Talk:Moonwalk One

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Moonwalk One article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Film: Documentary / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Documentary films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Wikify

A version of this article was wikified by Sumsum2010, a member of WikiProject Wikify, on December 10, 2010. The project welcomes all editors with a good grasp of wiki markup to help improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please ask at our talk page.WikifyWikipedia:WIKITemplate:WikiProject WikifyWikify articles

IP comments[edit]

Right now this page looks like an advertisement for the new DVD release of this film. The first external link is for a site selling the DVD, and the others point toward favorable reviews and news items. I love this film, but I wonder if this page was written by people with a sales interest in the DVD that's coming out soon.

I really want to know why this entire film isn't in the public domain. Or is it? According to this page, NASA commissioned the work and the American taxpayers paid for it. NASA products, as well as the products of all US government entities, are supposed to be in the public domain. DVD movies in the public domain cost $.89 at Wal Mart. Am I missing something? 98.240.216.193 (talk) 08:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that it is in the public domain - the entire film is available on archive.org, here: http://archive.org/details/gov.archives.arc.1257628. 86.7.23.104 (talk) 01:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article claims that Moonwalk One was the last film to be printed using the imbibation process, yet I'm sure I read an article about the Star Wars DVDs which claimed that an imbibation print of the original Star Wars (aka Episode IV) (1977) was used as a color reference.

The article also states that the film was released at 4:3, but gives no explanation as to why 16:9 was chosen for the DVD release. Lee M (talk) 14:49, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the previous comment was made before I'd viewed disc 2... the 2-disc DVD features both cropped 16:9 and original 4:3 versions. I've now viewed both, and while the 16:9 version has been carefully prepared, the 4:3 wins hands down whenever a shot has strong vertical elements, and what could be more relentlessly vertical than a Saturn V? Lee M (talk) 04:00, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Moonwalk One. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:11, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]