Advertising Last completed movie pages Comments about this movie| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2012-09-05 14:54 |
![[Image: vlcsnap-4740528.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/433/vlcsnap-4740528.jpg) |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 17:33 |
release date make this movie filmed in 1980........ |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 17:37 |
or else they made it really fast, but what is your point?  |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 17:46 |
The year should be 1980 instead of 1981........... -- Last edit: 2012-09-05 18:06:49 (G-MANN) |
|
Andre Malraux ◊ 2012-09-05 17:49 |
deleted comment |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 17:55 |
For movies we use first release year (like IMDB does). Like for vehicles we use model year rather than production year. |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 17:58 |
IMDb gives sometimes (usually?) strange years. I think the most imprtant for us should be the year visible in the credits - it is the direct source (as it is old French film, it could be visible at the title screen). |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 18:08 |
When adding a film, it's just easier to use the year on IMDB rather than look up the filming dates or go to the end of the credits. You can't always use the year a film was shot because there's always editing and post-production (so it's not finished until that's all done) and sometimes films get delayed for a few years, eg. this one: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1327601/ (due to be released this year, starring Brittany Murphy who died in 2009) -- Last edit: 2012-09-05 18:13:02 |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 18:18 |
Is it really so hard task to check end of the credits? .gif ";)") Anyway, I do not try to force anyone to do this, do like you want. For sure sometimes it is not possible to find the year (or to read it), then the IMDb date is an obvious choice. But if someone wants to add movies according to this, what is in credits, I think he has right to do it. It is not any mistake. Do not see any reason to follow so strictly the IMDb info - when there is the better source - the movie itself. Personally I always trust more to the filmmakers than to the IMDb info.Filming year - year when pics have been taken is a different story. |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 18:28 |
The "year" field here on the site is not "filming year", it is "movie year". Usually the convention is to use the first release year. So we use that convention here too. I do not see why we should use filming year rather than release year: if the latter one is more common it is better to use the same reference as others do! (and the filming year can still be mentioned in the comments if it is different from the release year). That's like for the cars: it is easier to use the same references as what everybody uses. |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 18:37 |
Let's say there are 3 "years": 1) time of filming - important from our POV, nice to know it, but we should not use it of course, as it is not any official date. 2) year when prodcution was finished - the one we usually see in the credits 3) date when film went to cinema(s) "2" is IMO the most important - this is the one I defended. |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 18:43 |
I say we just use the year IMDB uses and if you want to know 1, 2 & 3, go and look it up there. It would just be one more thing to have to do when it can already be quite time-consuming to make all the captures and add them to the site  When? What films can you think of? -- Last edit: 2012-09-05 18:49:28 |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 18:50 |
IMDb uses the 3rd date. In case of the US films it is usually correct (means 3=2). In case of European (from non-English speaking countries) it many times is not. -- Last edit: 2012-09-05 18:55:53 |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 20:04 |
All movies have a copyright date; it's usually printed on the box or the disc if you're too lazy to sit through the credits. And we really can't use the filming date as some movies actually take years to film. For example, I think parts of Apocalypse Now were actually filmed three years apart. |
|
◊ 2012-09-05 23:52 |
so, i will left 1981? anyways doesnt appear any 1981 model year car  |
|
◊ 2012-09-06 01:43 |
I agree with somename. Some movies sit on the shelf for a few years because of underwhelming pre-release buzz. Eventually they are released with little enthusiasm by their distributors. The recent Eddie Murphy film A Thousand Words is an example of this. So definetly go by when the movie hits theaters. -- Last edit: 2012-09-06 01:44:31 |
|
◊ 2012-09-06 13:20 |
In fact Somename mentioned the "copyright date" - the point is, it is not always the same what date when movie went to the theaters or TV (which IMDb uses in case of many films). The film can be finished and ready for the legal distribution in the year A, but then for some reasons it goes to the theaters in the year B or C and sometimes even Z. Does it mean we have to list it under the B, C, Z years? What for? No idea why IMDb is doing this. I completly do not see any similarities to the car's "model years" system. To me, they simply don't check this properly in case of the foreign films. They make mistakes too - does it mean we have to do the same mistakes? It is a bit OT of course, I do not refer to the French film we have here (no idea if IMDb is correct in this case or not). -- Last edit: 2012-09-06 13:35:06 |
