Talk:High School Musical/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Rival Cliques plot is inaccurate

Yes, the movies plot has nothing to do with Gabriella and Troy's rival cliques. At no point in the movie does the fact that they come from different cliques enter into the plot, more so the movie is about how there respective cliques don't think they should move into an area outside of their clique (the whole singing thing), but their respective cliques at no point object to the actual fact of the two of them dating. 70.78.84.7 07:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

What??? Have you actually seen the movie? Of course being from rival cliques influenced both leads, as well as the cliques themselves (who do try to break them up)Smatprt 16:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

They set to break them up because they're being distracted by the call backs, not because they don't want a jock being with a book smarts person. They come from DIFFERENT cliques, not RIVAL cliques,for there to be rivalries, there needs to be a sign of rivalry at some point in the film. 70.78.84.7 05:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

We can argue about this for ever, but the fact remains that we have cited numerous reliable sources that say they are from rival cliques. Unless someone can quote a reliable source RS that says they are NOT from rival cliques. then this must stay as written and referenced. I must remind everyone that it's not what WE think, but what can be attributed to a RS. (Also - please ntoe that the article does not say the movie is about rival cliques. It's about 2 kids that happen to come from rival cliques.)Thanks, all. Smatprt 13:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

shrug. I'm assuming that the sources for "rival" are articles where the phrase "rival" just happens to be used, as in, not an article directly discussing whether the cliques are rivals. So, is it not possible that someone could just find an article that randomly uses a different term then rival, and claim this to be opposition to the current sources? It almost feels like the sources are just being used as a technicality to me. ah well. 70.78.84.7 (talk) 00:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to agree with your argument. How can a basketball team and a science quiz team be rival cliques. They will never meet in direct competition with each other and, if they did, it would be impossible to pick a fair discipline to challenge them with. Bonzostar (talk) 18:37, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

isn't the fact that there is antagonism between cliques enough to call them "rivals?" they don't necessarily need to compete, but certainly between the teachers there was a rivalry. neither understood the importance of the other's passions and so clashed. it didn't help that the principal favored basketball. it's the same with the students. each group puts down another- verbally, if nothing else. the coming together of Troy and Gabriella suggests that unity in the school is better achieved by mixing as opposed to looking down on other interests by parties in your original clique. does that all make sense? Hotaru y hanabi (talk) 07:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Problems

This page feels like a fan site. It has so much trivia that should be removed. Also, many of the actors in the film are not notable enough to have their own page. This isn't right 24.218.65.219

• Ok. I tried to address some of your concerns. Trivia is gone or incorporated into other sections. Lead sounds alot less like a Disney advertisement. Other "fansite" trivia is gone. Do you have other specific concerns?Smatprt 07:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, however, I have one more problem. The character of Jason Cross should not have anything even in the supporting characters section. He is a character with only one major line. Why should a character with only one major line have a profile. Also, Ryne Sanders, the actor who potrays him is definitely not notable enough to have his own page. Neither is the profile for Gabriella's mother. This entire page just feels like a fansite. Mishy dishy 22:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The part about Mrs. Montez was just recently added. I think it should be removed, as there's nothing there besides "is Gabriella's mother" -Sukecchi 23:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Kill it with fire! The page is starting to read a little like a fansite. I'll go through and try and weed out the fancruft --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 23:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Agree. I just deleted a number of disney ads and some fan trivia. Feel free to do more!Smatprt 04:33, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey - nice edits by Mishy dishy, but the formatting is messed up from the song list down. Can someone fix?Smatprt 04:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey, just to let you know, theres a part missing in the synposis to do with when Troy is confronted by his farther in the basketball gym. It should come before Gabriella sings "When Ther Was Me and You". Spartan222 (talk) 17:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I recorded it on DVD and will probably look to see if I can find it sometime during the Thanksgiving break to see if I can verify. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 17:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup

This was so confusing, unsigned, and unweildy, I archived the talk page so we could start over. As a reminder, please read WP:NOT - Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. When we are no longer adding anything useful to the article in this discussion, we should stop. A talk page is meant to facilitate conversations in order to make the article better, not to act as a Q&A about the movie, or even to say how much you love it. Please see the off topic warning above. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 13:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Grease 3

