Talk:Tomorrow, When the War Began (film)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Update[edit]

This article needs some attention and an update, there is already a teaser and a trailer out for this movie and the official release date has been set to September 2. JRA_WestyQld2 Talk 10:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article already mentions the teaser and the 2 September release date. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

Presently, the article is so short as to prevent use of individual images, especially at screen resolutions greater than 1024x768. Left-aligned mages should not be placed immediately after headings as this breaks text flow so we are forced to use galleries or no images at all. Wikipedia:Image use policy#Image galleries says, "the use of galleries may be appropriate in Wikipedia articles where a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images. The images in the gallery collectively must have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject." There's no efficient way to describe the main street using text so use of a gallery seems appropriate. Regardless, I've moved all of the images into a template so they're all displayed as a single image, rather than as a gallery, and I've set the individual image widths at 130px to avoid forcing readers using 1024x768 to scroll. I've removed the "Sets" heading so the images are now firmly in the "Production" section, where they are relevant. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:35, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

F-18 scene[edit]

In the scene where the F-18 gets shot down by one of the 3 chasing Chinese/Pakistani JF-17 Thunder jets, the F-18 as it was flying looks to be the F-18 from the film Behind Enemy Lines (film). It flew the same way and it looked like the same Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. The only difference was the background and the part where it got shot down. in Behind Enemy Lines (film) the missile only destroyed half of the jet while in Tomorrow, When the War Began (film) the enemy missile blew up the whole jet. They must have just changed the background but where did the producers manage to find 3 JF-17 Thunder? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.92.111.114 (talk • contribs) 10:13, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The whole scene is computer generated, if you go onto the DVD special features, you can see how they created the F/A-18 and the (supposedly) JF-17's. I always thought that they were Chengdu J-10's myself --122.107.46.168 (talk) 13:14, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any mention of jet types without a citation from a reliable source is original research since it isn't mentioned in the movie. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That would apply for the "Coalition" aircraft, which might well be completely fictional. However, it's completely self evident that the lead aircraft is an F/A-18 of some description. The only question would be what variant it was. As the McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet article includes all of them, it covers things quite nicely. I've included the link in the plot subsection. --Johnmc (talk) 10:32, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever aircraft it is, it is, in this movie, trivia and just as (un)important as the make of the motorbikes, trucks, kind of TV set they watch or a million other details that could be observed. Barsoomian (talk) 18:39, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Better late than never I suppose. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:51, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing more anal and a complete waste of time than correcting a year old typo in a comment is someone highlighting and documenting it. Barsoomian (talk) 05:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Depature from the Novel[edit]

While the novel follows the plotline of the first book almost to the letter, a major departure exists from novel to film. In the entire tomorrow series of books, the country of the teenagers is NEVER mentioned. Obvious assumptions that it is Australia exist because of terrain descriptions, the rural setting and later, proximity to New Zealand. In the film this uncertainty is immediately quashed with the Australia flag flying on Australia Day celebrations in Wirrawee. 60.240.14.140 (talk) 07:36, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wirrawee is an Australian Aboriginal name, the culture is most definitely Australian and since the book is obviously about a hypothetical situation in which Indonesia invades Australia written by an Australian authour I think its safe to assume that the book and film both take place in Australia, I mean where the hell else fits all the descriptions in the books? 124.169.237.193 (talk) 08:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't read the books, but it's not uncommon for novels not to state the country it takes place in, simply because there is no need to state something that's obvious. But in the books, are there no real cities or states (or people) ever mentioned? In any case it's not a "major" departure, as everyone assumes that it is Australia, in both book and movie. The story remains the same. It's more important that the country of the invaders is (still) ambiguous. Barsoomian (talk) 10:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, the only reason Australia is not mentioned by name is because it is obvious. Anyway in one of the books New Zealand fighter jets launch from New Zealand and attack the "country in question". A fighter jet leaving from New Zealand does not have the range to reach any other western country. Freikorp (talk) 14:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

while not mentioned in the very first book the 3rd book mentions sydney and key australian locations. in the 4th they specifically mention returning to australia and give alot more details to a location (suprisingly close to the real life area of nowra based on vague details)152.91.9.153 (talk) 22:05, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some interesting articles[edit]

SBS: review, article 1, article 2. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 15:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some random things[edit]

Taken from GA Avatar (2009 film) > Production > Development: "Estimates put the cost of the film at about $280–310 million to produce and an estimated $150 million for marketing, noting that about $30 million in tax credits will lessen the financial impact on the studio and its financiers."

