Talk:Snow White and the Huntsman

Billing order.

Several users who have edited this page believe that Charlize Theron gets top billing. I disagree; I think Kristen Stewart gets top billing. The sources I used to support this theory include the credits on the poster, iTunes Movie Trailers, the film's Facebook page, the film's twitter feed, and this: [1] I've been told that the film's official gives Theron the top billing, but as far as I can tell, there is no cast list on the film's website. Zuko Halliwell (talk) 03:55, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

adbot??!?

Somebody has changed all the links so that they redirect to a spam site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.123.2.124 (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, changes are almost immediately reverted back to link out to some ad network. I'd almost suggest locking the page from being editable for the time being. ModernTenshi04 (talk) 16:21, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Additionally, I think the spammer in question has violated the three revert rule. Should we report it at WP:AN/EW? Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:39, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Plot section

The Plot section explains what the story of the movie, but may not explain what really happens in the movie. What exactly are the three drops of blood about? Are Ravenna and Snow White in actuality the same person?[2] --82.170.113.123 (talk) 21:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Is the magical deer a reference to Herne the Hunter? Bgt (talk) 10:51, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

I think its more a reference to "Princess Mononoke" (the spirits of the forest leading to stag (god of the forest/life)) 89.245.82.66 (talk) 18:41, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 05:43, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

---

Snow White & the Huntsman → Snow White and the Huntsman – As per WP:COMMONNAME. Film was copyrighted as Snow White and the Huntsman and Google returns 227 million hits for "snow white and the huntsman" and 47 million hits for "snow white & the huntsman". The version with the ampersand seems to be a promotional stylization. Betty Logan (talk) 02:37, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

• Support MOS:TM -- Avoid using special characters that simply substitute for English words -- 70.24.251.208 (talk) 05:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
• Nope. The rule is to go with what's on the officially released material - if it is a common enough symbol, which an ampersand surely is. And it is clearly "&" on all the posters. It's always best to be accurate, even in the little things. :) -- Wikkitywack (talk) 09:07, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

That is clearly not the "rule". WP:COMMONNAME states Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources, which I have ably demonstrated. NOTE TO CLOSER: I recommend ignoring Wikkitywack's objection; consensus is not decided by head counts or votes, it is decided by the arguments that you determine are the most consistent with the nameing guidelines. The only valid counter-argument in this case is to demonstrate that the proposed name is in fact not the "common name". Betty Logan (talk) 09:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Seems obvious. Ampersand has to be escaped in a URL to %26. It's an unusual enough character. See for example WALL-E. Obotlig ☣ ^interrogate 15:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
• Support per Obotlig. Steam5 (talk) 04:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Huntsman's wife

There's an actress listed as playing the Huntsman's wife. That character is already dead by the time of the Huntsman's first appearance, and I don't recall her appearing in any flashbacks or anything like that. Did I miss something. Tad Lincoln (talk) 05:49, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

I was wondering about the same thing. Maybe it was cut?--Krystaleen 05:56, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Kristen Stewart's infidelity with married director Rupert Sanders

Kristen Stewart who played Snow White in Snow White and the Huntsman directed by Rupert Sanders recently had an affair together. While Kristen Stewart was romantically involed with Twlight saga co-star Robert Pattinson (who has since moved out of the residence from Kristen Stewart), Kristen Stewart was seen beeing romantically involved with Snow White and the Huntsman director Rupert Sanders. Both Kristen Stewart and Rupert Sanders have apologized since been caught by the media. The chacrter of Queen Eleanor in Snow White and the Huntsman played by Liberty Ross is the wife of director Rupert Sanders and played Snow White's mother in the movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.132.82 (talk) 21:52, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Switch scandal section with sequel?

since the sequel section mentions the "public fling", with details being posted in the following section, perhaps they should be switched around...just a thought :) 60.241.64.151 (talk) 07:20, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

the "scandal" has nothing to do with the movie, and should be removed altogether.Caringtype1 (talk) 15:51, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Caringtype1. It should be removed. Regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 03:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Dwarves - Curious line

In the article there is a section about the protest of the Little People of America to the digital face replacement for the Dwarves, and it says "despite the fact that the Dwarves were played by British actors."

