Talk:Make It Happen (film)

Budget

A budget of "$10,000,000 - $30,000,0000"? An approximate figure would be nice, not a range with a difference of $20,000,000 84.69.39.199 (talk) 01:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

The-Numbers.com and BoxOfficeMojo.com do not list any budget figures for this film. Someone probably made those figures up, or got them from IMDB (again same thing, someone on IMDB just made them up). There don't seem to be any sources for the budget of this film, I searched Variety, Deadline, Indiewire, and LATimes, but no luck.

Based on the dance genre and the studio (Weinstein) anyone could make an educated guess, but I have to agree $10 to 30 million is a far too broad a range. For a film like this $10 is most likely and $15 million is still plausible (Winstead would have been able to command a good salary pushing the cost slightly higher compared to equivalent films with relative unknowns in the lead role), and anything higher than that is increasingly unlikely. When the film was done they could easily have spent much more than $10 million on promotion but that's a whole other matter. -- 109.79.76.103 (talk) 16:18, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

I've found where that ridiculously broad range came from, Variety.com: "The Mayhem Project has greenlit dance pic “Make It Happen” with Mary Elizabeth Winstead ... Mayhem [aimed to produce films] with budgets ranging from $10 million-$30 million."[1]

The Infobox should not list those kinds of wildly speculative guesses, it is misleading (and it was rightly removed because no source was provided[2]) but it is maybe something that could maybe be included in the Production section if it was written out and properly explained as prose. -- 109.79.76.103 (talk) 16:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Make It Happen (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120227055630/http://movies.uk.msn.com/film.aspx?P_MediaID=36248 to http://movies.uk.msn.com/film.aspx?P_MediaID=36248

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:55, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

"Not enough skin"?

"Another main criticism was that, except for a few scenes where Lauryn appears with a bare midriff, the film did not contain enough skin." Seriously? Does this sound like a legitimate criticism to anyone who's not a 12-year-old boy? Kumagoro-42 04:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I see that, five years later, this still hasn't been addressed, and it's becoming more and more embarrassing. I'll just go ahead and remove that sentence, let's see if someone can come up with a good argument for establishing "not enough skin" as one of the failings of a film that's not sexploitation or a porn. --Kumagoro-42 (talk) 20:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure I looked at this before and then left it as it was. It is crass but they were likely trying to make the point that most dance films are inherently sexy almost without trying, and unlike other dance films such as Flashdance or Step Up (film) or even Honey (2003 film) which might tempt a wider audience to take a look, there is nothing for anyone other than the primary target audience to watch it. Dance films are primarily aspirational films for teenage girls but others end up watching them too (boyfriends, brothers, fathers, etc.) and sometimes they are worth a look if there's nothing else (Save the Last Dance). MSN would not be be my top choice for notable film critics in any case. The Rotten Tomatoes summary makes a similarly crass comparison already so it's redundant anyway. It is fair enough that you removed it[3], but I looked it again anyway, just in case maybe I could rephrase it into something meaningful or salvage something from the review but the Archive copy of the review was dead too (I checked several archive versions, all permanently dead links). So it's dead and gone, good riddance. -- 109.79.161.25 (talk) 03:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Make It Happen (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080827141647/http://www.teletext.co.uk/bigscreen/film-reviews/dbca99054dddfa19d543f089c0ed9823/Make+It+Happen+(PG)+90+mins.aspx to http://www.teletext.co.uk/bigscreen/film-reviews/dbca99054dddfa19d543f089c0ed9823/Make+It+Happen+(PG)+90+mins.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 13 January 2018 (UTC)