Talk:The Emperor's New Groove
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Disney on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
Why is the image duplicated in this article? MK2 06:01, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] My head hurts..
I'm only doing the story section and I'm getting a headache from all the unclear antecedents, fragmentary sentences, and miscellaneous typos. I fixed some of them, but it's still a bit jumbled. Unfortunately, I haven't seen this movie recently, so I can't just rewrite the whole thing. I marked my changes as being "minor" because they were cosmetic, for the most part. runey 02:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Mine Too...
It is probably unfair to go looking for that one piont where the Walt Disney Animated Canon got...well, shot by a canon...but if there was a piont, The Emperor's New Groove is probably it. Is this a fair marker? Is it even encyclopedic? My head hurts...
[edit] Hercules "unsuccessful"
Is it really fair to label Hercules "unsuccessful" as a movie? It grossed over $252M worldwide (almost $100M more than The Emperor's New Groove). I think either the phrase needs to be qualified or removed.
- Disney seems to reguard any animated film of theirs post-Beauty and the Beast that doesn't make over $100 million in America. WIll qualify. --FuriousFreddy 06:34, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I dont think that this movie was a flop
[edit] It's a hit because
David Spade. What? That's the reason. THE ONLY REASON!
[edit] A Loss at the box office?
The budget is listed as $100,000,000, according to the article it made $170,000,000, which translates to a profit of $70,000,000. While not as big a profit as other films, it's certainly not a great failure, or even a loss at all. Why does the article say it lost money in theatres? JBK405 03:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Add a semi-cult secton?
Not sure if its appropriate - but could a section be added regarding the internet semi-cult thing about demon llamas? As in
- pacha: Aargh! Demon llama!
- kuzco: Demon llama!? where!?!?
I'm 'demonllama' on some communities, but on most demonllama is already taken by what looks to be at least 3 different people, mainly in the UK and US. Any objections, or it is too far off the topic... --glasnt<3 01:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- No, that would be wierd. 'Nuff said.Julz
[edit] WikiProject Kuzco?
I'm thinking of making WikiProject Kuzco. The problem is I think it should be a fork of WikiProject Disney which needs support to come alive, so people need to show intrest in it on the proposed wikiprojects page to make Project Kuzco true. We have more than 5 articles so we can qualify.
[edit] The Setting is Fictional
People seem to be real insistant about stating in the Story section that the movie is set in the ancient Incan empire. It's not. As the production team says in the DVD commentary, this movie is simply set "long ago in a jungle", and uses an Inca-like background. The note to this effect in the Trivia section covers this point, and is far more apperance.
Kuzco is such a nuthead. He's silly. Kronk like squrrills.
