Quoting RHo:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
There is no exact number.  I have always considered it the general release, in theaters, nationwide.  Not a single screening in a single city.  You don't have to agree, but that is my opinion on the matter.

I have seen films opening with only a few copies because of economical reasons. I would consider those general releases the same way as those with many copies. No matter how many copies are used for the release, there are always regions where no theatre gets a copy at the release date. Do you still call those releases nation wide?

Since when is someone required to explain his opinion?  And who the heck are you to demand that he do so?

Box Offiice Mojo and IMDB are both very solid sources for release dates for movie that played in theaters. If you want to whine about how you can't trust them (though I've never known them to be wrong in this area), you can always use google to hunt through press reports for anything since the mid nineties or so.

Quoting GSyren:

Quote:
Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:

Quote:
Box Offiice Mojo and IMDB are both very solid sources for release dates for movie that played in theaters. If you want to whine about how you can't trust them (though I've never known them to be wrong in this area), you can always use google to hunt through press reports for anything since the mid nineties or so.

Slight correction, Ace: Box Office Mojo only lists movies that played in theaters in the US. I would agree that IMDB seems pretty reliable in this regards, though.

Really? Upon what basis? Now while I'll grant them a degree of accuracy in this regard for the last, oh say, ten years or so. Beyond that....based upon what...do they provide any sort of documentary support to back up their claims as regards any given fiklm particularly pre-2000, if so I have never seen it. Let's take, for example, a B-Movie, Horror Film, From Hell It Came which they claim wsa released in August 1957, IMDb very clearly did not exist in 1957. Knowing the level of inaccuracy that exists elsewhere in IMDb, what basis do i have to trust this data, I don't see any. I happen to remember this film from a Saturday Afternoon Science Fiction Theater, called Terminus, in my local TV market at thet time, I think many of us remember those shows, along with the Friday Night "Shock" Theaters which wwere prevalent. I could not tell you when it was released, except by Copyright, let alone the exact release date listed at IMDb with out any documentation, so I can'trust that data. It's very easy to provide accurate data for the Classics films, GWTW, The wizard of Oz and so forth, but this is not true of ALL of the possible film works from the US or elsewhere, yet they CLAIM to be able to provide precise data, August 25, 1957, but provide no reference data...NoO, I cannot trust that kind of data from anyone, particularly someone with as sloppy a record as IMDb has.

Skip

Personally speaking, deejay, I have always favored the Copyright data, simply because it is a part of the film data. Unfortunately, this will not always reflect either the "Production" Year or the Theatrical Release date. If we are going to truly try and use Production Year, then we have to define what Production means, which will be another argument. Avatar is a good example, Cameron wrote the story ten years ago I believe, but technology of the time precluded production, some of the actors were under contract in 2007. When does production begin, it might in some cases be easier to determine when it concluded. Actual Theatrical Release date especially for older films could be problematic for older films, since I suspect documentation would be an issue.

I am less concerned about what the Field is called than what the data is, now sure it would be nice to see a "correct" name, but how do you define that even. Ken haws used Production year for Ten Years and it is not the only field that is not reallynamed properly, see Total DVDs, which is really Total Profiles. It is not the only field which can sometimes be problematic, see COO and that's a recent one. There are always going to be areas which will represent food for fodder for those users who seem to delight in that game.<shrugs>

Skip

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
Really? Upon what basis? Now while I'll grant them a degree of accuracy in this regard for the last, oh say, ten years or so. Beyond that....based upon what...do they provide any sort of documentary support to back up their claims as regards any given fiklm particularly pre-2000, if so I have never seen it. Let's take, for example, a B-Movie, Horror Film, From Hell It Came which they claim wsa released in August 1957, IMDb very clearly did not exist in 1957. Knowing the level of inaccuracy that exists elsewhere in IMDb, what basis do i have to trust this data, I don't see any. I happen to remember this film from a Saturday Afternoon Science Fiction Theater, called Terminus, in my local TV market at thet time, I think many of us remember those shows, along with the Friday Night "Shock" Theaters which wwere prevalent. I could not tell you when it was released, except by Copyright, let alone the exact release date listed at IMDb with out any documentation, so I can'trust that data. It's very easy to provide accurate data for the Classics films, GWTW, The wizard of Oz and so forth, but this is not true of ALL of the possible film works from the US or elsewhere, yet they CLAIM to be able to provide precise data, August 25, 1957, but provide no reference data...NoO, I cannot trust that kind of data from anyone, particularly someone with as sloppy a record as IMDb has.

Not trying to start anything here but, whether or not you trust them is not really relevant.  Like it or not, IMDb has become popular amongst Hollywood types.  So much so that some actors link directly to them for their filmography.  One Blu-ray release last year, Wolverine I think it was, even had them incorporated as part of the special features.  Are they 100% accurate?  No but, as they say, given their sheer size...over a million titles and 2.3 million names...mistakes are bound to creep in.

As to your specific example, using a simple google search, I found several sites that back up the 1957 claim.  Was it August 25?  No idea, but it was, according to a few sites, 1957. 

Quoting dee1959jay:

Quote:
The question remains what other sources can be used then to document submissions for this data field, especially for releases from decades ago.

Whatever sources can be found. Books, magazines, reviews, movie encyclopedias, actors profiles, databases etc. I've never found it to be a problem. The film industry is quite well documented. I could see TV being a bigger problem.

Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
You guys have argued yourselves in a circle. The field says production date. Change the rule so that we use the copyright date in the film (which is the production date) and ask Ken to give you a new field for your release date.

That would only create the need for thousands of changes. It would be preferable to change the current name to "year of original release" or something like that and create a new field for the copyright date. If anyone wants it, I certainly have no interest in it.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that this is what I want and I have a plan on how to make it work.  To be clear, it isn't and I don't.  I simply gave my opinion as to what the term 'Theatrical Release Date' meant.

And that is what it means to you which is of course valid as it is your opinion. But what it actually means is when it was first released in a theatre. We have a reference for interpreting words and that is a dictionary so we don't need user interpretation.


There is a term for what you describe and that is general release which is not what the rules tell us to use.