This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zhanzhao (talk | contribs) at 12:53, 13 February 2009 (syntax issues argh). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 12:53, 13 February 2009 by Zhanzhao (talk | contribs) (syntax issues argh)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | Film: Indian Redirect‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | India Redirect‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
We asked people to cite at least one review claiming plagiarism, and discuss the pros and cons at the article for the film. No one is bothering to do that. People are just putting up accusations and leaving. Are we going to have to do a weekly prune of allegations that don't meet the standard? Zora 23:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Cite a reliable source or it should be deleted
I see lot of movies that are uncited and those that are cited are often cited from unreliable sources. Reliables sources are newspaper, journal articles and any other scholarly work. People will find movies that they see similar to movies that they saw before. For example, all sports are similar where under-dogs win against some big dogs. To accuse Lagaan for plagiarism of Mighty Duck or any other sport movies is ridicules. There are so many American movies where Alien invade the Earth or horror movie of where the killer is on the lose and killing people but if Bollywood do any of those common theme that movie will be accused of plagiarism Tarikur (talk) 00:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
What we are putting here is movies that are ALLEGED to contain plagiarized material. There is no way to prove plagiarism beyond doubt. It is not possible to find a newspaper entry for every plagiarised film. If someone has seen both the Hollywood and Bollywood film and feels that a particular entry is unjustified, they are free to remove that entry. But instead some people think they are King of wikipedia and are wholesale deleting other people's entries. No one has the right to delete another's entries. If you do so we will revise revert back your changes.
This list is no way a true picture. To make the picture clear add a column to describe what is really copied (and what is original in the movie). Many of the entries are not having enough merit to get honored ;) in this list. Probably having this column will make sure that only rightful entries get into it by discarding any entry without any detail.
Toakhilesh (talk) 08:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
j
Sarkar cannot be considered a plagerized movie. In no shape or form did that movie copy anything from the Godfather aside from the way Abhishek Bachchan sat in the chair (in the manner of Michael Corleone) for a few minute scene near the end of the movie. And Ram Gopal Verma specifically said that his movie was inspired by the Godfather, even though the stories of both movies are extremely different. Namantra 14 July 2006
Fight Club is also completely different than the American Fight Club. Same name doesn't mean plagarized. Which makes me wonder if people who add these actually watch the movies.... Namantra 6 August 2006
- Respectfully, have you actually seen both movies? The font and some of the background music is lifted directly from the American version. And the "rules of fight club" refered to twice the the Hindi version is one of the most famous parts of the American Version. It's really hard to miss that. --Richrobison 00:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Rewrite
Due to the failure of this list to be maintained at acceptable standards of verifiability, a proposed rewrite has been started here. See also the Indian cinema WikiProject's talk page. --Sam Blanning 17:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- I support Samuel's initiative and have added another film to the rewrite. This article is out of control now. It is full of baseless accusations. Zora 00:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's safe to just replace what's there now with the rewrite. I am little worried about "plagiarism" because there is a lot of borrowing which shouldn't exactly be classified under the label of plagiarism... gren グレン 07:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Done. A few things I should mention:
- I didn't write up Jo Bole So Nihaal -- Crocodile Dundee, for which a source was added here, but the source is very much a passing mention and didn't give me anything to go on. I tried searching on Factiva, but found no articles that mentioned the similarity.
- I did write up Ek Ajnabee -- Man on Fire, but realised afterwards that as the makers never claimed that it wasn't a remake, it doesn't deserve to be called 'plagiarism'. I posted it on User talk:Samuel Blanning/Hindi films and plagiarism, which is now a redirect, but if anyone strongly disagrees they can look in the history.
- I removed "Film songs alleged to contain plagiarism", which is more an advert for the site it links to than a reliable source of songs that can be said to have been plagariased. I also removed "Bahasa Indonesia songs inspired by Hindi songs" - the only link is a 404.
There's also a commented-out bit at the top of the list which makes clear that sources are expected, and if anyone knows of a verifiable case but doesn't know how to use inline citation, they're welcome to nominate films on this talk page. I hope that this new layout satisfies everyone. It should certainly be easier to maintain, and I no longer think deletion is necessary. --Sam Blanning 16:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Sources
Although I have not added any movies to this article, I've removed the prod, and added five refs. Will add more. utcursch | talk 16:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- Looks like we had an edit conflict with our last posts to this page. When I rewrote the article I incorporated your references on Main Aisa Hi Hoon and Zinda, and I've explained why I haven't included Jo Bole So Nihaal and Ek Ajnabee. That leaves Phir Hera Pheri, which I forgot to mention above. I couldn't quite understand from the reviews where the similarities were, and I haven't seen Phir myself, so I wasn't able to write it up. I'd be happy if you or someone else could add it back, though. --Sam Blanning 16:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ok with me. utcursch | talk 07:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
KAANTE
Kaante, the 2002 movie, directed by Sanjay Gupta totally ripped off Quentin Tarintino's Reservoir Dogs. Though it also stole from The Usual Suspects.
