Talk:The Princess Diaries (film)

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

Name note[edit]

In the book, Mia'sthredftrdffgtrdsdfghj

What? Say that again? Queen Padmé Amidala (talk) 20:02, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Headline text[edit]

official name is Amelia Mignonette Grimaldi Thermopolis Renaldo. Kate 01:02, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You reversed Grimaldi and Thermopolis. Her name is Amelia Mignonette Thermopolis Grimaldi Renaldo--Shaul avrom 12:03, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Information box image[edit]

The information box should supply the original theatrical poster as the lead image, in accordance with the films project. I'm going to upload it immediately after this message. The DVD cover needs to be moved to a separate section. Never Mystic (tc) 16:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finished. Never Mystic (tc) 16:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clean-up tag?[edit]

I'm curious to know why the Plot section is tagged for clean-up. Some film FAs have substantially longer storylines than this one (examples include Jaws (film) and V for Vendetta (film)). International release dates are also included in these articles as well as others (for a full list, see "Media" at Wikipedia:Featured articles). Never Mystic (tc) 16:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The sheer length is not the issue; the issue is that for which it is tagged, that it is written from an in-universe perspective. V for Vendetta apparently originated in three countries, as is cited in its infobox. Shannernanner 16:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean now. You can put the clean-up tag back. In your opinion, how do you think the plot should be summarized? Perhaps we could get some copy-editors to remove the in-voice synopsis? Never Mystic (tc) 16:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is not my particular area of expertise, or I would fix it myself. See the writing about fiction and perfect article pages for further ideas. And yes, perhaps so. Shannernanner 16:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like a plan. By the way, the DVD says that the film runs for 115 minutes. Do we have to state that it's "approximate"? Never Mystic (tc) 16:51, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's the correct format according to the template syntax; even if stated on the DVD it probably depends whether or not that includes the credits, etc. It's not give or take 20 minutes, but perhaps give or take 2-3 minutes, depending on how you count. Shannernanner 16:53, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've finished watching the entire DVD and the timer clocked in at 115 minutes exactly (including credits). I asked my friend to do the same — who fast-forwarded straight to the end — and said that it ends at 115 minutes with credits too. I'm thinking about removing the "approximate" because it seems insufficient with this information. Other FAs don't seem to use it either. However, I won't edit until you express your view. Never Mystic (tc) 21:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Does the field intend for it to include credits, or just the length of the film itself? It's not a big deal, but that's the proper format according to template syntax. Shannernanner 11:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Most articles include the credits in the film's length. I'm uncertain of whether the field intends this for one or the other, however. Never Mystic (tc) 22:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brief peer review[edit]

To expand the article you should:

  • Add a Reception section
    • With a sub-section of Box office
    • and a sub-section of Critical reaction
    • Awards and Nominations should also be a sub-section of this
  • Possibly add more pictures

These suggestions are based on WP:FILMS's style guidelines. Cbrown1023 14:30, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your bolding suggestions. =) They sound good and I'll do whatever I can to include this information in the article. Never Mystic (tc) 17:56, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I came to this page via Never Mystic's request at WP:FAC. I only skimmed the article, but I don't think you have too much problem with in- verses out-of-universe prose. The plot summary is told from the perspective of the fiction, but that's generally okay for plot summaries. My suggestion for cleaning up the prose is instead to eliminate the cumbersome lists by converting them into flowing prose. Also consider doing more research to expand the information on the film's development. You also need information on the film's reception by critics (preferably with direct quotes from both positive and negative reviews) and its box-office performance. Sequels should also be mentioned but not dwealt on. I hope this helps. — BrianSmithson 22:23, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those are excellent suggestions and I intend to retrieve all the necessary information, but Shannernanner thinks that the plot is somewhat voiced incorrectly. Are you certain that it is okay? Do you understand the entire plot or are there some confusing, misleading or redundant parts? Never Mystic (tc) 22:25, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't think it's a problem. It could be tightened up a bit, though. For example:

After a thorough discussion with her mother and grandmother, Mia reluctantly agrees to attend "princess lessons", after which Clarisse hopes to present her to the Genovian government at the forthcoming State Dinner. She is also introduced to Joe (Hector Elizondo), who becomes her security guard. With the additional class tied in with her daily schedule, Mia begins forgetting to help Lilly with her homework or watch Michael's band perform at a nearby auto-mechanic shop. During a "princess lessons" session, Clarisse informs her granddaughter that she will undergo a makeover, which is completed by Paolo (Larry Miller). Lilly confronts Mia after she undergoes the change. Their friendship almost comes to an end, but Mia decides to tell Lilly that she is a princess and results in their relationship becoming stronger than before.

could become:

Mia's grandmother convinces her to attend "princess lessons" in preparation for her introduction to the Genovian government. Under supervision from her new body guard, Joe (Hector Elizondo), Mia begins to forget to help Lilly with her homework or watch Michael's band perform at a nearby auto-mechanic shop. Mia gets a makeover from Paolo (Larry Miller), after which Lilly confronts her for being so distant. However, when Mia tells Lilly that she is a princess, their relationship becomes stronger than before.