Why would Grease 3 redirect to here? Is someone trying to imply this is a sequel to the Grease movies? --Fez2005 01:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Check this out. that should explain it --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 01:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... that's quite interesting. Thanks for the tidbit. --Fez2005 04:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Maybe that should be mentioned in the article lead (in case someone else gets confused for the same reason but is too lazy to read the talk page)? Irish♣Pearl 02:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea... 67.81.170.159 21:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Tried that w/"Grease 4" for HSM 2. Didn't work. WAVY 10 16:17, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

think that the redirect should become a disembagcation (sp?) so that people don't get confused. Because there is going to be a grease 3.User:xylogirl 12:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Release Dates

Poland TVP 1 December 30, 2006
change to
Poland Disney Channel Poland December 30, 2006
Why no one change this?

Merger proposed (Socorro Herrerra)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result was merge Socorro Herrerra into High School Musical. --B. Wolterding 08:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I propose to merge the content of Socorro Herrerra into here, since that article does not meet the notability guidelines for biographies. In fact, the only information given is that S.H. played a minor character in High School Musical. So an alternative to deletion would be to merge the information here. (It seems to be a very minor character, though.)

Please add your comments below. Proposed as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 08:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Sort of Merge - This is a page about the movie, not the actors, and really if all there is about her is that she was in this, then we list her in cast and call it a day. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 17:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Ipstenu, list her in cast and take a nap. She is minor, and the article even says she's minor. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 18:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

• Merge and Delete. Merge whatever info is necessary (maybe just a mention to her minor role), and delete the stub article. <3 bunny 01:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Merge and Delete. Agree with CyberSach above completely.Smatprt 06:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• OK, I think we have consensus to merge. I will list her under "supporting characters"; feel free to move or edit that as needed. --B. Wolterding 08:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Grease 3 ? !! ...

No reference => DEL Mikani 15:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

It was called greece 3 in some countries look back in the archives. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 15:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

go here --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 15:43, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the reference in the infobox initially, but after seeing your response in the Talk:High School Musical 2 page, I re-entered the Grease 3 reference but put it in the main article instead of the infobox. WAVY 10 15:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

This still needs a citation beyond someone's claim on a talk page. Powers ^T 13:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

IMDB lists it as an alternate title. I'll look for some articles. Problem being there's actually noise about a Grease 3 with Travolta and Newton-John as the parents ... -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 14:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for looking. Even if you do find a source, though, if it turns out to be just one country, I'm not sure it's worth putting it in the lead or the infobox. Trivia at best. Powers ^T 16:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

And trivia should be avoided :D A mention in production notes would be more appropriate,I agree. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 18:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I thought that was something that a fan made up. For example, IMDB lists HSM2 with the title "Grease 4" as a working title, which I do not believe at all since its working title would simply be "High School Musical 2" should they want to change it later on. Also, you would need to pay money to be able to use the Grease title, and I don't see why Disney would do such a thing. There shouldn't be any reason why the title "High School Musical" wouldn't be suitable for any country. graphitesmoothie ^{(talk | contributions)} 23:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Basically, it was originally going to be grease 3, because i saw it on IMDB before HSM was even heard of. i forgot all about it, then when i was looking at HSM on it, i realised it was originally grease 3. maybe disney couldnt get the rights or something?? also, there was always going to be a HSM 2 & 3, so their working titles WAY back would have been grease 4 & 5. final word, though High School Musical WAS going to be grease 3. --03crichardson 19:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Socorro Hererra

This is mainly my opinion, but in the "supporting characters" list on the high school musical page, for Socorro Hererra it says: Mrs. Montez (Socorro Herrera) is Gabriella's mother and initially not supportive of her daughter dive into musical theatre but eventually comes around as does everyone else.

How can we actually tell that much from the movie, she only has four appearences:

1: At the beginning of the movie where she tells Gabriella to get into her good clothes and go to the party 2: When she escorts Gabriela to the school and tells her that she'll do fine in the school and that she always do 3: Halfway through the movie when Troy comes to their house, she answers the door and says that Gabriella is busy with homework when Gabriella tells her to. 4: When Troy and Gabriella are singing "Breaking Free", she doesn't say anything.

We can't tell that she does not support Gabriella, if she didn't she wouldn't have forced Gabriella to go to the party at the ski lodge. I don't think she even has enough credit in the movie to be labled as a "supporting character" she doesn't have eough influence in the plot.

