Talk:List of highest-grossing non-English films

Countries to specify

Substituted from my talk page:

Hi, the issue of which country is the film's origin does not always have a clear answer. That is why sometimes multiple countries are/should be listed. For example if you look at films such as The Hobbit (film series), which if you only use one country to identify it, would it really be accurate to only list New Zealand and not the United States? There are many examples I'm sure you are aware of.

A second point I want to point out is the nature of co-production between mainland China and Hong Kong film industries. Today, there are Hong Kong films does not have mainland financing/investments, but these are typically small art-house films. In terms of big budget commercial film-making (such as The Monkey King series), the clear exact line between what is considered mainland China and Hong Kong film productions is very much vague, even professionals would find it difficult to define it. They are typically financed by mainland China production companies (source Variety [1]) and are primarily targeted at mainland China market. That is why when it comes to films like these co-productions, it is hard to categorize them.--Getareu8 (talk) 12:56, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Uh, let's take this on the article-specific talk instead. Don't wanna WP:OWN this article more than necessary. Thankful for cooperation, thankful for Wikipedia, Gaioa (t,c,l) 14:43, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Hmm. Yeah, I get your point - the national borders of corporations are hard to define. And you seem to know a fair bit about Chinese-Cantonese cinema cooperation, so I'll take your word for it. I guess we'll have to put both countries where appropriate. The reason I wanted to avoid it was purely because of formatting and visual appeal - IMHO tables look so much better when each line contains only one row. But of course, content goes before appearance. I'll refactor the list when I got the time.
And one other thing you may be able to give an opinion on: is it good to write all these films' language as "Chinese", or would it be preferable to write "Mandarin"? I was unsure. Thankful for cooperation, thankful for Wikipedia, Gaioa (t,c,l) 14:55, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

"Chinese" is ambiguous. If the language is Mandarin for example, it is better to just say that. You don't lose any information value by being specific. I also agree that countries shouldn't be cherry-picked either. Betty Logan (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

You're right. Just as I wrote the variant of Mayan language on Apocalypto, I should specify the variants of Chinese. Thankful for cooperation, thankful for Wikipedia, Gaioa (t,c,l) 17:37, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Problem with China and India

Those countries each have 1/7th of the earth's population. And especially with china, box office earnings will mostly come within borders . It's a different situation than it is with english films. Although "worldwide" is true, it's deceiving. We all know abominations (or to be polite films of peculiar taste) that bollywood produces that make a lot of money. So I suggest that amount of money, in money or in %, that is earned in domestic cinemas is added. This just feels weird and raises a lot of questions. Setenzatsu (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
edit: So for example, Wolf Warrior 2 earned it's all 870+ million $ domestically. Although worldwide is technically true, it's a misleading information. Setenzatsu (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

This has been  Already done for India; I suggest checking the list of highest-grossing films in India and the list of highest-grossing Indian films overseas. --Mαuri ’96 (talk · cont) 00:37, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Here's a rough box office breakdown of the four Bollywood movies on the main list:

• Dangal - 26% India, 74% overseas (63% China)
• Secret Superstar - 9% India, 91% overseas (88% China)
• Bajrangi Bhaijaan - 46% India, 54% overseas (32% China)
• PK - 57% India, 43% overseas (15% China)

As you can see, all four of these Bollywood movies made huge chunks of their revenue from overseas markets (especially China). And it's also worth noting that all four have fresh Rotten Tomatoes critics' ratings, ranging from 76% to 93%. In other words, your remarks about these Bollywood movies are very off-the-mark. Maestro2016 (talk) 11:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Should we use flags?

Me and Aspects have been reverting back and forth on whether or not to include country flags. Instead of warring let's talk about it.

I'm strongly of the opinion that that flags should stay. Here's how it looks. The main advantage is how you can clearly differentiate each film's origin and group them together with films of similar origin. But why should origin be relevant? Because that's a large factor to the purpose of this list, to highlight non-Hollywood blockbusters and the countries they come from. To graphically differentiate countries makes it far easier for the reader to see which nations' industries they are made by.

Also, I can't find anything in MOS:FLAG that would disqualify the use of such. There is even a section prohibiting them in infoboxes, so the fact that they aren't used in Infobox Film is irrelevant. Gaioa (T C L) 08:43, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

The advantage you mentioned is already done in the article because the tables are sortable to sort them by country. They do not improve navigation and are decorative. Template:Infobox film specifically says not to use flagicons in the infobox because "When using the field, do not use flag icons, as this places an unnecessary emphasis on nationality; see MOS:FLAG for a detailed rationale." If the films' themselves are not supposed to use them in the articles about the film, they should not be used in lists of films because they do not represent the country and put an unnecessary emphasis on nationality. Aspects (talk) 13:57, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree that it’s not appropriate to use flags here. As pointed out, these films do not represent countries. This is an aspect they are simply not notable for.Tvx1 14:30, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Expanding the list

I feel like the list has a disproportionately high number of films from China or Hong Kong. In the top 50, only 13 films don't come from the region (and one of those is American). I have a few suggestions for expansion:

• Create a new list that excludes Cantonese / Mandarin movies.
• Set a threshold (eg - $100m WW)

This seems like a good idea to me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:5198:AA4C:D4D7:2AD4:75BA:1344 (talk) 10:25, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Box office admissions

Can we give Box office admissions it own page I started a draft for it here

92.236.253.249 (talk) 10:00, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Personally, I don't mind if you make another page for box office admissions. However, not sure what other editors would think about it, as there's already a page for List of films by box office admissions (which includes many non-English films). You could still try go ahead with creating the article, or might want to look for a third opinion on this. Maestro2016 (talk) 18:42, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

A Third option could be give Highest-grossing openings it own page here a List of Highest-grossing openings for none English films or even do both 92.236.253.249 (talk) 21:17, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I meant third opinion. As in find out what a third editor might think about this. Maestro2016 (talk) 13:53, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Regarding your question, the List of highest-grossing openings for films already includes many non-English films (specifically Chinese) in the single-territory section. You could still try go ahead with it, or might want to look for a third opinion (i.e. opinion from another editor) on this. Maestro2016 (talk) 21:03, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Boy and the Heron

Movie grossed $294 million and should be on the list. See source:

https://deadline.com/2024/04/godzilla-x-kong-kung-fu-panda-4-detective-conan-china-japan-global-international-box-office-1235885714/

80.192.187.151 (talk) 10:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)