That was just a quick pass, but by removing things like "so-and-so tells so-and-so to do this," and replacing them with "so-and-so does this," you save a lot of redundancy. I've never seen the film, by the way, but I had no problem following the summary in the article.
Another way to add distance to a plot summary (make it more "out-of-universe") is to add direct quotations from the movie. Rather than something like "Mia is told that she is a princess" you can replace it with a direct quote from whatever character gives her that news: "Mia discovers that she is 'of royal birth, a princess of the Genovian bloodline, with all the rights, priviledges, and duties thereof.'" Or whatever the relevant quote is. You can also add language like "In the film's first half-hour, Mia is a regular high school student . . . . The climax occurs when . . . ." etc. But it's optional. Plot summaries of individual works are okay written mostly as in-universe prose. Do have a look at film Featured Articles, though; I've never written one, so I could be wrong. :) — BrianSmithson 22:48, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to incorporate your changes immediately. I was wondering if you could take a look at the last paragraph (it was my main concern) and copy-edit it too? Originally I thought it would be easy, but I think my "knowledge" and familiarization to the film got in the way and in my opinion, I ended up writing a very confusing and questionable paragraph. What do you think? How could it be better-worded? Never Mystic (tc) 00:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I'm a bit too thinly spread as it is. The paragraph reads fine to me, but I'm not sure it should be necessary to mention that it rains. — BrianSmithson 09:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So you think it reads well? Okay! I'll omit the rain mention. Thanks again. Never Mystic (tc) 16:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinks[edit]

I think perhaps you've become somewhat overzealous with delinking terms within the article. Please review WP:CONTEXT; "plain English words" should not be linked, but links which are relevant to the context, and especially specific links, are fine and helpful, and should not be delinked ("public access television" is specific). As such, I am going to reintroduce wikilinks to the article. Shannernanner 12:03, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think I did remove a few too many links. It's fine if you reinsert some of the ones in the plot section. Never Mystic (tc) 19:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Differences and similarities section[edit]

This section is likely going to be spiral out of control if every detail is included. I suggest that it's trimmed to the most signifcant points of the entire film; if that fails to generate some stability, then it should be removed altogether. Never Mystic (tc) 16:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That section references "Differences between ..." and says retrieved October 2006 - but that doesn't seem to be referencing some external source for the differences, but being someone comparing the book and the film.
  1. I think the reference needs to be made clearer, in that case, but
  2. Surely this is original research, and so should be removed ?
-- Beardo (talk) 15:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mysterious track...[edit]

After checking all over the internet, I stil was not able to find the name of the track Mia is listening to while having her toenails painted during the makeover scene...That same track (well part of it) also appears during the ending credits. It's a kind of jazzy trumpetty tune. Would anyone have an idea? Thank you so much for your help, Best, 219.67.2.69 10:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Movie Poster[edit]

Did anyone notice that on the movie poster if you look in Anne's sunglasses you can see the movie crew?(24.36.92.110 (talk) 00:30, 23 August 2008 (UTC))Kiyome[reply]

Is it the crew ? Or is it meant to be reporters ? -- Beardo (talk) 16:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, did anyone notice...[edit]

How in the movie, Gretchen and Helga, Palo's assistiants, are called by different names? (Ex.: Palo: Gretchen, hand me the curler. Then later he says to the OTHER GIRL: Gretchen, the cucumbers! Queen Padmé Amidala (talk) 20:05, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't notice that. Probably because it didn't happen. And the names are Paolo, Greta and Helen. Not trying to break rules here (talk) 21:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kathleen Marshall link[edit]

The link for Kathleen Marshall (the director's daughter) who plays the part of Charlotte, points to the choreographer Kathleen Marshall. See http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0550982/. ThomasCrownAffair (talk) 23:15, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Link to incorrect actress has been removed, but no article for the correct Kathleen Marshall has been created yet. Until then, leave the name without a link, or a red-link perhaps?
Incorrect actress: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1240648/ (born ??/??/1962 in Pittsburgh, PA).
Correct actress: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0550982/ (born 12/16/1967 in Los Angeles, CA).
Bullmoosebell (talk) 03:15, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibility of this film being based on real life country.[edit]

