Talk:Newt (film)

newt or Newt

While it's true the logo is spelled with "n" instead of "N" if every Wikipedia article name was based on how it was advertised, alot of titles would BE LIKE THIS. 71.182.145.40 (talk) 18:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

its spelled as "newt" in press material presented at the announcement, if my recollection of the listed citations are correct. No special font used. SpikeJones (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree. We don't write "A Bug's Life" a bug's life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.153.120 (talk) 21:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll reiterate -- in the typewritten press material provided from Disney, "newt" is used. For Pixar, it was "A Bug's Life". Hence the difference. SpikeJones (talk) 21:56, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, and thus correct English is used in preference to however some company wants to style their trademark. As a name, the title of a film is capitalised. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters) and various sub-sections, such as Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) for guidance. Nouse4aname (talk) 19:03, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

To elaborate Disney actually calls A Bug's Life, "a bug's life" while Pixar doesn't. I expect the same happening with Newt, so lets keep it capitalized with correct English, after all, it's a title.Martini833 (talk) 17:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

This is why we have {{lowercase}} —Preceding unsigned comment added by ViperSnake151 (talk • contribs)

Thank you! Alientraveller (talk) 09:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Please read WP:MOSTM. As a trademark and title of a film, the name "Newt" is capitalised. The stylistic formatting of the title is meaningless. This is an encyclopedia, and thus we use correct English in favour of stylistic preferences. Nouse4aname (talk) 15:03, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Also, reliable secondary publications look to be basically unanimous about using "Newt" per this Google News search. We should definitely capitalize, marketing predilections aside. Croctotheface (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Logos aside, if "newt" is the title of the movie, that's how it should be written. ✍ (talk) 18:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Plot

Are you sure that's the actual plot? It seems a bit strange for a disney film... Princess-pink95 (talk) 13:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, taken straight from the citation. SpikeJones (talk) 13:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

not really i think is just a normal disney/pixar film acutally, but where the hell have the names come from i haven't seen them any where esle where did all the cast come from what links i haven't seen anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Veggiegirl (talk • contribs) 22:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

this plot seems weird. how are they going to animate two newts mating and keep the film family friendly?fortheorlingas (talk) 15:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Well obviously they won't actually show the newts making love. That would be beneath Pixar's principles. The story is about them falling in love. It's basically WALL-E with newts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.28.112.31 (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Newt's don't "make love". The female lays her eggs in the pond and then the male squirts his goo into the water near them.Eregli bob (talk) 03:39, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Disney, for ages, has shown the by-products of the two main leads' liaisons (Lady and Tramp's kids, Simba and Nala's cub, etc.) without showing the acts that made them. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 16:34, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Michael Giacchino

It lists him as the composer for this film, but does not give a source. I haven't seen that said anywhere else, and I'd like to know if it's true or not. Mike is one of my favorite composers. 76.175.116.65 (talk) 02:37, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Important note

I learned that Cars 2's release date has been pushed to Christmas 2011. This will probably force The Bear and the Bow to be released in the summer of 2012 and in turn this film will have a Christmas 2012 release. Disproven?? Georgia guy (talk) 15:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

At this point, the only confirmation we have is that Cars 2 is to be released in/around December 2011. While it's possible that Newt and The Bear and the Bow also got pushed back, it's also quite possible that one of the later films got swapped into the June 2011 slot. Until we hear something definitive, we should make adjustments stating that there is some flexibility in these dates. I may go ahead and do that with Bear, since it's the most directly affected by the Cars 2 shift. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 16:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Scrapped

I've been hearing rumors that "newt" has been scrapped. Disney veteran Floyd Norman commented on a blog, saying "Newt is dead" but he is unable to elaborate. See here: http://pixarplanet.com/blog/is-newt-dead-cars-2-having-production-problems 76.175.116.65 (talk) 01:42, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

There's another post with links to the original blog posting at DenOfGeek.com. — Loadmaster (talk) 03:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Both sources are self-published and thus not appropriate for use here. Stories have come out about story or other issues with Pixar films before, with films still getting released (legend has it Disney was attempting to downplay Finding Nemo in order to reduce Pixar's contract price). Until something official appears, be it from Disney, Pixar or in a more reliable source like Variety, Newt is still on. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 03:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Newt has been removed from the Disney A to Z encyclopedia: http://adisney.go.com/vault/supplement.pdf The news broke in spots such as Stitch Kingdom and The Pixar Blog. I'd say it's indefinitely shelved or cancelled. dogman15 (talk) 00:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Newt is officially cancelled. No press release (yet), but here's the details: [1] dogman15 (talk) 06:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

2012??