203.129.55.55 08:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

That's a good point, as those references you bring up seem to infer she doesn't really care one way or the other. WAVY 10 13:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

A modern retelling of Romeo and Juliet?

I have to strongly disagree with this. High School Musical's storyline doesn't really share much similarities with that of Romeo and Juliet, other than a very diluted theme of "forbidden love" used by HSM. But other than that, I wouldn't go so far in saying that HSM is a modern retelling of Romeo and Juliet.

Not to mention, the evidence provided for that statement is an article that briefly mentions that HSM is a combination of "Grease" and "West Side Story." While West Side Story is a modern retelling of Romeo and Juliet, you can't really stretch it to HSM, especially since Romeo and Juliet is not directly mentioned with HSM. So if no one disagrees, I will delete that statement soon. 69.226.54.196 01:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you need to read further down in the article, where the producer says quite clearly that they took the whole idea for the movie from Romeo and Juliet. "Our story line is maybe not the most original or creative, but it's Shakespearean," said Borden, who described the plot as a modern version of Romeo and Juliet. "We took from the best." (And you missed the whole "rival gang" - "rival clique" take-off. Smatprt 14:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with the whole concept of it being a romeo and juliet thing. None of the plot is about "the smart person can't be with the jock person because they're from different worlds", it's about how there individual worlds don't want them to break out into doing anything different (as in the singing. Their friends didn't care about them dating, it was that they were being distracted by the call backs).

The whole idea of the movie is covered in the song "stick to the statis quo". It's not romeo and juliet.70.78.84.7 08:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but you are factually wrong. We have a verifiable reference to a statement by the original producer where he quite clearly makes the R&J connection. Moreover, movie and theatre critics all over the world have made the connection, as have teachers and students.Smatprt 16:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

yah. I understand that a producer might claim they set out to make a modernized remake of romeo and juliet, but they didn't actually do that. I had read the rest of the topic before i replied, including the producers quote. As far as critics comparing it to Romeo and Juliet, people like finding an easy thing to connect too. Yes, we have the producers quote where the producer believes the plot to be a take off of R&J, but quite frankly, the producer is flat out wrong. Cite me one example in the entire movie where the rival cliques of Troy's jock friends and Gabriella's booksmart friends feud with eachother. there isn't one. Cite me one example in the movie where the Rival cliques try and seperate the two of them BECAUSE they come from rival cliques. There is only one instance in the movie of the cliques trying to seperate Troy and Gabriella, and the reason to seperate them is because they don't want them to be distracted by the callbacks. It has nothing to do with a feud between Booksmart and jock, but more so that both sides are respectively worried that their friend will be to distracted to help them out in their championship game / whatever the sciene competition thing was called. Moreover to this point, the Jocks and Booksmart cliques, which you suppose are rivals to one another, work together towards a common goal. Would the montagues and capulets all get together and come up with a plan and work together as friends just to split Romeo and Juliett? No, they wouldn't. I kind of got sidetracked there, but yah, cite me one example in the entire movie where Troy's friends feud with Gabriella's friends, or cite me one example where they show any sign of disproval of their relationship relating to the fact that they come from different cliques. (remembering that the reason they try to seperate them is BECAUSE of the callbacks, and that scene can not be counted unless you can make a point that the callbacks were not the reason for the attempted splitting.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.78.84.7 (talk) 05:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

This is all well and good but the fact is that this reference (and numerous other references available) say that the connection is there. Unless you can provide reliable printed sources that take issue with this, then there is no real arguement here, in terms of Wiki policy. If you find a real reference - like a disney exec saying it is NOT connected to R & J, then use that reference to build a consensus to change the current referenced fact.Smatprt 05:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

