Talk:Kareena Kapoor Khan/Archive 2

Billo Barber
Kareena has finished shooting her segment of the movie, please stop removing it from her filmography —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahak01 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Anything that is added without a citation to a reliable source will be removed in alignment with our policy of verifiablity. -- The Red Pen of Doom  07:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Kareena is seen in the promo of Billo barber. http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/broadband/video/Movie-Promos/5Pute045/3/Promo-1-Billo-Barber.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahak01 (talk • contribs) 07:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Roadside Romeo
First off, the credit for an animated film goes to the producers and directors. The story does not matter, and certainly not on Bebo's article. We can mention that it relates the story of a street dog (that too is quite redundant), but what does matter here is actually, which character Kapoor dubbed for and that's about it. Critical reception of Kapoor's act is not that important, though does not harm either.

The fact that she prepared for the role is a good mention because it shows how dedicated she is, and it's great. However, a point which must be sourced word for word is that she's the first actress to dub for an animted film in India... Were there not ANY animated films in India before? The source is Bebo's own words which can never considered for a fact, and many would question it -- I'm sure (I do believe her LOL, but you know...)

Thirdly... *cough*... The film (unfortunately) by no means was received well. Most of the reviews were negative, both in India and abroad. And you know what annoys me even more? That it doesn't matter!!!! It's just another cartoon... since when have critical reviews for cartoon been important? Since when has cartoons' main goal been critical success? Its main goal is to entertain people. So it takes me to the next point. I'm yet to watch it, but the real thing which matters, the box office verdict, was overlooked. The film was declared a flop. I think the whole matter is handled pretty well on the Jolie article, so that no further explanations are added. I also think if someone agrees: all the reception can be dropped altogether, as it is not a film and does not constitute another step in her work as an actor. The fact that she was chosen for the first Indian animated cartoon with Disney, is an accomplishment on its own, and is no less impressive. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  23:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Shahid, I see where you are getting at and I completely agree with your points. I have just outlined some of my points:


 * Previous animated films have been released in India though only actors had provided the voice-over for the characters. This is the first time that a "mainstream" Indian actress would be providing the voice of a character. If you feel that the claim of being the "first" Indian actress to dub for an animated film should be removed, I have no problem!
 * As for the film being received well by critics, I never said that the film was received well. As a matter of fact, I indicated that, "Roadside Romeo received acclaim for its animation...", which it did. Majority of the critics concluded that the animation could be compared to Hollywood. As for the reviews, per my analysis, the film recieved mixed reviews with majority of them being positive.
 * Regarding your last point, I tend to agree with what you are saying. Jolie's article is a perfect example of how it should be like. For now, I am going to remove the reception part!! --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 02:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * To your first point, I think that yes, it has to be removed. It is still unclear, confusing, and does not even serve as something to be impressed by.
 * As for the critical reception, Rahul, it's just not notable. Critical reception is not important when it comes to animation. Animation films are made for the masses. Also, it's got nothing to do with Bebo. Saying "The cartoon received acclaim for animation" is like saying "The movie (not animated) got rave reviews for its cinematography" --- these are just trivial details. You can say "the film (was/was not) received well", but again, just think: Does it matter? Is it important? What does matter is the film's commercial result. But that was not mentioned. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  08:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * OT - the newly added Golmaal2 para is very well written. But, are you sure she was criticised? I don't think...We'll have to make a new analysis. Also, what strikes as a bit odd is the unbelievable contradiction. It says "Kapoor's character was particularly criticised" while the review says "Kapoor's character is great".... ? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  08:23, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Since I wasn't able to find any other sources claiming that she was the first Indian actress to have dubbed for an animated film, I removed it.
 * As for the Golmaal Returns paragraph, I messed up in what I was trying to say :)) In reality, I was going to say "Kapoor's performance was particularly critcised..." That's why I included the bit about the critic's quote on her emoting and dialogue delivery. Anyways not to worry. I will do a review analysis of her performance in GR to see what the majority view is. --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 17:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Om Shanti Om
Everyone who has made an appearance in the film, credited or not, has the movie listed in his/her respective wikipedia page. Why make an exception here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amol1186 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Whoever was credited in the film's rolling titles was done so in Wikipedia as well. I beg to differ but I don't think any actor that wasn't credited in the film has been credited here. If you come across any of them, please do let me know. As of my knowledge, a film should only be listed in an actor's filmography if he/she has been credited for it. Regards --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 20:06, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


 * A couple of other examples of uncredited appearances listed in wikipedia pages-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Taylor_filmography_and_various_appearances
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentina_Brunetti


 * Well, I may not be right but maybe in those films, the actors actually made an apperance, which was more than 1 second. In Om Shanti Om, Kapoor's apperance is so small and short that it wouldn't make much sense to add it to her filmography; she just walks past the camera without saying anything. However, if her apperance was longer like that of Bipasha Basu & Hrithik Roshan's apperances in OSO, then it would be a different story. --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 20:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Probably those appearances were longer. But I feel that it should be added to the list since only a very few people are actually aware of her appearance (however small it may be) in the film, because it is literally a blink-and-miss kind one. --Amol1186 (talk) 14:09, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Like you said, her apperance in OSO is "literally a blink-and-miss kind" thus it would make no sense adding it to her filmography. --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 18:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Career
User:TheRedPenOfDoom had removed the section headings in Kapoor's article stating Wikipedia's rules about WP:NPOV & WP:OR. These headings were not created by personal opinions but by researched & published reliable sources, which as a matter of fact are included in the article itself. These sources help show that the year 2001 did mark the beginning of her "breakthrough" year. Furthermore, sources provided in the article also show that the year 2004 marked the "turning point" of her career. As of now, I am going to restore back the original sub-headings of the career section. Regards --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 18:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Dhruv (Sudhir Mishra's Next)
Work has begun on Dhruv (Sudhir Mishra's next), though shooting starts on 1st september 2009. Mahak01 (talk) 07:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Mahak01, I moved your message to a new topic as the previous section was getting quite long. I really appreciate that you have included a number of sources indicating that Kapoor was signed on for this film. However, according to WP:NFF, "Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles. Budget issues, scripting issues and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended filming date. The assumption should also not be made that because a film is likely to be a high-profile release it will be immune to setbacks—there is no "sure thing" production. Until the start of principal photography, information on the film can be included in articles about its subject material. Sources must be used to confirm the start of principal photography after shooting has begun."
 * Until Kapoor begins shooting for the film and there are reliable sources shown to prove it, we cannot have the film listed on her filmography. Furthermore, you have created the article way too early for this film, which is prohibited by WP:NFF, and will have to be deleted until the film enters into principal photography. --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 15:54, 13 April 2009 (UTC)