind of sense to use the confirmed cast order – it really is a non-issue, but there is nothing else to differ between the two actors from what I can see. There are a couple of other possible ways to reason around the listing order: one is to keep it alphabetical, in which case Ma... comes before Mo...; the other one is even more tenuous, namely that in the compound "Harikrishnans", "Hari" comes before "Krishnan" – but as I say, that's so tenuous as to be silly. Still, there doesn't seem to be any reason not to mention Mammootty first. The legality arguments have no bearing on how to cite the cast list. --bonadea contributions talk 17:53, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Ha, I just realise that you countered the "Hari before Krishnan" argument at User talk:103.99.219.54 – good thing I did say it was silly! Sincerely, bonadea contributions talk 18:07, 11 July 2020 (UTC) (not a fanboy of either actor)

@Bonadea: At some point this might need a wider RFC, because this crap comes up every time with these clowns' films. And I'm pretty sure I remember from the past other instances when different posters, or film prints, were released with different billing to satisfy the zealots. Might've been related to Twenty:20 (film). And frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the same two people haven't been fighting about this stuff for years. Oh, and to be honest, while I did pissily say that going by the Hari Krishnan ordering was ridiculous, I started to think that maybe it wasn't so dumb after all, especially in a world where we have no clear way to gauge "correct" billing order. Since we're kind of saddled with making an arbitrary decision, maybe that should be the way to go. So I'm walking that back... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I have provided the official source for the film, the true final print, whereas you haven't provided any. What are you saying, we have to take your word for granted? That IP has not provided any source for his claim. I am the only one who have obeyed WP:BURDEN here, still you have reverted that over the unsubstantiated version. Great. I have cleared my part, now its his turn to provide evidence for his claim. Do you think he is ever going to come here for discussion with this version on? Never. 137.97.147.191 (talk) 07:15, 12 July 2020 (UTC)