|
◊ 2012-09-06 22:37 |
Most of the movie sites seem to list movies with release year. That's just so easier to use the same convention as other movie sites... I do not understand why you cant to change. When you seek a movie, you have a year mentioned on IMDB or another site; if we use a different year here, it is confusing for the user. IMDB usually uses the first release year, not especially the theatrical one. Often it is shown in festivals, avant-premières, etc. So their date is usually close to the end-of-production than the real theatrical release. For this particular movie, Allociné (biggest French movie site) lists 1981 as production year and has "unknown" for the release year ("date de sortie") http://www.allocine.fr/film/fichefilm_gen_cfilm=29596.html -- Last edit: 2012-09-06 22:38:24 |
|
◊ 2012-09-06 23:13 |
Name one movie that has a different copyright date from it's release year. |
|
◊ 2012-09-07 00:28 |
@antp I understand everything, but when I have a well visible year at the film title screen - right below the film title and it is different than the IMDb one, it is hard to ignore this. IMO it is obvious that the linked IMDb film is the same one, especially when difference is usually one year only. If necessary I can point this in the comment, like I did in the past. Like I wrote, majority(?) want to list movies with IMDb dates - OK - I do not want any mass changes of years at the site, but when I choose official year, taken directly from the film, it is really hard to say it is wrong. If it can help in anything, here are some, which copyright/prod. year is different than the IMDb one: These few films have been taken only from the first page of my contribution list = there are more of them. -- Last edit: 2012-09-07 00:37:34 |
|
-- ◊ 2012-09-07 00:39 |
One case happened today: /movie_991174-Lightbulb.html http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0991174/ Credits: ![[Image: sep.1.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/8212/sep.1.jpg) I actually noticed this by mistake, I don't usually check the credits. |
|
◊ 2012-09-07 01:46 |
So, the normally infallible IMDB has a number of typos in regards to the release dates of some obscure Polish language films.  Still, you probably should add a screen shot of the copyright when the IMDB is wrong. People do think of it as a source of reference. -- Last edit: 2012-09-07 03:06:42 |
|
◊ 2012-09-07 02:36 |
On imdb it's impossible to change the year by the update process. The database automatically takes the earliest release date, which for obscure things can be years off. I agree with Weasel1984 here. Copyright date is more correct. Of course for American movies you can blindly follow imdb, it's about the slow-moving Czech drama that only the filmmaker's immediate family has seen. |
|
◊ 2012-09-07 14:31 |
Haha... In fact not only Polish, but in my previous comments, I was writing about the non-English(!) language films, so what did you expect? Anyway does it make any difference? Mistake is mistake I'm afraid. BTW. the kegare's "Lightbulb" is an US movie, isn't it? This is what I'm usually doing. Those were my old contribs mostly, from times when nearly none didn't add the title screens. |
|
◊ 2012-09-07 22:30 |
^So how do you know the year is listed wrong? -- Last edit: 2012-09-07 22:36:32 |
|
◊ 2012-09-08 14:25 |
? Because I listed them (here) with different one. In case of my contributions the IMDb mistake is the only reason to this. Anyway just in case - to confirm - I checked them once again the day before yesterday. |
|
◊ 2012-09-08 15:14 |
^So the copyright is printed on the box?  |
|
◊ 2012-09-08 15:30 |
The fact, that few movies is listed without title screen (though exactly most of them disappeared meanwhile due to changes at the external image hosting server) doesn't mean, the date wasn't visible in the credits. And there are also databases which give you this year. -- Last edit: 2012-09-08 15:59:13 |
|
◊ 2012-09-11 14:03 |
Of course, for obvious errors we can ignore IMDB info. As somename said, you cite movies for which it is "normal" that IMDB is not a good reference. For such movies credit info or info from a Polish site would be more reliable. But for US movies (or well-known internationally ones) I think using the IMDB year rather than the supposed filming/production year is better. |
Add a comment Advertising | The vehicle is part of the movie |
| Vehicle used a lot by a main character or for a long time |
| Vehicle used by a character or in a car chase |
| Minor action vehicle or used in only a short scene |
| Background vehicle |
 | Unknown vehicle role |
 | Seen only in preview/trailer |
 | Seen only in deleted scenes |
 | Seen only in an alternative ending |
 | Seen only in an extra DVD contents |
© 2004-2025 IMCDb.org — Managed by Controgest SRL — Contact us — Privacy policy —
Pictures are property of movie companies owner of the respective movies. Comments are property of their authors.
Page generated in 0.037 sec.
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