It appears that Brave and Monsters Inc. 2 have 2012 releases, so I guess this film's release is probably 2013. Any evidence on the truth?? Georgia guy (talk) 13:48, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I think at this point we have only the information to say that the film is in production, with no announced release date. The only things that would change it would be (a) an official announcement with an updated release date or (b) an official announcement that the film has been canceled. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm very sure Pixar won't release 3 films in 2012, so it makes no sense to predict this to be a 2012 film. I'm sure 2013 makes more sense because both Brave and Monsters Inc. 2 have 2012 releases. Anyone who disagrees?? Georgia guy (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Saying Newt will release in 2013 may well make sense, but it would be pure speculation, which is inappropriate for an encyclopedia. It's up to Disney/Pixar, either directly or through a reliable source like Variety, to either provide an updated release date or state that they're not moving forward with it. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Have you contacted them?? Georgia guy (talk) 21:07, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

All you gotta do is provide a reliable source stating that Newt will release in 2013 or a reliable source stating it's been canceled. As of now, the reliable sources available indicate that Disney is working on Newt, but it currently doesn't have a release date. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 21:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Changed to redirect

With the film officially cancelled [2], I've changed the page to a redirect; it now points to a cancelled projects section on the Pixar page. I've also changed the information on the Feature Films page.Pejorative.majeure (talk) 05:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Before making such wholesale changes, can you provide reliable proof that this blog is indeed operated by Pixar and is thus considered official? --McDoobAU93 (talk) 05:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The source is the Chief Disney Archivist. It is not a statement made by the writer of the blog, who is in contact with Lasseter and other individuals at Pixar. Besides, if I simply said "Slashfilm" and other movie sites reported this, instead of simply going directly to the source, I doubt the "reliability" of the blog would be in question. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 08:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC) Additionally, it was reported "dead" in February by a consultant to Disney, Floyd Norman. The statement from the archivist is verification of THAT statement. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 08:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Still in production

Although Internet sites say this film has been cancelled, Wikipedia is accepting without proof that this film is actually still in production and that the info that it has been cancelled is a soon-to-be-disproven rumor. What decides what Wikipedia accepts without proof?? Georgia guy (talk) 13:15, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

The problem here is that the proof offered isn't considered reliable enough to make such a change, so instead Wikipedia defers to that which is reliable ... Disney's announcement of the film and the various news articles talking about its production. What we need is some sort of proof that the Pixar blog being cited is indeed owned by and able to speak for Pixar. For all we know, it's a fan blog who was able to register the name. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 13:38, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I want to know what Wikipedia accepts without proof. Any recent evidence that this film is actually still in production?? Georgia guy (talk) 13:43, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, not much ... if it's a choice between a statement that's unsupported and a statement, potentially outdated, that is, it defaults to what is supported. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 13:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Well then what is supported is the Entertainment Weekly article, the email from David Smith (or his representative), and the statement from Floyd Norman. Again, NO information regarding this film as still being in production (aside from Iger's comment about 2011 which all know to be misinformation) has been forthcoming for months. Instead, rumors and then supportive statements from sources inside Pixar and Disney have both stated the film is cancelled.Pejorative.majeure (talk) 08:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Let's break down the info you've posted. First, the "the film has been canceled" email. Even the blog poster said they had no idea who sent it, only that it came from Dave Smith's e-mail, so even attempting to credit it to Smith is speculation, and that's to say nothing about how reliable the blog that posted this is. Next, the information in Entertainment Weekly merely says they're not working on the film in order to work on other projects. It does not say the film is canceled; again, that would be speculation on our part. If one of these sources had said something along the lines of, "Ultimately, we decided Newt was too similar to The Princess and the Frog and there was no way to save what we'd done so far, so we scrapped it," THEN we can say it's canceled. Right now, the more accurate statement is that the film isn't being worked on right now. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 14:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

So a) it's taken off the development schedule, meaning it is no longer in production. b) Dave Smith or his representative sent the email - any supposition that someone intentionally spread misinformation or was not authorized to use this email account is pure speculation. So that email should be regarded as official, supported by the EW article. Considering it was reported cancelled in February by Floyd Norman, a Disney insider, both of these support that information. Again, no denial or information regarding the item still being in production has come forth in months. Instead rampant speculation has been put forth: that a) the film was too similar to The Princess and the Frog b) the film was too similar to both Rio (Blue Sky) and Alpha and Omega (Lionsgate) c) the film's quality was not up to par. All of these support the cancellation (even tho speculation). Again, no response or promotion of a film supposedly coming out in a little over two years and complete removal from the authoritative Disney encyclopedia argue against Newt still being a viable film. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 03:17, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The EW article only said they had, in essence, put Newt on the back burner to focus on Brave, Cars 2 and Monsters, Inc. 2 ... it did not say the film would not be made. You're most likely right that it has been canceled, however the reliable sources haven't said anything authoritative. I still don't know who writes the Pixar blog that started all this, or that the information they publish is official and verifiable. The bottom line is this: no official, verifiable source has stated that the film will not be completed. What has been said is that it's not being worked on at the moment ... for all we know, it could be re-worked and re-released later, much as Kingdom of the Sun became The Emperor's New Groove. I think the current wording of the article leaves Newt's fate up to the reader to decide, until such time as either Disney or Pixar officially settles the issue. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 05:18, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