And here [[1]] is another interview with the executive producer who explains it for those who still don't get it.Smatprt 05:37, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't really have any intention to change the article, trying to make a major change to a popular article is too much work. I was simply stating my point as to why the producer was wrong because I felt like stating it somewhere. I figured I may aswell do it on the talk page. And so far no one has prooved me wrong when I say the producer is wrong. :P Edit: Just editing to add, yes, I did read the new article you posted, and it doesn't help with any of the issues I took up with the comparison to R&J in the first place. I never disputed that a producer believed it to be an adaptation of R&J. I disputed that it was infact an adaptation, as per all that crap I said in my big long post up there earlier. 70.78.84.7 05:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Adding a bit further on to what I said, I have no doubt that you can find a whole load of quotes from this producer saying he believes it to be R&J, but I'm not trying to get into a debate over what some producer believes. Don't worry, I'm not trying to change the article, I don't care what it says about R&J, but if you feel like having an honest and earnest conversation about this error in the article, just for the sake of talking, which was really all I felt like doing, please feel free to try and disprove my previously stated problem with the whole comparison. If you do want to do this by posting links to articles and interviews, atleast make the article or interview you're linking to have anything to do with my problem with the comparison in the first place. Otherwise we just go in circles. But I would honestly like to have a conversation about it. maybe you can change my mind. This isn't about what is "Wikipolicy" correct, it's about what is actually factually correct. I never tried to change the article's saying it was R&J, because of course I don't have printed sources of someone randomly deciding to say "actually I think it's not R&J", but the point I wasn't trying to make wasn't about how to change the article, but was about what is actually true. "She's the man" is a take off of "twelfth night". "West side story" is "Romeo and Juliet". High School musical does not bare any of the strong simalarities of any sort like the preceding examples do. (note I mentioned she's the man, to show an example of something in a completly different context, that still clearly follows a shakespear play. Which HSM in no way does. 70.78.84.7 06:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Came back to see if you'd replied yet, and have though about it a bit more. You're obviously not a huge fan of shakespear or anything, so I'd reccomend going to a local library and actually taking out a copy Romeo and Juliet (most library's tend to have shakespear plays in them anyway), read the whole play, and then REALLY compare that to highschool musical, and then come back and try and dispute the above points. Because really, after you read the play you should be able to tell it doesn't have alot to do with Romeo and Juliet other then they're both genericaly romance stories with one or two vaguely simaler themes. Your entire arguement that it's at all related to Romeo and Juliet seems to come from your concept that rival families(montagues and capulets) are the same as rival cliques in the film. What sign of rivalry is their in HSM? Taylor says one insult about the Jocks once or something? There's more to a rivalry then just taylor insulting the jocks once. When you read R&J, you'll see that the Montagues and Capulets are actually RIVALS of one another, as opossed to a small vague dislike. And remember that this quote you take so highly is just a producer afterall. If you can find a quote of Kenny Ortega or Peter Barsochini saying they believe it to be R&J, I think that would carry a bit more weight. Though they'd still of course be wrong, it could be atleast argued that the film was INTENDED to be an adaptation of R&J.70.78.84.7 23:10, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it has more in common with Grease than Romeo & Juliet. WAVY 10 Fan 13:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

What was that?

Before Sukecchi removed the trivia yet again, someone put a claim stating that Miley Cyrus and Mitchel Musso were considered for roles, which is rather unbelieveable considering that it's set in a high-school (and Miley was what, 13 at the time)? WAVY 10 15:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Probably just more fancruft. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 15:10, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

You make it sound like my removing the trivia is a bad thing. -Sukecchi 15:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't intend to. I just saw the difference between the last versions and the whole Miley/Mitchel entry caught my eye as particularly ridiculous. WAVY 10 15:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

It was probably fan-dalism, or something like that. Abcw12 00:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

DCOM Trilogy Order

The High School Musical trilogy is disney's second DCOM trilogy, the first being the Zenon trilogy, the third will be the Twitches trilogy, this is untrue. There's also the Halloweentown trilogy. But was order was it in? Abcw12 00:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Twitches hasn't even aired its second movie so how the hell is it supposed to be a trilogy? --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 15:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

And haven't there been FOUR movies in the Halloweentown series? WAVY 10 16:08, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Recent Trivia Section

Everything in it is a load of bull to my knowledge..

Drew sang for Zac as Zac's voice was not what the producers wanted.

Everything in the new trivia section is totally wrong and i propose it is removed? Amstoakes 19:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I took this one out...