I'm struggling to understand the intent of the meaning for this line! --Plkrtn (talk) 21:08, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I've removed it, as you say the meaning is ambiguous and appears to be an OR/synth addition, their nationality is irrelevant to the motivations asserted in the cite provided, and seems to imply some sort of bias against this protest with the use of 'despite'.Number36 (talk) 09:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Snow White and the Huntsman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:48, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Will copy edit as I go and jot queries below. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:48, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

After her death, Snow White's father rescues Ravenna from an invading Dark Army of glass soldiers, becomes enchanted with her beauty, and marries her. - here Ravenna is mentioned without being described or introduced. You need to explain who she is at first mention.

The source for The first two sentences of the Casting section indicates that they considered big names, then lesser known actresses before returning to big names - need to calibrate article with source.

Place release dates for other countries in Release section.

Any information on how the script developed would be a very good addition.

Fix tag(s)

Comment: I would say please do not continue the review and quick fail it instead, because the nominator has contributed little to nothing for the article, the lead is too short, the plot is too long, there are a few tags, and the release section is too short. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:06, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Agree with your comments on the article - I placed the tags there today - did muse on quickfailing but happy to AGF for the time being and await a reply as it could feasibly done within 7 days. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:10, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

1. Well written?:

Prose quality: - some issues outstanding - see above.

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources: - not checked as more obvious issues not addressed

Citations to reliable sources, where required: some tags.

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects: - mostly, but missing release dates outside US. Also, no info on script development.

Focused: - plot needs work, lead too short.

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail: - nominator busy - realistically, significant work required. Recommend addressing obvious issues before resubmitting. Article has potential though. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:41, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Reviews of Stewart's Performance

I've noticed from following the page that the line "Stewart's performance received mixed reviews" constantly gets changed from "...mixed..." to "...mixed to positive..." to "...mixed to negative...". Is there some definitive source that can sum up how mixed her performance was? static shakedown ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ 11:13, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Why isn't just "mixed" sufficient? I thought the general preference was to avoid ranges with "mixed", which already means "some positive, some negative". Maybe a better term would be "mostly negative". --Fru1tbat (talk) 12:30, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

All right, I left a hidden text comment asking people to leave it as "mixed". static shakedown ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ 15:42, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Winter War sounds like a sequel too

If you read the plot summary there, the first paragraph sounds like a prequel, sure, a flashback telling how the younger sister was banished, but it sounds like that would be a brief portion of the film compared to the second paragraph which focuses on the younger sister returning to the kingdom and teaming up with her older sister again, which sounds sequel.

What do you call it when a movie depicts events happening before and after the originating film? A surroundquel? A presequel? I think Lion King 1.5 was like that. 174.92.135.167 (talk) 13:05, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, if the most significant portion of the film takes place chronologically after the previous film, it's a sequel. No need to account for smaller overlapping portions or flashbacks - that's getting a bit too precise. --Fru1tbat (talk) 13:50, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Snow White is in the public domain

See this article. Disney may have copyrights on depictions and derivative works, but the property "Snow White" is far too old to be anyone's intellectual property. Elizium23 (talk) 00:09, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Why was this film changed to dark fantasy?