Re-word for this article: "Estimates put the cost of the film at about $20–27 million, (noting that (about $30 million in) tax credits will lessen the financial impact on the studio and its financiers)."[citation needed]

There isn't any source for "tax credits", so how can you "note" anything about them? Barsoomian (talk) 16:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reinstate comma in title[edit]

I see someone has changed the article title without any notice or discussion. The edit comment was : "(moved Tomorrow, When the War Began (film) to Tomorrow When the War Began (film) over redirect: As much as it really, really should, the film has no comma in the title. Not in the title treatment or the billing block."

When you have a longish title that's broken over two lines on a poster, in text it's usually joined using a colon, dash or in this case comma. I don't know what "title treatment" or "billing block" means. What's on a poster? I do know that "titles" of both books and movies often are simplified for graphical reasons (which are more important to the designer than grammatical niceties) on covers and posters. A linebreak will replace a colon or comma, for instance. E.g. see 2001: A Space Odysey poster, without a colon. The Borat poster has an exclamation mark that's usually replaced by a colon in text (as IMDB and Borat.) And Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. The Tomorrow movie website uses "Tomorrow, When the War Began Movie" in the page titles. IMDB calls it "Tomorrow, When the War Began (2010)". And you can find as many more or less "official" titles with and without a comma. So it's not a clear cut case. And in THIS case, since the book title the movie is based on certainly DOES have a comma, I think we'd want something more than the apparent omission of the comma in some artwork to conclude that it's deliberate and authoritative. So I think the comma should be reinstated. Barsoomian (talk) 16:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The editor who moved the article also removed commas in the titles of several citations, despite the sources using the comma. I've fixed that. The comma is consistent with what I saw during filming of the movie here (Wirrawee's main street is only a 3.5km drive from my house). The public announcements in the local newspaper, the road closure signs erected by production staff, even the newspaper articles,[1] all used the comma so I agree, it's not a clear cut case. Of course, the movie's website seems authoritative and it uses the comma too. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The most convincing evidence is that of the official website, which is owned by Omnilab Media and uses the comma in the page titles and the body text. Since the official site uses the comma I've moved the article back and restored the commas. If the original mover wants to move the page again he'll have to follow WP:RM since it's clearly not uncontroversial. --AussieLegend (talk) 19:49, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that and the bloody book uses a comma.  狐 FOX  00:18, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Race[edit]

I take it from the mention that the invaders are Sinitic. Can't you just say that in either this article or the one on the book, or are you ashamed of it, since it's actually whites who are invaders in that part of the world? 72.228.189.184 (talk) 00:29, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The race of the invaders is not mentioned in the book, so that is why it is not mentioned there. And whilst they obviously are Asian in the film, they are only referred to as the 'The coalition nations' from Asia. Saying they are of a specific Asian race would be original research, and I do not think the general public need us to go out of our way to explain that a person who appears Asian is, in fact, Asian. It's somewhat obvious. I find your comment about being ashamed both hilarious and irrelevant. Freikorp (talk) 05:21, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No Freikorp, it's not obvious that they are indistinct Asians, as you can see by my query. I've not seen nor I do I plan to see this, comments are based on the wikipedia content (and real world history of course). 72.228.189.184 (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not obvious? Call me presumptuous, but I would expect an invading army from nearby Asia to be comprised of people who appear Asian. Accordingly I would consider an extra line pointing out the race of the invaders to be extremely condescending to the average reader and highly innapropriate. As you know, the articles plot already mentions the invaders are from "The Coalition Nations" of nearby Asia. I think that is not only the most appropriate thing to say, but it should also be the only thing mentioned on the subject considering that is exactly all that is mentioned in the film. Incidentally when reading the book it became apparent that Marsden was going out of his way to not mention the race or the country of the invaders, and the film only differs from this by using the term "The Coalition Nations" (the book has no such terms, if I remember correctly) and the fact we can see their skin colour. Freikorp (talk) 11:15, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you say so. FTR, just came here to review to see if it was worth renting, glossed, sufficient to determine that the info in question was missing. Lycurgus (talk) 13:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel[edit]

Any news of a sequel? 220.245.146.235 (talk) 08:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Tomorrow, When the War Began (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tomorrow,_When_the_War_Began_(film)&oldid=1204474993"