Talk:List of comic-based films directed by women

Thoughts on this article as is stands

• As this is promoted as a list of films directed by women, it's probably best to list film first, then the women. (If it were "list of female directors of comic book films", 'twould be the other way around.) Of course, with a sortable table, it could serve both.
• We may need to be clear on the definition of a "comic book movie"; I usually see this to describe a film derived from a comic book, and Professor Marston, while it obviously has some connection to the world of comics, is not.
• I'm too tired at the moment to add Persepolis (film), but it should qualify. --Nat Gertler (talk) 02:22, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

I like your ideas, but I think Professor Marston should stay or at least be mentioned in some capacity. For now, we can keep the female directors listed first until a table is made. I will add Persepolis. Cardei012597 (talk) 19:43, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

If you want to help out more, there is an article I have been improving for months now, but there has not been many people who visit it. It is the List of R-rated films based on comics. I would like your opinion on it and if you found another R-rated comic book film not on the that list, you are more than welcome to add it. Cardei012597 (talk) 19:51, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

I think the general idea of 'based on comics' includes any adaptation of comic books/strips, mangas, graphic novels, and pulp magazines. Any biographical film that heavily discusses a comic book character should be included because the film would not exist without the comic, like Professor Marston. Cardei012597 (talk) 20:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

• • I agree that Professor Marston and the Wonder Women should go. It's about comics, not adapted from them. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:49, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Just as on the R-rated page, I get befuddled when you lump in pulp magazines with comics. The other things you list here are varying forms of comics; pulp magazines are not. They are prose works, occasionally with spot illustrations (and generally with a cover illustration), but that no more makes them comics than most prose. You'd have at least some case if you were arguing for children's picture books which are at least an image-heavy medium (and thus would get you female co-directed Shrek... but no, I don't think it should be included.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 21:13, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Alright, pulps will not be included. I will probably remove Professor Marston, but maybe reference it in a sentence or something. Cardei012597 (talk) 03:40, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

• Why? It's not a comic adaptation. It's connection is tangential at best. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Lilly

An editor just removed half of the directing team of Speed Racer from the list, saying "Andy/Lilly did NOT go through her gender transition during the filming of 2008 Speed Racer, she did that on 2016. Lana did on 2008. It should be defined that a woman directed a comkc book mlvie during which she was a woman, nlt 8 years after." That gets into a tricky thing in discussing trans individuals; the current view of things generally presented by members of the trans community would be that Lilly was always a woman, even when she had a male name and presented herself as male. --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:04, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

So, should I add in Lilly? Or leave it as is. Cardei012597 (talk) 00:03, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

The public transition for both was after the film was released; they were credited as Wachowski Brothers on the film... which is how we should credit them here (our guideline is to list credits as they are on the film), with a footnote noting that while both of the sibling directors were identified as male at the time of the film's release, they have since publicly transitioned as transwomen. --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:07, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Actually, Larry/Lana was going through the process during post-production of Speed Racer. Andy/Lilly was in 2016. I can credit it as The Wachowskis and add the footnote stating the transition as transwomen. Cardei012597 (talk) 20:12, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

title change

If we're including Little Nemo, then we've gotten away from the "comic book" portion of the article title. Should we move it to "comics-based films" instead? --Nat Gertler (talk) 06:31, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

I think the idea of "comic book films" is already a loose term as some adaptations have few similarities to the source material. The film is still "based" on the comic strip. The page should include any adaptation of comic strips, graphic novels, or comic books. The page name is fine. Cardei012597 (talk) 02:38, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it's based on the comic strip. A comic strip is not a comic book. Why say the list is for comic books when it's not limited in that way? --03:35, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

I just think the title would be too long and over-bloated if it was titled "List of comic book, graphic novel, and comic strip adaptations directed by women. It is nicer to keep the title simple, flowing, and straught to the point. Besides, comic strips are similar to comic books; the only real difference is one is printed on newspaper and the other is formatted as an actual book. They have the same ideas, structures, formatting, etc., like they are always comprised of small panels with cartoon characters and word bubbles. I just do not think it is necessary to change the name of the wiki page when the mediums are basically the same, outside of what kind of paper the panels are printed on. Cardei012597 (talk) 06:09, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

They are not the same things, this is understood very well by folks within the industry. We have separate pages as it is for movies based on comic books and those based on comic strips. And the title that I suggested is a single character longer than the title as it exists now. Or, of course, we could just get rid of the Little Nemo entry. --Nat Gertler (talk) 06:12, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Fine, I can change the page name to "List of comic-based films directed by women" and keep Little Nemo. Cardei012597 (talk) 06:52, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Release date

The chart would become considerably more compact if, instead of having a "U.S. release date" column and then listing the countries in which the film was released if it was not the US, just list the date the film was first released anywhere. There is no reason that the US date is of particular import, this date will cement basically when the film appeared in film history (and in fact it could be stripped down to the year without significant loss of relevant information), and the real benefit: the list would become much more compact, allowing more of it to be viewed at once on a screen. --Nat Gertler (talk) 02:00, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Ok, that sounds fine. I can do that quick. Cardei012597 (talk) 18:09, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Much better! Thanks! -Nat Gertler (talk) 19:16, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Japanese animated films

I just deleted several Japanese animated films from the list, because the original source material in each was not comics (they either started as TV anime or as prose novels), and while there was also manga derived from the source material, we had no source stating that the movies were based on the manga rather than on the original source. Many works get adapted in multiple forms, but that doesn't mean that the adaptations are based on each other. If we have reliable source indicating such an adaptation, these entries can be readded. --Nat Gertler (talk) 16:49, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thats fine. Most average Americans probably never heard of those films anyway lol. Cardei012597 (talk) 17:12, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Default table sort

I started editing the main table so that when there were a group of films by the same director, they would share the name box. Then I realized that this list might be more logical if the default sort was by the name of the director, rather than by the release dates. Thoughts? --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah,thats fine. Btw, if you find anymore female directed comic-based films, let me know. I would like to have more for the list. Cardei012597 (talk) 20:14, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Nat Gertler, Should I also place the type of film in the same box, like if the next 2 or so films chronologically are all live action, combine them in a same box? Cardei012597 (talk) 20:24, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Only if they're the same director, I'd say. We're really looking to unify like things. Otherwise, we might end up with a looooooong run of different live action directors, and the words "live action" may not be visible on the same screen as the director's work. --Nat Gertler (talk) 21:18, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Nat Gertler, I noticed your recent edit. I kinda prefer to have the list in chronological order. I feel that this way will help readers skim through the list better. Just my opinion. Cardei012597 (talk) 01:46, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

It's still sortable by date, but grouping them by director is the only way we can get full blanket boxes for each director, which highlights those who do a lot of work in the field. This keeps the focus on the director, which seems to me to be the point of this list. I'll pause edits as we discuss this. --Nat Gertler (talk) 01:52, 29 December 2018 (UTC) Added: also, it helps keep the first screen from being all one directory, one property, which makes it look all less diverse than it really is. --Nat Gertler (talk) 01:53, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Nat Gertler Ok, you make a good point. The female director is the focus of the page, the biggest reason for the page. You can continue, if you wish, just don't remove specific directors or films without consultation. Cardei012597 (talk) 01:59, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Worry not. In these edits, I am merely moving, not removing. --Nat Gertler (talk) 02:19, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Nat Gertler, alright, go ahead. Cardei012597 (talk) 02:24, 29 December 2018 (UTC)