Talk:1929 in film

Woman Making Dinner

Ever since last summer, someone keeps putting that as a notable event on this page. Is this for real, or someone plugging their Youtube video? There is a Youtube video with this title, as well as the info that was put on Wikipedia last summer. The first time it got removed, it was deleted as a "prank entry." I'm thinking it's the latter.Crboyer (talk) 22:43, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Lead section

Well Well as I tried to add the lead ,they took it away!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1006:B12A:F84B:B842:9FC0:4E66:CEBC (talk) 10:42, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Top 9?

There's yet another conflict in the sources, because this site & this site both put "Welcome Danger" at #1, & Worldwideboxoffice.com lists it at US$3.1 mil, "Sunnyside Up" at US$3mil, "The Broadway Melody" at US$2.8mil, & "Coquette" at US$1.4mil; "Gold Diggers of Broadway" doesn't even make the list... That said, a contemporary (more/less) source is more likely to be correct IMO--but since the year pages routinely use gross take including re-release, clearly some standard is required. AFAIK, there isn't one. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 06:29, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Worldwideboxoffice.com is not a reliable source because it is self-published. But aside from that, many box-office lists prior to World War 2 are inconsistent because some distributors ranked by domestic gross and others by worldwide gross. This is what Variety and the Motion Picture Almanac have down, and tehse were the most reliable contemprrary sources:

• Variety: 1) Sunnyside Up - 3.3 rental; 2) The Broadway Melody - 2.8 3) The Cock-Eye World - 2.7; 4) Gold Diggers of Broadway - 2.3; 5) Rio Rita - 1.7; 6) The Hollywood Revue of 1929 - 1.5; 7) In Old Arizona - 1.3 & Syncopation - 1.3; 9) The Trial of Mary Dugan - 1.1; nothing else over $1 million.
• Motiona Picture Alamanac (1937): 1) Sunnyside Up - 3.3 rental; 2) The Broadway Melody - 3.0 3) The Cock-Eye World - 2.7; 4) Gold Diggers of Broadway - 2.25; 5) Rio Rita - 2.0; 6) In Old Arizona - 1.3; nothing else over $1 million.

As you can see, even these two sources are not fully consistent, although they agree on the order of the top 5. Personally what I would do is strip the chart down to a top 5 and have a column for the variey figures and another for the Almanac figures. Betty Logan (talk) 16:52, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

This is what I meant about a standard. At least these are something like contemporary, & far less likely to include unmentioned re-releases, which modern online sources do. The idea of two dollar columns seems a bit overkill, but I wouldn't oppose it; I'd say fn mentioning the conflicts (where they arise) would do it, provided it's clear there are conflicts, so heading the "BO$" column with "(sources disagree)", or something... TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 20:06, 14 January 2018 (UTC)