Talk:Captain Marvel (film)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Logo

http://cdn.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/Captain-Marvel-Movie-Logo-Official.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.13.126.21 (talk) 23:13, October 28, 2014‎

Images are not allowed outside the main space. Will add once it is moved to the main space. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:54, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Suggested sources

• Kevin Feige Q&A: [1]
• Meg LeFauve on the film: [2]. Hula Hup (talk) 07:36, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Nothing to add from either source that isn't already in the article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:36, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Emily Carmichael and Elizabeth Wood

@Favre1fan93: Lets take a look at these sources. THR says, "Her name has even surfaced as a possible contender to direct Marvel’s Captain Marvel." While it might be short, THR is making a definitive statement - her name has surfaced - and the attribution for making the statement comes directly from the author. Nothing is being passed off. On the other hand, We Got this Covered says, "our sources are telling us that a private meeting was held last week between Marvel representatives and independent filmmaker Elizabeth Wood in order to discuss potential directorial duties." As you can see, they are passing off the attribution to anonymous sources, thereby ducking any responsibility for reporting it. The only thing that can be assured by WGTC is that they were told about the meeting, not that it actually happened. The strength of the statement shows if the source is willing to back it up by taking credit for it. That is not what WGTC is doing here. Furthermore the credibility of THR goes a lot farther then WGTC, which admiteddly I had not heard of until this story broke.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:10, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I've seen WGTC in passing a few times so it isn't super new to me. I looked further at their About page (which I should have done sooner), and they don't have much for editorial oversight. I'll remove the Wood info. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:33, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Brie Larson

Something to keep an eye out for "Brie Larson the Frontrunner to Play Captain Marvel." Ofcourse this is one of those "sources say" articles, so it by itself is not verification that she is indeed in talks.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:10, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

THR has also confirmed her being the frontrunner and in early talks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:25, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

They use the same wording, "sources say she has emerged as the choice for the part. One source says negotiations may be underway.".--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

How is this different from Lupita N'yongo entering talks for Black Panther? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:38, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Wording. The N'yongo article says "Lupita Nyong'o, who won an Oscar for her performance in 12 Years a Slave, is in negotiations to star opposite Chadwick Boseman in Marvel Studios’ Black Panther," which is direct verification. All the Larson article verifies is that someone told them that she is in talks.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:43, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

We can still use the sources IMO, even if we aren't certain on the negotiations part, saying Larson was being considered. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:39, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

IDK, given the flimsiness of the rest of the article, it's kinda sketchy. Our policy is pretty clear on the matter.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:48, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't see this being any different than any other film articles we've worked on. The sites are reputable, and the fact, as I suggested, that we remove "negotiations" doesn't go against the policy. Because both Variety and THR have confirmed that she is being considered. The speculation part is if she has actually entered talks or not. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:53, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I think we should definitely use these to say that Larson is the frontrunner / first choice, which we have done before. And obviously expect more concrete news soon. - adamstom97 (talk) 01:02, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Exactly, this is the same standard we've been using all along. Variety doesn't confirm anything, THR does however make a direct statement in the opening sentence but the rest of the article seems to undermine it. I understand how exciting this news can be but we have to be careful with publishing speculation. Policy says speculation even from reliable sources is not permitted.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:04, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Again, I don't see the issue in saying she became a frontrunner, or that the other two women were director contenders. All of this info, if not from Marvel directly is "according to sources", even if they never say it in the articles. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:10, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Not true, investigative journalists do independently confirm information for themselves, not just repeat what someone tells them. As I said the front runner part though iffy is a direct statement so go ahead and re-add it if you wish. I feel it's better to err on the side of caution.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:16, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Deadline is giving literally the exact same info, saying "Brie Larson has emerged as the front-runner for the role in what would be Marvel’s first female-led superhero pic, Deadline has confirmed." However, they don't mention anything about "sources", yet it is literally the same thing THR and Variety is doing, providing info "according to sources". - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:14, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

This Deadline article confirms what I was saying, I feel: she is definitely the frontrunner / first choice, but nobody is really confident enough to say that she is in negotiations yet. - adamstom97 (talk) 01:18, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

And IGN says "reportedly", more reason to be cautious but go ahead and add it if you must.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:19, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Heh, Vanity Fair says the Variety article is far from a confirmation.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:28, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

The "reportedly" is for being in talk, which I think both myself and Adam agreed is too speculative at this time between all the sources to definitely state she is in. But that doesn't mean she isn't being considered, which all our sources have all confirmed she is. I think we can all agree from our work on these articles that consideration and being in negotiations are not the same, so that is why just saying what you did here is fine. Additionally, I think Vanity Fair saying "far from a confirmation" is more to the fact of her being cast in the role, as we've all seen these reports about actors entering or being in negotiations and then other news outlets say they are cast. Case in point, Marissa Tomei last July was only ever said to be in negotiations from Variety, and everyone else then took that report and said she had been cast. So in summary, what we have on the draft right now is fine in my eyes. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:36, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Larson confirmed at SDCC lads! https://mobile.twitter.com/AgentM Rusted AutoParts 02:14, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Director shortlist