- * In the basketball game at the end, the time does not travel in real time

As it is, movies/TV shows with big sports scenes almost NEVER have real time and game time correlating. Also, an ENORMOUS chunk of the game (early 1st quarter to last few seconds of 4th) are never seen in order to set up the pivotal scene (the one with Breaking Free). WAVY 10 19:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

i might be wrong but i thought that high school musical took place during their junior year because in the scene where the basketball team tries to pressure troy out of doing his callbacks they say something like "who was the first sophomore to make the varsity team... troy" and then "so who decided to make him our team captain this year... we did". also high school musical 2 is the summer before senior year, when troy is dealing with college basketball scholarships, so shouldn't the first high school musical be during their junior year? 70.20.159.65 05:46, 25 August 2007 (UTC)isabelle

That may have been a writing error, as everything mentioned in both HSM1 & HSM2 implies and/or states it's their junior year where the story takes place. WAVY 10 13:52, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

This is a recording...

I just asked for page protection. WAVY 10 22:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Spelling Errors

I found a spelling error in the section "Book Series"

... A complete list of books is profided below

it should be "provided"

SK8007 05:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

• There's no need to discuss such small changes, you can go ahead and edit it Amstoakes 21:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

This is a great movie for yound kids trying to follow their dreams and helps kids if they have problems on the movie it shows how you can resolve it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.160.114.1 (talk) 01:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC) high school musical was horrid —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.184.65 (talk) 23:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Ryan Evans section

I feel that Ryan Evans section can be trimmed a bit. the para describing Ryan, tells about his role in HSM2 also. I feel that the role played Ryan in hsm2 shd be in the HSM2 article and not this one.I feel we can delete all the sentences beyond "In the second movie, however, when Sharpay replaces ..." This will trim up the para wrt description of other characters.Gprince007 11:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Failed GA

I've failed this article for GA status. The scope of the article is not broad enough, since there is no information about production or reception. 17Drew (talk) 02:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Separate Character Pages

I reckon someone should make an article each for Troy, Gabriella, Sharpay and Ryan (possibly Chad, Taylor and the school). Your thoughts? Malpass93 (talk) 16:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Not necessary. Simple as that. -Sukecchi (talk) 16:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm also not in favor of creating separate pages for each character. Maybe Troy, Gabriella, Sharpay and Ryan deserve it but not other characters. Infact the character description in the current HSM article itself is not much in good shape. Having separate article will definitely result in it being deleted. I suggest that we expand the character description in this HSM article first. When it gets broader in coverage, then i suggest that we move it into its separate article....What do you think of that????...Gprince007 (talk) 16:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, Gprince. Malpass93 (talk) 16:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Please don't expand the fictional aspects of this article first. Right now, there is very little in the article that discusses why there should be an article at all. Not much in the way of reviews, reception, impact on other works, etc. Expand the real-world information first, and then add fictional detail if needed to balance. By no stretch of the imagination do the characters deserve their own articles. This is a TV-movie that played on the Disney Channel, which inherently does not rise very high on any objective scale of importance. Individual characters are even lower.Kww (talk) 18:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Please, do not create separate character pages This has been done before several times over (Ms. Darbus, Jack Bolton, Troy & Gabriella, Chad Danforth, Taylor McKessie, Ryan Evans, Gabriella Montez, Troy Bolton to name a few). Time and time again these articles get redirected to this article. Any efforts to create these other articles will undoubtably be reverted back by numerous editors very quickly. A better suggestion would be to do as Kww suggests above and do some research into the real world aspects of this piece as a movie. Not more research into the fictional universe. See Writing About Fiction for more information. Happy editing! --omtay38 21:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

All this for a movie article?

When I look up a movie article I usually expect to see just a synopsys, cast, reception and a few other sections. I think this is way too much for an article about just the film. 71.105.91.242 (talk) 02:26, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree. Everything having to do with the first movie gets crammed into this article...and it's been like this for a long time. I think a 'High School Musical Series' article might be in order...maybe. -Sukecchi (talk) 02:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I'm a little confused to, I haven't seen the movie but it seems to be getting loads of publicity and I can't figure out why. It's all over TV and I doesn't even seem that good. Can someone explain why a bunch of pre-teen kids dancing and singing is emmy award winning? I mean at least Travolta was cool 212.219.220.125 (talk) 20:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Well I disagree. HSM is insanely popular and characters from other movies have their own separate pages. It wouldn't be so long if this was the case. 88.109.62.252 (talk) 10:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Travolta was cool, yes, but the message of his film was not. Grease said: conform, dress and act like a slut and you will be accepted. On the other hand HSM discourages cliques, and encourages kids to be themselves, be who they want to be, not what others tell them to be. It has also turned thousands of kids on to theatre, even to Romeo and Juliet. What makes it so notable? Gee - most watched tv movie OF ALL TIME, top selling cd OF ALL TIME. If you don't get it, just ask any 10 year old and they will explain it to you. Having said that, I do think the addition of all the Disney merchandise is over the top. Pretty spammy in that regard. I could see some of that go by the wayside. Smatprt (talk) 05:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah but your missing my point, it is popular, but why? what exacctly makes this a popular film? over say, Transformers or Spiderman 3? Jay794 (talk) 17:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Poster

