 |
This is an essay.
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
A planned film is a film that has not started principal photography. Before this start date, a planned film is a project in development. There are different stages of development before the start of filming, such as the optioning of rights, the budgeting process, the contracting of cast and crew, the writing process, and preparation in pre-production. In the film industry, many projects are launched but only a small portion of them will start filming. Projects that start filming have a much higher likelihood of completing production and being released, so the start of principal photography is used as a threshold to determine the creation of an article for a film. Even if filming is incomplete, unfinished films are recognized as a tangible category of films. The notability guidelines for future films establishes this threshold.
In spite of the threshold, plans for possible films are frequently reported in mainstream media. Trade publications Variety and The Hollywood Reporter often report studio's announcements of their intent to make a film. The publications also typically track contractual progress, such as the director, writer, or main stars being attached to the project in development. In addition to the wide spectrum of planned films announced in these publications, there are certain categories of possible films whose progress is especially reported. Superhero films are a set of films whose source material are comic books, which are accompanied by a major fan base. Planned films based on source material that is well-known, like comic books or bestselling novels, are more likely to be reported. In addition, planned films by well-known filmmakers are also likely to be reported. If Steven Spielberg announces his plans for a film based on obscure source material or even an original idea, his reputation will attract reports about his project. In contrast, a project being developed by little-known cast and crew and little-known source material is not likely to attract reports until after filming has started or when the film is ultimately released.
If a planned film is the subject of news reports, then when principal photography starts, the film can usually be established as an encyclopedic topic. Prior to this threshold, policy indicates that discussion of planned films can be reported, but it also indicates that news reports on their own cannot determine the enduring notability of a topic for its own article. When the progress of a project in development is covered in news reports, the underlying outcome of that development is a film. Details of the development are more relevant when there is a film as an encyclopedic topic. If there is no film, the news reports cannot sustain themselves as their own topic. Details of such development do not have to be absent from Wikipedia, however. As aforementioned, development of a project is generally newsworthy because of an underlying factor. These factors are enduring topics that precede the planned film, such as the source material or the filmmaker. News reports of planned films related to one or the other can be useful background information for encyclopedic topics. For example, if a planned film adaptation of a recent bestselling novel is announced, this news can be referenced in the novel's article. Depending on the attention given to a planned film, the amount of coverage in news reports will vary. Some planned films will be announced, and its next mention in the media will be the start of filming. Other planned films will be announced, and aspects of the project's development may be tracked. In the film industry, there is jargon termed development hell, which refers to a planned film that is perpetually in development and does not start principal photography. Some projects will languish in development hell until they are retired, while other projects may be developed persistently by various studios.
To best assess coverage of projects in development, both ends of the spectrum can be identified. On the lesser end, news reports covering a studio's plans to produce a film are basically announcements and especially not the basis for a stand-alone article. On the greater end, projects in development may become well-known for the amount of time spent in development or the number of changes in the progress, such as different directors being attached, and if sufficient retrospective coverage exists, an article about the project may be created. A challenge regarding projects in development is the management of coverage for a project that has been in development for some time and is currently in development. Unlike an attempted development that is now in the past and covered historically, an ongoing development still indicates the possibility of a film. News reports about current development are written with the film in mind. If the same news reports also talk about what has happened before, this could be considered retrospective coverage. Even so, if the reports are ultimately looking forward to a film, then they are not assessing the developing project on its own separate merit.
The key to assessing projects in development, past or present, is to identify the highlights of the process. If a project has not been in development for very long, relevant news reports can provide background in an umbrella article, such as for the source material or the filmmaker. While it is possible for such news reports to be very detailed about the filmmakers' intentions, these intentions are intended for a film, which is not yet established as an encyclopedic topic. Forward-looking detail must be tempered, and coverage of a project in development should focus on the key events. A change in directors is worth noting, but the first director's intentions for the film is not worth noting within the time frame of development. That first director's intentions could ultimately be called back if a film is ultimately produced and an encyclopedic topic exists for which certain background information may provide well-rounded coverage. With the project in development known under the guise of source material or well-known filmmaker, there may be enough key events, especially retrospectively covered, to warrant separation from the umbrella article as a sub-article. The remaining challenge is the presentation of tense in such sub-articles. If a project in development is known for its delay and its changes, then it is less realized as a film. When this is the case, recent news reports cannot present the presumption that an actual film is due. Such reports serve better as footnotes in the presence of retrospective coverage of the key events of that developing project.
