Talk:List of 20th Century Fox films (2000–2020)

Image copyright problem with File:Logo 20th century fox.jpg

The image File:Logo 20th century fox.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Ice Age 4 and 5

fox hasnt confirmed this --201.172.177.34 (talk) 04:01, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Three Musketeers

I think the list is missing this one. Greetings --Jambornik (talk) 08:29, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

"GoGos: Shapes & Sizes"

Removed mention of this film. I searched on google, and wikipedia was the only reference I could find. If the movie is real, someone can add it back with a reference. -Frazzydee|✍ 18:57, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Same for "U.B. Funkeys: The Inventions of Dr. Tinker - 2013" -Frazzydee|✍ 19:01, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Same for "Diary of a Wimpy Kid 2: Rodrick Rules" & "Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Sea of Monsters". No credible sources found. All four movies were, by the way, added by the same anonymous contributor. I have left a note on her/her talk page asking for a citation. -Frazzydee|✍ 19:28, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

The Fanfare Today

The movies that 20th Century FOX are doing today is worst because they keep using the 1997 fanfare that was recorded by David Newman. When will they do an update of the 20th Century FOX fanfare? --Rod14 (talk) 14:36, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Split list?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The list is getting longer. Perhaps split 20th- and 21st-century films? relisted. --George Ho (talk) 05:18, 5 November 2013 (UTC) --George Ho (talk) 04:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Comment. You might consider splitting it into three, but I'm not sure where the splitting points should be. Maybe 1910s to 1950s, 1960s to 1980s, and 1990-present. That would give you lots of room to grow the modern list before it got too long. Or you could split it at 1910s to 1960s/1970s to present, to align it with the death of the studio system. That might be seen as less arbitrary than a triple split at random places. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:48, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

• Support split. That has got to be the longest list I've ever seen on Wikipedia. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 04:28, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
• Support split Way too long. A split would greatly help to shorten the list and make it more readable. Admiral Caius (talk) 20:34, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

What about The Rugrats Movie and Rugrats in Paris The Movie?

These two films do not belong in this list because 20th Century Fox had no connection to either of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.198.171 (talk) 04:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Does Co-production mean Distribution

Hello,

Part of my job is noting down which films are distributed by certain companies, I note that in this list (and others like it e.g. Universal, Paramount, Disney) the list of films are pretty much either Co-production or Distribution only,

My question is just does Co-production also mean distributed by the company (Fox in this case)? And if not, is there a list for films that are distributed by a company?

Thank you for reading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.39.5.234 (talk) 13:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

You mean that you're using Wikipedia as a resource for your job? That's a little risky. Wikipedia is an excellent resource, but it's prone to false information and hoaxes by immature vandals. So is the IMDb. If your job depends on it, you'd probably want a commercial database. That said, I try to keep the Wikipedia articles clear of vandalism and hoaxes. Unfortunately, I don't know whether all these films have been distributed by the studio. I assume so, but it's not immediately obvious anywhere in the article. I've been using the American Film Institute's database to update these lists and correct errors. You might consider checking that site or the others at Category:Online film databases. Some are free, and some are subscription-only. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

What is the haunted frights?

What is the haunted frights and why is anubis taken off schedule? Jstar367 (talk) 23:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Why did ferdinand change dates?

Is there confirmation about ferdinand changing dates? Jstar367 (talk) 23:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Removed entries

I removed some entries with sources that failed verification. The sources did not mention 20th Century Fox, and only were announcements of the films in question. We need sources that explicitly state 20th Century Fox will be producing, distributing, or both. If the source doesn't say this, it can't be used. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Films in development

Given WP:CRYSTAL, specifically:

• Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place.

and

• Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements and rumors.

and that films "in development" aren't guaranteed to enter production, should such projects be included here if they have not entered production or have no scheduled release date? Trivialist (talk) 02:58, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

MPedits: Do you have any comments, or will you just be reverting any attempts to remove the "Films in development" section? Trivialist (talk) 22:14, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, because as long as they are being worked on in some form, it is worth mentioning them unless they are officially confirmed to be cancelled. MPedits (talk) 15:13, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Then can you explain why a page titled "List of 20th Century Fox films" should combine both films that exist, and ideas for films that may not be realized? And can you explain how listing films in development doesn't violate WP:CRYSTAL? Trivialist (talk) 23:23, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 19 January 2020

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move to the proposed titles; see #Closing analysis & comment – wbm1058 (talk) 20:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