Does the poster for this article look fake to anyone other than me? (talking mainly about the title part) WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 14:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Reverted. Thanks for bringing it up! Malpass93 (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

oi todo bem!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.17.120.10 (talk) 13:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Romeo and Juliet comparison

This is the quote I found from the source given (the other source seems to be a dead link): ""Our story line is maybe not the most original or creative, but it's Shakespearean," said Borden, who described the plot as a modern version of Romeo and Juliet. "We took from the best.""

I see this has been discussed before and there doesn't seem to be a conclusion, so let me give my two cents. The story of a boy and a girl falling in love with each other but not getting their way is probably the most common theme in the world, and that's the only resemblance between those the movie and Romeo and Juliet. There's an enormous difference - Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy, for one. Let's just say that this movie is nothing like Romeo and Juliet.

Moreover, if you have a basic knowledge of Shakespeare, you will know that Shakespeare created nothing. His story of Romeo and Juliet comes from an earlier story of the same name, which in turn comes from the Metamorphoses by Ovid, who probably heard the story as a folktale. His other tragedies - Hamlet, King Lear - are the same. The true excellence of Shakespeare is in his ability to transform them masterfully into blank verse. It has nothing to do with creativity, and here Borden is awfully wrong to claim that the best is Shakespeare's plot - which has been around for centuries. It shows a lack of basic knowledge about what he supposedly based his story on.

All this raises doubt to the amount of truth in Borden's claim that he based it on Romeo and Juliet - is it babbling, or is he simply ignorant? We do not know. But we do know that his comparison is, at best, doubtful. Yes, it is a verifiable source, it comes from the writer's own mouth, and it is not my place to judge him wrong, but it is also against the principle of common sense to make the comparison in an encyclopedia based on one sentence out of the writer's mouth - as far as I know, no one yet has made this comparison and no one seems to see the same way. I would suggest moving the sentence below to the plotline as "The writer of the play claimed that..." as it is not exactly a notable claim either (nowhere else in the article is it mentioned, except briefly in what I believe is an OR sentence). Or, better, remove it. Herunar (talk) 16:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the editor seemed to feel that what Borden said was sufficient. I'd be a little dubious because; besides it being possibly self-promotion, the only thing we can grab without a shadow of a doubt that (like what you said about the Bard) they weren't that creative. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 16:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok - I have now posted 5 more references not from the author, but from mainstream critics who easily saw the similar elements. I also fixed the dead link. I also retooled the sentence to say that both the author and numerous critics have made the same (or similar) description. As to the obvious similarities: meeting at a party, a balcony scene, each has their "gangs", the thwarting of a parents will, rival cliques instead of rival gangs is also referenced by 3 different critics. May this be the end to this conversation now? Thanks for allowing me to post more references. Please read them all and you might learn something.Smatprt (talk) 03:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes - of course their are elements of Grease and West Side Story - They too were based on elements of the R&J story. I feel silly even having to point this stuff out, but it keeps coming up. Let's see - Grease wasn't a tragedy either (except its message of "dress and act like a slut and you will be accepted". Shakespeare created nothing? Gee, I guess that is why R&J is perhaps the most adapted play of all time. See the wiki article on Romeo and Juliet on screen just for a taste of what the play has inspired. No one has adapted Ovid and few have even read Romeus and Iuliet (I have though - has anyone on this page read it?). I sincerely doubt if Bordon or many critics have. And just so you know - Shakespeare did indeed add to the plot and created characters that have become iconic - Not Ovid and not Brooke. Do you know who Brooke is? Doubtful - and most critics certainly do not. Ok - I'm done "babbling" too.Smatprt (talk) 03:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Well said, but I insist on my argument that the two stories are fundamentally different because Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy. The sources you gave do make the comparison, but also noted the difference between the two stories - the closest was "Romeo and Juliet (without the suicides)". None have suggested it to be a "retelling" if I understand the word as it is - if you retell a story, you don't change the genre.

