Jump to content

Talk:Nineteen Eighty-Four (British TV programme)

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Roman Spinner (talk | contribs) at 07:31, 25 April 2019 (Appending section header ==Untitled== and 4 signature templates). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured articleNineteen Eighty-Four (British TV programme) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 11, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 19, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
August 25, 2006Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Untitled

Could this part here:

Most were worried by the depiction of a totalitarian governmental regime controlling the population's freedom of thought, and four Conservative Party – the government of the time – MPs tabled motions in the House of Commons for the scheduled Thursday second performance to be cancelled.

be made a little bit clearer? As I understand it, 4 MPs, from the Conservative party, wanted to not see part II. Because -- why? They didn't like the depiction of a totalitarian state? How exactly did they voice their complaint, without sounding curiously ironic. They were in effect banning free thought, right? Or did they not care how it looked. Their names, and some of their other policy decisions, might shed light on this story.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.37.18.16 (talk) 01:11, 11 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

It was an Early day motion. I've just had a look in The Times archive online and will add the info to the article. Timrollpickering 11:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

spelling error?

I believe that the location referred to the the Production section of the article should be Tavistock (not Taverstock).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.191.170 (talk) 13:22, 11 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Google has references to both spellings. I'd consult my copy of the London A-Z if it wasn't buried under a ton of rubbish....—Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee M (talkcontribs) 01:41, 9 April 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Also, unrelated, but, shouldn't the title be spelled Nineteen Eighty-Four (TV program). I mean, that is the way we spell "programme" in American English. Just wondering...--silverBULLET(x3) 21:44, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The semi-formal Wikipedia rule is more or less to use British spelling when dealing with subjects having to do with Britain (in most cases). AnonMoos 00:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How does one get a copy?

Is it possible to obtain a copy of this program from anywhere? -Timvasquez 05:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not currently, I am afraid. There was a DVD release scheduled a couple of years back, but this was kaiboshed by the Orwell estate, who didn't want two versions of the book (this and the Burton / Hurt film) to be available. Goodness knows why. Angmering 07:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I am a United States Citizen, where can I watch this film—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.50.69.27 (talk) 02:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere, at the moment, although there is some talk of a Region 1 DVD release this year. I am not sure if this will also go ahead or be stopped by the Orwell Estate, though. Angmering 07:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]