---

• List of 20th Century Fox films (2000–present) → List of 20th Century Fox films (1985–present)
• List of 20th Century Fox films (1935–1999) → List of 20th Century Fox films (1935–1984)

– With the Disney purchase, the 1999-2000 distinction now seems somewhat arbitrary with only twenty years in the recent category before rebranding and sixty-five years in the older category. A much more logical break in the pages would be the purchase by News Corporation in 1985, reflecting the new management structure producing the films. DilatoryRevolution (talk) 01:17, 19 January 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 04:20, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

• Leaning support - seems a logical split. Not sure what the previous split represented, which is why I'm leaning as opposed to completely supporting (but might forget this RM exists and not return to it, so adding it now). --Gonnym (talk) 08:09, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
• Wouldn't it make more sense to just keep all of the 20th Century Fox films together on one page and have a new list starting in 2019 (starting with the Disney purchase) or 2020 (starting with the name change)? Or they could be split by decade like the lists of Paramount films. Trivialist (talk) 19:30, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
  • I would prefer having Lists of Paramount Pictures films in a similar situation where it’s broken up between pre- and post-Viacom films: (1912-1994 and 1994-present). Any response to this would be appreciated. Jkline16 (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
    • Why, though? Paramount didn't drastically change when Viacom bought them. Trivialist (talk) 02:01, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Ownership changed Jkline16 (talk) 02:58, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but Paramount didn't radically change with the new owners. Trivialist (talk) 23:57, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

While, yes, Paramount had no significant changes with Viacom’s control, I should note that it would still be helpful to have a guideline instead of going by decades, which is why my proposal for using Viacom as the splitting point is valid and should be considered as an option. Jkline16 (talk) 05:38, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

If the pages are going to be arbitrarily split, it might as well be by decade, because most people don't know or care about who owned a studio at a particular time. Trivialist (talk) 20:04, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

• • • Actually, I'd prefer that they be moved into two separate pages for pre-2000 films and post-2000 films as with this studio and Warner Bros. so it would be easier to navigate. IceWalrus236 (talk) 01:58, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
• I'd like to point out that these pages were moved during the open discussion to titles not mentioned here, and the move tags were removed. I have restored the stable titles again under WP:RMUM and asked for move protection so this discussion can continue. For my part, the request and Jkline's suggestion both make sense in their own way. It seems like it would be most helpful to move the pages to titles that reflect what organization actually made the films. The move that was performed that ignored this discussion moved the second page to List of 20th Century Studios films (1935–1999), but none of the films in that list were made by "20th Century Studios". Dekimasuよ! 06:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose as-proposed. We should split both Fox and Paramount lists on a pre-Disney, pre-Viacom (respectively) basis, so we are not confusing readers about these different legal entities and their output.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:08, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
• See also: Talk:20th Century Studios/Archives/2020#Requested move 17 January 2020 (closed) • Talk:20th Century Fox Television#Requested move 19 January 2020 • Talk:List of 20th Century Fox theatrical animated features#Requested move 19 January 2020  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:50, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
• I think there should only be one page for 20th Century Fox releases (1935-2020) and then a new page for films released under the 20th Century Studios banner. This would be the easiest and most obvious way to differentiate between the two eras. B91302 (talk) 18:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
• Support B91302 proposition (List of 20th Century Fox films). It was originally split by centuries (List of 20th Century Fox films (2001–2100)—ignore my math). If needed a hatnote to List of 20th Century Studios films can be included. © Tbhotch^™ (en-3). 23:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
• Split by decade for consistency with Lists of Paramount Pictures films. This seems the least ambiguous and most consistent approach. Otherwise, you're left trying to decide which of the "milestones" (1985 NewsCorp takeover, 2013 split into 21st century fox, 2019 Disney takeover, 2020 name change) is the most significant arbitrary point to break it up.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:50, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
• Support splitting by decade, though to be clear would we be starting with the 1930s and moving on in whole decades, or starting with 1935–1945 and moving on from the fives? BD2412 T 01:21, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
• Support B91302 proposal List of 20th Century Fox films. If necessary, we can break out some or all decades as subarticles, per Amakuru/BD2412, but let's start by renaming this to List of 20th Century Fox films and merging in the earlier one. Then, the decision of whether and how to break that up if necessary can be discussed further below on this talk page. --В²C ☎ 17:20, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Page move history

List of Fox Film films

This looks like y'all have been playing the Chinese whispers game...