- According to a Times of India article I found, Gupta "doesn't shy from admitting that the film is a remake of Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs". In my opinion if you acknowledge your source, it's not plagiarism. --Sam Blanning 13:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think it is still plagiarism because he doesn't acknowledge the source in the movie(in the credits), isn't that right? Fkh82 22:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Chori Chori and Dil hai to maanta nahin
Both based on It Happened One Night
Karma
Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikandar
The Others
does anyone know the name of the hindi film which copied 'the others' starring nicole kidman ? THE BOLLYWOOD ADAPTATION IS 100% copy its not even funny !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaygajera (talk • contribs) 02:18, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Hum Kaun Hain It starred Amitabh Bachhan and Dimple Kapadia.Hope this helps!
Baazigar
Papi Gudiya
Ek Ruka Hua Faisla
Qaidi
Webpage for list
I found following webpage has list of movies. Not sure which will be qualified as plagiarised ones from wikipedia standard. http://www.akhilesh.in/life/india/bollywoodinspirations.php
I have been maintaining this list for past some time now. The aim is to list down the movies based on the amount of copy/inspiration done. This is indeed difficult to quantify as the nature and number of pieces lifted vary and difficult to judge. There are various components that a movie copies from other movies. As mentioned in this WiKi that music is one, but then there are others things also, like in one account I rememebr lifting of entire original movie clip of few seconds.
My question right now is: in this WiKi are we going to mention only the movie which copies the main plot or major plot(s), or this also aims to capture the other types of plagiarization?
Example of Scene Lifting:
- Dumb and Dumber's Urine in the Bottle scene, copied in Mela
- Matrix's Building Shootout Scene, copied in Awara Paagal Deewana
- A James Bond movie's villains den scene, 2-3 seconds of orinial clip lifted in a Devanand's movie (do not rememebr the name right now).
Note: I have added the above link in the External Links section. Hope that is OK.
Toakhilesh (talk) 12:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
song
The song Nasha Yeh Pyaar Ka from Mann is an exact copy of Toto Cutugno's L'Italiano. 69.244.234.39 17:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 17:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Oldboy/Zinda and Hitch/Partners
I find that some of you guys are a little too zealous and overboard in the management of this article. Case in point, the films Zinda and Partners are so obvious copies that they are already in the danger of being sued by the original owners for infringements ] ] and yet these items are being removed from the list? How more concrete can you get with this? Websites that state the exact plot similarities ] are not allowed, individual reviews from multiple sites are apparently are not allowed either. And yet any editor with an account is allegedly more credible than any of these sources.
Look at it this way. The Zinda article itself has all the comparisons showing beyond a doubt the extent of the plagiarism. To fit such a list of contents for every single movie tht can be listed here will make this article ridiculously long, complicated and unfriendly to the reader. The visitors to Misplaced Pages does not deserve this eyesore, but your removal of Zinda from the list makes it seem like its the only way to go. Zhanzhao (talk) 18:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm going according to policies. I'm thus requiring sources and I believe only to sources, not your words that the films are "...so obvious copies that they are already in the danger of being sued..."
- Cite sources and this discussion will, too, be unnecessary. Shahid • 19:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Just to make it clear to you Zhanzhao, imdb, bollycat, letfilmi, akhilesh, oneindia are all unreliable. There might have been others which I did not catch. I suggest you to read first WP:RS, that will help you understand the matter. Newspapers are most welcomed for example. Also, the sources must mention the fact that a film is plagiarised. If it says that it is a remake - it is not alleged of pagiarism. Shahid • 19:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- The sources for the the lawsuits are mentioned in the original movie articles, which was why I placed the links there. I don't wish to junk everything about the cases in this article as well, since wiki gave us the capability to link. But since it takes too hard to even click on the movie article, I've added the direct links to the lawsuits here as well. As for the technicality of it being plagiarised or not, 1) The directors have not credited the original owners/films for their inspirations. Merely stating that it is a remake is lipservice. If it IS indeed a bona fide remake, they would be officially acknowledging the sources AND paying for the rights to use the ideas. ], which is what is being done for Don.
Clarifications for identifying plagiarism
Obviously the confusion here is the definition of plagiarism, as well as the "credibility" of sources. this is what I feel.