I think that Disney probably based the simple details on the country of Monaco. The name of the royal family is similar, and like the country in the movie, Monaco is a small, sparsely inhabited country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ABickerstaff (talk • contribs) 07:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This observation is shallow and pedantic, but thanks for your opinion. Bullmoosebell (talk) 03:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some sources you could use: --Coin945 (talk) 13:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[edit]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:The Princess Diaries (film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 15:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I will review this article. Thank you.  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 15:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
  • "the film was written by Gina Wendkos and follows Mia Thermopolis (Anne Hathaway), a shy American teenager who learns that she is heir to the throne of a European kingdom. Under the tutelage of her estranged grandmother, the kingdom's reigning queen, Mia must decide whether to claim the throne she inherited or renounce her title permanently. In addition to Hathaway, the film stars Julie Andrews as Clarisse Renaldi, Mia's grandmother, with a supporting cast consisting of Héctor Elizondo, Heather Matarazzo, Mandy Moore, Caroline Goodall and Robert Schwartzman." — You can put the cast members first followed by the plot. Something like "the film was written by Gina Wendkos and stars Anne Hathaway and Julie Andrews with a supporting cast consisting of Héctor Elizondo, Heather Matarazzo, Mandy Moore, Caroline Goodall and Robert Schwartzman. The film follows Mia Thermopolis (Anne Hathaway), a shy American teenager who learns that she is heir to the throne of a European kingdom. Under the tutelage of her estranged grandmother, the kingdom's reigning queen, Mia must decide whether to claim the throne she inherited or renounce her title permanently."
Done.--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "by whose popular girlfriend Lana Thomas she is often teased." — Can be rephrased as "and is often teased by his popular girlfriend Lana Thomas."
Done.--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just mention "Joe" as "Joseph" in the "Cast" section to let readers know that he is referred to by a shorter version of his name.
Makes sense. Done.--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a decision Marshall made because the latter is home to both himself and his granddaughters, to whom the film is dedicated." — Did Marshall make the decision to move the setting to Frisco? If not him, then do write who made the decision.
Yes, I believe the source states that Marshall himself made the decision. I'll leave as-is.--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "To help him channel family-oriented comedies, Marshall "rubbed all my ‘Happy Days’ scripts on my face and said, ‘I remember this.'"" — This wording is a little confusing. Does Marshall help himself or someone helps him? Just make the wording a little more clearer.
I re-worked the entire sentence; "Marshall revisited his old Happy Days scripts to remind himself how to approach family-oriented comedies."--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The set has been described as collaborative, encouraging a family-like atmosphere and abiding by his motto "Life is more important than show business."" — Has been described by Marshall? If so, then could you state that "He found the set to be as collaborative..."
It's actually Matarazzo's quote; changed to "Matarazzo described the set as as collaborative, recalling that Marshall encouraged a family-like atmosphere abiding by his motto "Life is more important than show business."--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The director celebrated a birthday while filming" — Change "a" to "his" because it is his birthday.
Done.--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Andrews suggested that the fictional country of Genovia be famous for its pears," — Why pears? Any particular reason?
I can't find a source stating why, exactly, Andrews suggested pears; it appears to be random.--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Marshall worked with Miller to improvise humour moments," — You should mention that Miller is Mia's hairstylist in this sentence, which is the first instance of you mentioning him, and you've done that in the next paragraph instead. State his full name, wikilink it and state his role here and remove the mention of him in the next paragraph (The part that begins with "Both Elizondo and Larry Miller, who portrays Mia's hairstylist Paolo").
You're right. This was a more recent addition to the article; I thought I had mentioned it before. Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikilink "ingenue" in case readers don't get it at first.
Done.--Changedforbetter (talk) 18:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Elizondo playing a hotel manager who helps transform Roberts' prostitute Vivian into a socialite" — Not really needed here unless it is relevant to the film here.
You're right. Removed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 18:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are a few mentions in the "Production" section that says that the film gives Hathaway her breakthrough role and revived Andrews' acting career. Both of these would be better off in the "legacy" section.


More later, Changedforbetter.....

I think I've addressed everything thus far. Thanks!!--Changedforbetter (talk) 18:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Further comments
  • "The film is credited with reviving Andrews' film career and introducing her to a younger generation of fans,[50][55] rivaling her career-defining performances in Mary Poppins and The Sound of Music (1965) in terms of popularity.[47]" and "The Princess Diaries is credited with establishing Hathaway's acting career,[28] similar to the way in which Pretty Woman offered Roberts' breakthrough role.[63]" — These are better off in the "legacy" section.
Sorry, forgot to address this before. Done.--Changedforbetter (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a convincing transformation that ultimately fooled audience members" — According to whom? Please specify.
Removed second half of the sentence, after transformation.--Changedforbetter (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the fire was intended to be extinguished once the actor placed his arm" — Who is the lucky SOB to have his burning arm doused by Anne Hathaway?
Haha, unfortunately it was a bit role in the film and I'm unable find any information officially crediting the actor XD--Changedforbetter (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikilink "bleachers" and "peach taffeta".
Done; linked "taffeta".--Changedforbetter (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Put the "Music" section after "Themes".
Done.--Changedforbetter (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The rest seems to be really well done. The references don't have the publishers and newspapers linked on the first instance of mentioning them. Please link all the references on first instance of mentioning them.
I've read that this isn't necessary especially if the work is referenced in the article previously, but I can work on it.--Changedforbetter (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If I may be bold, where did you read it, Changedforbetter?  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 15:57, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I can't seem to find where this was, but it's no big deal; I'm working on linking the references as we speak and I'll let you know when it's done. Should I come across that information again, I can forward it you to if you'd like :-) Ssven2--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:45, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's about it from me, Changedforbetter. Address these comments and the article is passed.  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 15:25, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's about it, thank you for your comments! Awaiting final verdict Ssven2.--Changedforbetter (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've linked all references. Final verdict? Ssven2--Changedforbetter (talk) 22:09, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
    Pass or Fail:

Thank you for addressing my comments, Changedforbetter. Congratulations, the article has passed.  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 08:01, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Princess_Diaries_(film)&oldid=1206996961"