Some have adapted Ovid's Pyramus and Thisbe, contrary to your claims - and Shakespeare did it twice, in Romeo and Juliet and as the play-within-a-play of A Midsummer Night's Dream. Shakespeare did add new elements into the play, but the plot is pretty much the same. It is the most widely-adapted simply because it is the most famous, as in many cases, and most of these adaptations could very well be adaptations of Romeus and Juliet since they only took the basic plotline. High School Musical is such a case - it does not have the additions made by Shakespeare. Sure, there is a balcony (which I believe is an addition of Shakespeare?), but that has nothing to do with the plot - the author only copied the feature (and which personally I believe is a ridiculous thing to do). Herunar (talk) 08:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes - you are right, of course, about P&T. I was thinking about modern films like West Side Story and Grease and the like, and even then, the P&T story has no doubt, appeared in some of those (like the miserable version of The Fantasticks several decades ago!). I'm not sure I agree about the changing of genres, after all Tate retold King Lear, but with a happy ending, for example. But let me dwell on some other wording - adapted, inspired, etc.. Re:Shakespeare's work - I agree that many of his additions were not added to HSM but I didn't think that was the issue - I was responding to the statement that Shakespeare added nothing except verse, which I strongly disagree with. His characters resonate on so many levels...but I digress! Anyhow, thanks for the discussion. Let me dwell on this some and I'll get back to this page within a day or two. Smatprt (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Based on the above discussion, I have changed the word "retelling" to "adaptation", as adaptation seems a better description and allows for the kind of variations of plot and structure exhibited in HSM. For readability sake, I also combined the numerous references to both the R&J comparison and the "rival clique" sources. Thanks to User:Herunar for raising some good points, particularly regarding the word "retelling".Smatprt (talk) 05:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Too large

This article is FAR too broad on the HSM subject. This should be about the movie and nothing else. Move the rest of this information...books, ice show, video game...ANYTHING that isn't the movie to a series page. This is ridiculous. -Sukecchi (talk) 12:22, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Philippines TV

I added this, since this is big in Philippine TV:*Philippine television premieres "High School Musical" and "High School Musical 2" on Studio 23 (May 24 and 25, 2008).abs-cbnnews.com, “High School Musical” premieres in the Philippines on Studio 23--Florentino floro (talk) 10:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Why no criticism?

Most games, and films covered on Wikipedia include a criticism section. Why is this not the case for High School Musical? I mean, I find it's one of the worst movies of all time, but of course, there must be other review institutions that mirror my views? Are Disney representatives on the Wiki editing prowl or something? Just a thought.

Hey, I totally agree. I'd love to see some criticism. MarianKroy (talk) 12:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to see some to balance it out even though I like the movies (so far)...but one problem is that nearly all of the criticism so far seems to have been personal opinion of the "I think it stinks" (or words to that effect) sort instead of a more thorough, critical analysis, which I think it what would be preferable for an encyclopedic article. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 17:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Just quote some reviews. You can look at rottentomatoes or any of the other review sites. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, HSM has been accused of backmasking. That at least should hve a sentance. lol Vitual aelita (talk) 21:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

We're going to need some...a LOT of proof before adding that serious a charge in this article. I suggest checking out the reliable source guideline we have here. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 22:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm nopt saying we should put that in THIS article. but maybe in like a disney article or something. It's like Another one bites the dust and Stairway to heaven. Vitual aelita (talk) 19:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Did HSM recieve any negative criticism at all? Just curious. TopGearFreak ^Talk 16:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Sequal Images

Aren't these images a little out of place as well as oversized. Furthermore the 4th year one looks like a fake due to its poor quality and lack of duplicates online.Bigbadbyte (talk) 23:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Deleted section. Blatant violation of WP:IUP
Kww (talk) 23:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Seperate character paragraphs

if not seperate character pages ( which characters of other shows and movies have)the characters must atleast have seperate character pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dianathirtyninethomas (talk • contribs) 04:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Characters

I know a few people have said about separate character pages, but it might help if there was actually information on each character within this article, fullstop.