Messenger VS Message
Granted, one may say that blogs or even sites like akhilesh may not be mainstream as newspapers. However, it does not take an expert to point out similarities, one just needs to have satched both the source and the copy, and be able to pinpoint AND state the exact nature of what is copied, be it core plot points or scene-for-scene shots.
For akhilesh, it has a "Copy Detail" link for most of the items linked which gives a breakdown of what exactly is being copied. Its merely a statement of fact. One does not need to hold a phD in film studies to catch these.
Definition of Plagiarism
There are a few tests for this.
1) 1st is the actual copying of content and ideas. This can be easily spotted, all one needs is to have seen both movies, or even read detailed synopsis for both (of course "scene-for-scene" and "shot for shot" accusations require actual watching of the film to be substantiated. But easy to spot. One or two similar scenes can scrape past with the homage moniker. But not when it gets to the extent that many people go "hey, that movie is just like that other movie I saw". As compared to "hey, that scene is just like that scene I saw in that other movie".
2) Crediting the source. One may say that just merely "saying" that one credits a particular film for inspiration is crediting. But one must consider that we are talking about commercial enterprises where rights and intellectual property equals to hard cash. Its good to know that some directors at least admit that they took their sources from a particular movie, but is the source actually being "credited" or acknowledged anywhere?
Were rights paid for or secured to make a remake? Is there a "Based on a novel/film by ..." anywhere in the OFFICIAL film/press releases? (Non official ones do not count. In fact its these that are pointing out the cases of plagiarism... and if the director himself does not admit it, the implications are understood). The film Don is headed in the right direction by FAILING the 2nd criteria I identified since it acknowledged and paid for the rights to use the ideaas in the original film. Now how many of the films on the original list can make the same claim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhanzhao (talk • contribs) 21:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Agree with everything. But you must cite sources and in this article specifically regardless of other articles they appear in. Akhilesh is not reliable, therefore is not here to stay under no circumstances whatsoever. The rules must be followed. In any case this list is considered for total removal, as nothing encyclopedic and beneficial (except for vandalism and policy violation) does not come from it. Shahid • 21:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Zinda is an a prime example of plagiarism
This rampant so-called "protectionism" is getting ridiculous. Case in point. Zinda had already been identified by the distributors of the original Oldboy film as being a copycat. A lawsuit is possibly even pending. ]. The links are given both here, on the individual film's articles as well as in this discussion above. Search Google for Zinda and Oldboy and see what you get. Go to the Zinda and you even get a point for point partial list of the parts of the films that were copied, plotwise as well as cinematogrphy. And yet it does not qualify as alleged or even outright plagiarism because it keeps getting removed. Onus is on the ones removing this films and other films to justify why this is so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhanzhao (talk • contribs) 13:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Sources
bollywoodmantra, bollycat, desiclub all the oher sources are not reliable. If you can prove otherwise do it and then add whatever you want. Shahid • 12:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Reliability of sources
All the sites pass the the reliability and burden of proof test.
Oneindia.in = Mainstream News site
hindu.com = Mainstream News site
thaindian.com = Mainstream News site
slough.gov.uk government/public website
desiclub.com = Entertainmetn news site
Timesofindia = Mainstream news site
twitchfilm.net = Entertainment news portal. Provides English translation of original Korean news article
indyarocks.com = Direct interview with director
iefilmi.com = Association of entertainment personalities and journalists
Bollywoodcountry.com = Entertainment news website. Co-edited by noted director/film critic Subhash K. Jha.
Bollywoodmantra.com = Article written by professional media journalist
None are self pubblished. And in the cases of interviews, or explicitely named writers, the writers' work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. In the case of the non English article, I provided a site with the translation.
Onus, as before, is on User:Shshshsh to prove why even when the sites or should be considered unreliable even though by definition they are allowed as per WP:RS and WP:Burden.
- I don't remember removing The Times of India and The Hindu. ::see diff=270060436&oldid=270059387 (talk) 12:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oneindia is not a reliable site - who is the owner? What are his credentials? Where are the offices?
- See contact us page
- Desiclub?????????/ It is a BLOG site!!!
- Its not.
- bollycat, bollymantra and whatever you have therei s not reliable, unless you can prove it. Saying "mainstream" or "news site" does not help.
- And why so?
- As for direct interviews, how do you know that this interview is real???? If the site is uneliable, so it obviously means we can't rely on it. And how do you know that it really was Subhash K Jha who is responsible for the article, and not just a way to fake the author's name?
- Read WP:RS and then you will understand that these sites are just rubbish.
- Read WP:BURDEN and you will understand that because you are the one who added the sources, you are the one who has to prov their reliability when they are questioned. Shahid • 12:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Onus is on you to prove the sites are rubbish and not written by the supposed personalities.