This film is set entirely in a fantasy world and not any world like ours. This movie does not have any connection to a world like ours. Per definition this should go in high fantasy. I don't know why it keeps getting changed to dark fantasy. Lord of the Rings has dark features in it as well, how come nobody calls it dark fantasy. By definition this is a high fantasy film and should be left there.--Taeyebar 20:22, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

The primary genre, per WP:FILMLEAD, is fantasy film. Most sources do not use the term high fantasy. - Gothicfilm (talk) 01:27, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Nope you were told WP:SPECIFICLINK supports subgenre [3] . Calling it fantasy is different from claiming it's not high-fantasy, since all high-fantasy is fantasy.--Taeyebar 23:35, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

What explicitly applies here is WP:FILMLEAD, which says Genre classifications should comply with WP:WEIGHT and represent what is specified by a majority of mainstream reliable sources. Most sources call this film a fantasy, not a "high fantasy". You've been told this many times before. Claiming authority from another guideline that has nothing to do with films or genres does not entitle you to ignore the clear intent of WP:FILMLEAD. - Gothicfilm (talk) 00:46, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

No both WP:FILMLEAD and WP:SPECIFICLINK support subgenre and a source calling it fantasy is different from saying its not high fantasy. So explain why you changed it?--Taeyebar 00:20, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

SPECIFICLINK has nothing to do with films or genres. Read the quoted passage directly above from WP:FILMLEAD. Most sources call this film a fantasy, not a "high fantasy". - Gothicfilm (talk) 04:52, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Numerous users pointed out that WP:SPECIFICLINK and WP:FILMLEAD both support subgenre.--Taeyebar 20:08, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Let's see you provide links supporting that. Stop WP: edit warring on this and dozens of other pages. Gothicfilm (talk) 01:39, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Marquise Giovanna Zazzara, wife of Annibale Corvi, was the inspiration for Snowhite (white skin, red cheeks and thick jet-black hair)

Can anyone explain why the queen is called Ravenna? It sounds like the name of an Italian city, but then you see ravens flying. Does it have anything to do with raven (the raven)? The story of Snow White was inspired by the city of Sulmona, where Publius Ovidius Naso was born who wrote the Metamorphoses. In this work a character called Chione or Neve appears. In Sulmona there was the Corvi family who inspired Basile the story of Lo cuorvo in Racconto dei Racconti. The real Snowwhite was the Marquise Giovanna Zazzara, wife of Annibale Corvi (Corvi means Ravens). Ravens are supposed to represent beauty and order, in fact they were sacred to the god Apollo. The ravens are supposed to represent Snow White and not the queen. Marquise Giovanna Zazzara, wife of Annibale Corvi (Corvi means Ravens), was the inspiration for Snowhite (white skin, red cheeks and thick jet-black hair). In fact, the surname Zazzara (o Zazzera) really means thick hair. You have to read the fairy tale "The Crow" or "The Raven" by Giambattista Basile to understand. Does the author of this Snow White perhaps know these things? 95.250.174.126 (talk) 03:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 6 March 2024

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: not moved. After extended time for discussion, consensus is clearly against the proposed move at this time. BD2412 (talk) 17:50, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

---

Snow White and the Huntsman → Snow White & the Huntsman – The current title violates MOS:AMPERSAND, which states: Retain an ampersand when it is a legitimate part of the style of a proper noun, the title of a work, or a trademark, such as in Up & Down or AT&T. Similar to works such as Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory, Percy Jackson & the Olympians, Fast & Furious, Batman & Robin (film), Dungeons & Dragons, Hobbs & Shaw, and Deadpool & Wolverine, the correct title of this film uses an ampersand, not the word "and", as seen in the billing block at the bottom of the poster. Many external style guides instruct copyeditors to change ampersands in titles of works to "and", so the common name is irrelevant; this is a matter of styling, which is what our MoS is for. Wikipedia's style is to use whatever is in the actual name; external style guides that other sources follow do not dictate our style. Additionally, the use of an ampersand vs. "and" does not negatively impact recognizability or any of the five WP:CRITERIA, and for what it's worth, there are plenty of reliable sources that use an ampersand: [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Killarnee (talk) 22:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Film/American cinema task force and WikiProject Film have been notified of this discussion. Killarnee (talk) 22:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