So now you're moving from the veracity of the email itself (which is pure speculation) to the veracity of the blog where it was posted? The Pixar Blog is a verifiable source. It is written by a person who has been in contact with Pixar staff and employees regarding their movies and shorts. It's been written about in newspapers and has been used for news relating to Pixar by a number of sources - the New York Times, Entertainment Weekly, Slashfilm, Latino Review, etc. - and for other Wikipedia articles regarding Pixar and its films. The only reason this is even up for discussion is due to one person's speculation that the email from Dave Smith's account was unauthorized. Again, the email had to come from either Smith or an authorized individual who responded on his behalf. Any other possibility IS pure speculation. I am not up for deleting Newt off Wikipedia. The summation of the AfD discussion was to keep the information; the retention of the article was left in the air. Changing this article to a redirect to Pixar where information regarding this cancelled film is appropriate. That was the majority opinion, including yours. If the movie does move forward in the future, then the article can be restored. Given, however, the flap that occurred when both A Bug's Life and Antz appeared simultaneously, the likelihood of Pixar pushing ahead with a movie that again has strong parallels not one, but two other films, and is reportedly weak, it appears in all likelihood that the film is permanently shelved. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 03:27, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Merge

The consensus on the article for deletion page was actually merge & redirect, not keep. I counted six merges/deletes and four keeps. If the movie is placed back on the development schedule at some point in the future, the page can be restored. In the meantime, it has been changed to a redirect to the Newt section on the Pixar page. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 21:39, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

According to the administrator closing the AfD, the result was keep. Please abide by that and make a separate case for the merge. I'll be restoring the article. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 22:35, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Then both you and the admin need to count again. Besides, I've already made the case for the merge - see my earlier note on changing this to a redirect. This article has two paragraphs worth of information and that's it. Both paragraphs are on the Pixar page. This movie is not notable on its own merit for an article. Nothing links to this article anymore. The movie has been cancelled. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 02:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Consensus isn't determined by counting votes. Thparkth (talk) 02:06, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

If anything, the consensus is to remove the page and keep the data, preferably on a redirect page. There was no consensus to 'keep' the page. If there is sufficient evidence of notability for keeping a separate page, then make the case for it. The case has been made for merge. Given the dearth of information on the project while it was in production, let alone the cancellation of the project, there will be little forthcoming information on what is essentially now a Pixar trivia question. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 02:37, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's an accurate count:

• Merge and redirect (5)
  • McDoobAU93 (talk) 14:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
  • FuriousFreddy (talk) 15:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
  • BOVINEBOY2008 :) 19:09, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
  • SnottyWong talk 00:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

• Delete (1)
  • Georgia guy (talk) 19:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

• Keep (4)
  • dogman15 (talk) 15:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
  • TheRealFennShysa (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Sneaky Oviraptor18talk edits tribute 20:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Thparkth (talk) 12:09, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

• No opinion (1)
  • Ye Olde Luke (talk) 06:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Newt's IMDb page has been deleted.

I view this as even more definitive proof that Pixar has cancelled this film. Regular users can't submit "updates" to say that a film has been cancelled. Regular users can't submit "updates" that somehow delete a film entry on the site. Click the link below and see for yourself. Click the Newt at IMDb link at the bottom of the article for further confirmation. dogman15 (talk) 03:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1216497/

What IMDb deletes can also be started up again. Keep in mind that IMDb has tons of pages for "untitled insert celebrity here project," so the presence or lack of a page on IMDb isn't that earth-shattering. All that's been said for sure is that they aren't working on Newt in order to focus on the three films coming out in the next two years. Until someone decides to grow a pair and go on record (*cough*Dave Smith's anonymous email*cough*) and say "Newt is done and won't be coming back," I'm not convinced. FWIW, I do agree that all signs point to Newt going to that big cutting room floor in the sky, but that's still speculation until someone says something officially. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 03:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with your point completely, as it is very valid. However, I wanted to make a quick comment. I highly suspect that Newt may have... er, had these events happen to it... because of similar plots found in Blue Sky's Rio and Crest Animation's Alpha and Omega. See the bottom of the Dueling Movies page on TV Tropes. dogman15 (talk) 08:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

How long do you intend to wait until someone makes an official statement that the film has been cancelled? If no one has made a comment by 2020 and the film hasn't been made, should this article still exist? WP:NFF is quite clear that this article shouldn't exist even if it hasn't been cancelled. Besides, all of the information in the article will still be available both in the edit history as well as at Pixar if they are merged, so if the film is miraculously resurrected, it will not be difficult to restore this article when the time is right. SnottyWong ^confabulate 19:26, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Newt (film)

I have started a discussion to merge this article into Pixar. If you are interested in contributing, please see Talk:Pixar#Proposed merge. Thanks. SnottyWong ^gab 19:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)