Just a short section (à la Britannia High [which is how I got to finding there was no character information on the HSM article, as I was looking to see if there were any pages or sections on the HSM characters to link to]) would be fine.

Not that I'm a fan or anything, but I think it would really improve the article as I'm sure a lot of people will be looking at it hoping to find information on the separate characters.

Craitman H. Pellegrino (talk) 21:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello! I was writing to agree with you.

Ashleigh101664

22:25 12 December 2008 ( GMT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleigh101664 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Mrs. Darbus

I reckon Mrs Darbus should be included more --Eigguhs (talk) 03:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

You'll have to explain why you think so. You can't just make random statements without a reason. Bonzostar (talk) 18:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Plot Mistake

In the plot section, it says that Troy and Gabriella meet secretly on the balcony of a greenhouse, but in reality, they met on the roof of the school. This is later verified in HSM 3 when Troy calls Gabriella to come up to the roof. I will rectify this mistake. Bonzostar (talk) 18:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Mass deletions

Please don't delete mass bits of material without discussion. I have reverted these deletions. The sections on spin-offs, stage musicals, etc. do belong in this article. They should be summaries of what appear in their own extended articles. Thanks. Smatprt (talk) 02:49, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Sesame Spoof

Please add this juice under the Parodies section: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn5cUaGYAXs - 60.52.73.157 (talk) 12:36, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Reception?

Why is there no mention of the movie's reception like most other films?

This article reeks of bias in my opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.47.67 (talk) 12:26, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Because no one has written anything. Feel free to add a section, just make sure you back it up with reliable source and create a neutral point of view. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 12:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think anyone reviewed this crap, but I'll see what I can dig up :))) 95.181.12.52 (talk) 16:56, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Just checked, no reviews on rottentomatoes.com by any top critic. So yeah, nobody even wanted to watch this :)))))) 95.181.12.52 (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Sharpay redirecting to here

Considering a layman might not know Shar Pei is spelled that way, it is gross negligence to have Sharpay redirect to this movie. A disambiguation page might be better. --71.167.15.89 (talk) 01:21, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Sharpay's Fabulous Adenture

Hey everyone, I added Sharpay's Fabulous Adventure to the Other Media section. It looks like other spinoffs have been included in this section, so it seems appropriate to also include this new release within this section. We might also want to consider making a new subsection with "Other Media" called "Spinoffs." Thoughts? --TravisBernard (talk) 14:24, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

SNL parody

Saturday Night Live once did an "advertisement" for yet another High School Musical sequel, involving middle aged adults in night school working towards their high school diplomas. Should there be a mention of this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.225.17.141 (talk) 18:24, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

10th Anniversary

Disney Channel aired High School Musical in a special 10th Anniversary telecast on January 20th, 2016 at 8/7c. Should this be noted somewhere in this article? If so, should there be a section about it? --Super3588 (talk) 06:37, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on High School Musical. 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/20091231133408/http://riaa.com/goldandplatinum.php to http://riaa.com/goldandplatinum.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203165936/http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Disney/Buena_Vista/Disc_Announcements/Sharpays_Fabulous_Adventure_Announced_for_Blu-ray/6005 to http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Disney/Buena_Vista/Disc_Announcements/Sharpays_Fabulous_Adventure_Announced_for_Blu-ray/6005%5C

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 05:41, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on High School Musical. 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/20080313161549/http://dvd.monstersandcritics.com/reviews/article_1230219.php/DVD_Review_High_School_Musical__Two-Disc_Remix_Edition_ to http://dvd.monstersandcritics.com/reviews/article_1230219.php/DVD_Review_High_School_Musical__Two-Disc_Remix_Edition_
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928011530/http://www.homemediaretailing.com/news/html/breaking_article.cfm?article_id=9197 to http://www.homemediaretailing.com/news/html/breaking_article.cfm?article_id=9197
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140912094435/http://www.playbill.com/news/article/disney-channels-high-school-musical-makes-history-as-1st-full-length-featur to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/disney-channels-high-school-musical-makes-history-as-1st-full-length-featur
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ashleytisdale.com/news/2010/03/31/sharpay-back-2011-new-disney-channel-movie-coming-soon
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120505164335/http://disneydvd.disney.go.com/high-school-musical-china.html to http://disneydvd.disney.go.com/high-school-musical-china.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 16:38, 3 November 2017 (UTC)