Last modified on 16 August 2012, at 18:15

Category talk:Films

Return to "Films" page.

Do we really need the subcategories Category:Films by language and Category:Films by setting? They are all empty and don't really appear to be necessary. Any thoughts by anyone? ~ UDScott 20:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly, we now have a Category:Moon-related films which is a sort of Category:Films by setting, but is for some reason categorized in Category:Adventure films. Hmm...

On a related note, I am unsure of the intended use of the Category:Technology films that you created recently. I am not aware of any classification that treats technology tropes as a distinct film genre or science fiction subgenre. ~ Ningauble 20:13, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

All that I did was take the category used in Wikipedia Category:Films about technology and applied it here. On WP, this category is further subdivided into films about computers, nuclear war, space, robots, etc. I just thought the more general category could be used here. But if you feel it is not warranted, feel free to nominate it for deletion and we can discuss it there. I'm not so infatuated with it that I wouldn't be persuaded to change my opinion, but I thought it would be a useful way to group films that have technology as a theme. ~ UDScott 20:21, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't really object to this sort of indexing. I can see that it has some usefulness even though it bears little relation to the taxonomies of genre in literary criticism, and even though I have doubts about the average youthful contributor's ability to distinguish between films that are actually about technology and, e.g., space operas that merely employ imagined technologies in their milieu. I would have more reservations about doing this in fictional Literature by genre, and I would not want the precedent to lead to individual productions being categorized under dozens of tropes or themes. We can navigate these imagined pitfalls if we actually come across them. ~ Ningauble 16:14, 20 July 2010 (UTC)