• at 14:31, 29 September 2007‎ Limetolime moved List of Fox Film films to List of pre-1940 Fox films: better title
• at 09:08, 24 March 2011‎ Kwamikagami moved List of pre-1940 Fox films to List of Fox films before 1940
• at 01:45, 29 November 2013‎ George Ho moved List of Fox films before 1940 to List of 20th Century Fox films (1915–2000): will split up such films soon
• at 00:37, 7 February 2015‎ Squeamish Ossifrage restarts List of Fox Film films‎ by copy-paste: splitting the non-20th Century Fox films out from the 20th Century Fox film lists to mirror the article split: Box Office issues first
• at 19:54, 7 February 2015‎ Squeamish Ossifrage moved List of 20th Century Fox films (1915–2000) to List of 20th Century Fox films (1935–1999): date range change (split, organization by decade)

This is how you end up with the oldest 69 edits of List of 20th Century Fox films (1935–1999) being totally out-of-scope... that content belongs in the history of List of Fox Film films, where it originated.

edit: I've moved those edits back in scope. wbm1058 (talk) 03:50, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

List of 20th Century Fox films

• at 01:02, 14 February 2007 Tregoweth started the article List of 20th Century Fox films by splitting out content from the "Notable films" section of the article now titled "20th Century Studios"
• at 02:07, 29 November 2013‎ George Ho moved page List of 20th Century Fox films to List of 20th Century Fox films (2001–2100): splitting from List of 20th Century Fox films (1915–2000) per Talk:List of 20th Century Fox films (2000–present)#Split list?
• at 02:54, 29 November 2013 Tbhotch moved page List of 20th Century Fox films (2001–2100) to List of 20th Century Fox films (2001–present) (That's an assumption 20th (or Wikipedia) will operate the next 76 years)
• at 19:54, 7 February 2015‎ Squeamish Ossifrage moved page List of 20th Century Fox films (2001–present) to List of 20th Century Fox films (2000–present): rescope since this is by decade

Hundreds of edits from 28 November 2013 and earlier are extremely out-of-scope for List of 20th Century Fox films (2000–present) – they belong at List of 20th Century Fox films since they cover all the years from the 1910s to "future releases"

edit: And I've moved that edit history back in scope. wbm1058 (talk) 15:46, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

List of lists ("disambiguation"):

• at 02:22, 29 November 2013 George Ho changed List of 20th Century Fox films to a "disambiguation"
• at 14:02, 23 October 2016‎ LittleWink moved page List of 20th Century Fox films to Lists of 20th Century Fox films: list of lists
• Final version of Lists of 20th Century Fox films before that was redirected to 20th Century Fox#Films

— wbm1058 (talk) 19:49, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Closing analysis & comment

This request has been difficult to close as evidenced by its remaining open for 76 days. Past moves (#Page move history) left the edit history in a rather disorganized mess, and I've made some hist-merge moves to get the history back on-topic for the title it's stored under. While longstanding guidance at Wikipedia:Moving a page § Reasons for moving a page says that a page may be moved when it's "an article at a descriptive name and the scope of the article has been reduced, extended or otherwise changed", I think there should be limits on the allowable amount of scope creep. Changing "2000" to "1999", a reduction of one year, is probably OK but adding or removing decades from the scope is just too much. I've proposed a guidance change at Wikipedia talk:Moving a page#Article scope changes.

Wikipedia can probably support multiple overlapping lists of films if there is a consensus to do that, provided other guidance is followed (e.g. pages shouldn't be so long that they take too much time to load, or bump into technical limits). For example, the current two lists could coexist with another set of lists organized by decade. These would not be content forks because they have different scopes.

There is no need for a separate "disambiguation" page; Lists of 20th Century Fox films simply redirects to 20th Century Studios § Films where the first sub-section just lists the five current relevant lists. More lists may be added and linked from here, though one downside is that more lists perhaps means more maintenance burden.

There is a weak consensus to revive the List of 20th Century Fox films. Feel free to revert to the last version of that and update it. You may copy content from any of the other list pages; be sure to provide attribution when you do that. There is also significant desire to split by decade. Feel free to do that too, by starting new articles at the appropriate titles and copying in content from other lists. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rename to List of 20th Century Fox films (2000–2020)

Can we rename page to the above considering that no further films will be released under this label? Picsovina (talk) 12:09, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Good suggestion, I was thinking the same thing. --XSMan2016 (talk) 22:31, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Agree, no more 20th Century Fox films. El Millo (talk) 21:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done – wbm1058 (talk) 21:12, 4 April 2020 (UTC)