@Killarnee: This didn't need to be relisted. If an RM receives no comments after a week, the default outcome is to move the page. See WP:RMNOMIN. But now that there is one person opposing the request, albeit with an invalid rationale, we have no choice but to leave this open for another week. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:06, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

• Weak oppose: Although it appears that sources using the ampersand can be found if you look for them, as demonstrated above, a quick look at the headlines of the sources cited in the article (which presumably were not selected based on their choice of which variation to use) reveals roughly 30 that use "and" and only 2 that use "&". This gives me the impression that independent reliable sources seem to use "and", which looks less strange. I don't see any clear evidence of the ampersand being "a legitimate part of the style" of this film's title, and poster art doesn't seem sufficient for establishing that. There was an RM that agreed to move the article in the opposite direction in June 2012. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:18, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

  As noted in the nomination, sources and the "common name" are irrelevant. MOS:& is the sole policy relevant to this RM. We follow Wikipedia's manual of style, not whatever style guide other sources follow. Even if a million sources used a hyphen in Minneapolis–Saint Paul, no spaces between J. R. R. Tolkien, or a comma before Martin Luther King Jr., we would not move our articles per MOS:ENDASH, MOS:INITS, and MOS:JR, respectively. Secondly, there is no doubt that the correct title uses an ampersand, as seen in the billing block at the bottom of the poster (I am not referring to the logo but the text below, which are the film's legal credits). There is also precedent for this as seen from the various examples I listed. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:06, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

  MOS:AMPERSAND isn't policy and does not even apply to article titles, where WP:AT is actually policy. And I think the matter is moot with "and" being the official title. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 00:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

  The MoS's status as a guideline is not a loophole to ignore it and follow other sources' style guides (which again, sometimes say to arbitrarily change ampersands to "and"). I am not sure why you believe WP:MOS does not apply to article titles. In any case, the purpose of COMMONNAME is to ensure a title is recognizable to readers; "&" or "and" doesn't affect this. I've responded below as to whether the official title uses an ampersand. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

  For MOS:& interpretation, I don't know of a good way to figure out whether something is "a legitimate part of the style of a proper noun" other than to look at sources. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:20, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose since it appears from copyright records that Snow White and the Huntsman is the copyrighted title and that the ampersand was used for stylization. In addition, using search queries to find mentions of Snow White and Huntsman from the year of release, especially reviews and other coverage, the vast majority of reliable sources commonly write with "and" and not the ampersand. Looking up these terms plus the director's name in Google Books actually shows no use of the ampersand in the first six pages of results I looked at. Even if I missed one, it's overall indicative of the common name. I saw the same results in Google Scholar. If anything, I think the article body should use "and" instead of the ampersand, and just update the opening sentence to mention "(stylized as Snow White & the Huntsman)" instead for a one-off mention. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 00:08, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

  Are you suggesting that the billing block is incorrect? That is supposedly the legal credits that we follow in many places, such as the infobox. Universal [10] [11] uses an ampersand in running text. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

  I used the copyright database. See results with ampersand here versus with "and" here. The official copyright records' inconsistency is weird, but it is much more "and" than the ampersand. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

  If the links don't work, use this and compare snow white & the huntsman with snow white and the huntsman. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:14, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose Per WP:COMMONNAME given that the movie is referred to without the ampersand in most reliable sources, and WP:TROUT the nominator for wasting peoples' time on a single ampersand when there was a clear consensus years ago it was not needed or wanted. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

  The MoS does not say anything about sources being able to override Wikipedia's style preferences. If that were the case, we wouldn't need an MoS; just follow what sources do. The only section on the page that mentions looking at sources is capitalization, which is why we have exceptions to TITLECAPS. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:30, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

  WP:FOC, please. I found it an interesting problem to review, considering that the ampersand is all over official materials and even in the billing block for some reason, despite copyright records showing the opposite (along with how the reliable sources call it). Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose per all above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:53, 19 March 2024 (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.

For what it's worth, the soundtrack also uses an ampersand: [12] [13] [14] InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)