Lexi Alexander is not on the list, but she believes that Rachel Talalay is. Is this too speculative, given Alexander only believes, and isn't 100%? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:21, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I think so.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 11:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Just curious

Why was it okay to include the new THR report about directors on the shortlist, yet we couldn't include Caro and Jennifer Kent when they were mentioned in Brie Larson's being eyed article? Both use some form of "according to sources", which we were discussing above as why we couldn't add the info per WP:SPECULATION. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, I didn't even check but you're right.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 09:52, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Larson reads comics to prepare for the role

Mentioning that an actor read comics in preparation for a role borders on WP:RUNOFTHEMILL, but would it be more substantive if we mentioned which comic they read? As seen here, Larson read Captain Marvel Vol. 1: Higher, Further, Faster, More as preparation for playing Carol Danvers. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:14, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

I think, cautiously, yes, if there is some significance to "Higher, Further, Faster, More", beyond the fact that (as I'm reading the situation) it is one of the more recent TPBs on the character in the moniker. Possibly TriiipleThreat could shed some more light on what I'm feeling, given I know they work a lot on maintaining the Danvers Wiki article. I feel if it is ever revealed that LaFauve and Perlman used that run as inspiration, it would make sense to me to include. But if nothing like that ever emerges, to me it is just the WP:RUNOFTHEMILL info as you initially pointed out. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:50, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

That is the first volume of the second series which features Danvers as CM. The only significance I see is that it is more cosmic, whereas the first series was more earthbound. But that is my OR. We need RSs to provide whatever significance there may be. Therefore, I'd have to say no at this time.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 23:24, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Analysis on 1990s setting

From THR. Wasn't sure where exactly to add this. Maybe after the "announcement" line in pre-production? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:10, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

I have added. Perhaps you could rephrase or hide until a better phrasing can be found? --Kailash29792 (talk) 04:23, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Filming location

According to this article, they will be filming in California. This contradicts the existing source. - DinoSlider (talk) 17:14, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I'll add it in, with wording in Pre-production how the location changed (and to keep the Atlanta source should that still prove to be true). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:15, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Filming start potentially revealed

Unreliable but still. Start: January 8, 2018 in Atlanta (so presumably Pinewood Atlanta). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:34, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Here are more details. Start: January 8, 2018; End: May 11, 2018: Working title: Warbird. Probably unreliable source. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:23, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I see CAJH has been using this site a lot today. From what I can tell it seems weakly reliable. It has editorial oversight but all the editors come from blogging backgrounds.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:59, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Fine. I admit. I had no clues the site would be unreliable. One reason I didn't believe so was that it was a site where viewer can not register like a blog or anything like it. CAJH (talk) 18:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Its okay, I didn't say it was unreliable. We should just still be on look out for something more reliable.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:10, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Maybe next time before making any edits I should come straightly here to talk if information comes from a site that is unfamiliar to me. CAJH (talk) 18:15, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea but you have the right to WP:BEBOLD.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:27, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Production will begin starting Jan. 22, 2018 in Los Angeles.

WP:FRUIT. Traces back to a Reddit post. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:04, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Budget

This source (page 9) says that total budget is ~120 million or only the California part of the budget? --Escudero (talk) 11:57, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

It might be the full budget if I'm reading it correctly, with $20.8 million worth of credits. So I'm guessing this could be a gross budget of $118.6 million and a net budget of $97.8 million. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Move to mainspace checklist

Since it appears we may be making some headway in moving this out of the draft space, time for our final move check list for Phase 3!

1. Move to the mainspace! Myself, TriiipleThreat, and Adamstom.97 all have page mover rights, so we can perform a page swap move to move the article to Captain Marvel (film). DO NOT CUT AND PASTE!  Done
   1. Remember to remove {{Draft article}} and unhide the categories.  Done
2. Change the template at List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films#Captain Marvel (2019) from {{further}} to {{main}} and update the table on the List of films article to link directly to the new article and change its status to "Filming" (in this case, if we move before end of March, maybe "Filming (hiatus)" would be appropriate...)  Done
3. Upload the film logo (which you can grab from here) to File:Captain Marvel logo.jpg.  Done
4. Fix redirects currently going to Carol Danvers#Film to the new mainspace article (that is only Captain Marvel (2019 film)).  Done
5. Add the article link to all the nav boxes used in the article.  Done
6. If Marvel provides us with a press release indicating filming starting, add any info from that to our respective pages (castings mainly).  Done

- Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)