Talk:The Emperor's New Groove

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Emperor's New Groove article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: American / Animated This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles This article is supported by the American cinema task force. This article is supported by the Animated films task force. Animation: American / Films Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by the Animated films work group (assessed as Mid-importance). Disney Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Comedy Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Latin America Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Latin America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Latin AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Latin AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Latin AmericaLatin America articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Animation / Cinema Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Animation - American animation work group. This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force. Peru Low‑importance This article is supported by WikiProject Peru. This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.PeruWikipedia:WikiProject PeruTemplate:WikiProject PeruPeru articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Peru To-do: edit history watch purge Assess and prioritise articles (log) Check for copyvios at Special:Contributions/Priscilla D, tag as {{Db-copyvio}} where appropriate Create: Expand: new articles; top importance articles FAC / FLC: Peru national football team GAN: Merge requests: Amazonas before the Inca Empire, Chachapoyas culture Review: Shining Path, Universitario de Deportes Translate: National University of San Marcos Work on Lima, the current article improvement drive Wikify: articles needing attention South America Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject South America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to South America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject South AmericaTemplate:WikiProject South AmericaSouth America articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Indigenous peoples of the Americas Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indigenous peoples of the Americas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: Oral History of the Emperor's New Groove at Vulture

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.

• Hooks, Ed (2005). "The Emperor's New Groove". Acting in Animation: A Look at 12 Films. Heinemann Drama. ISBN 0325007055.

Why is the image duplicated in this article? MK2 06:01, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only doing the story section and I'm getting a headache from all the unclear antecedents, fragmentary sentences, and miscellaneous typos. I fixed some of them, but it's still a bit jumbled. Unfortunately, I haven't seen this movie recently, so I can't just rewrite the whole thing. I marked my changes as being "minor" because they were cosmetic, for the most part. runey 02:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably unfair to go looking for that one piont where the Walt Disney Animated Canon got...well, shot by a canon...but if there was a piont, The Emperor's New Groove is probably it. Is this a fair marker? Is it even encyclopedic? My head hurts...

Is it really fair to label Hercules "unsuccessful" as a movie? It grossed over $252M worldwide (almost $100M more than The Emperor's New Groove). I think either the phrase needs to be qualified or removed.

Disney seems to reguard any animated film of theirs post-Beauty and the Beast that doesn't make over $100 million in America. WIll qualify. --FuriousFreddy 06:34, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. REDIRECT [it shows it made tons of money in the box office, and im sure in viewers on disney channel and dvd sales]

The budget is listed as $100,000,000, according to the article it made $170,000,000, which translates to a profit of $70,000,000. While not as big a profit as other films, it's certainly not a great failure, or even a loss at all. Why does the article say it lost money in theatres? JBK405 03:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering the same. That's just Box Office too. It could have brought in another $100,000,000 - $150,000,000 in merchandise and VCR sells. It's in NO way a failure. EVERY article says that only Brother Bear and Lilo & Stitch were successful, but this one was very successful too. ESPECIALLY considering it made more from VCR tapes than theater (It had a very successful VCR run.) --70.130.157.189 (talk) 20:29, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if its appropriate - but could a section be added regarding the internet semi-cult thing about demon llamas? As in

pacha: Aargh! Demon llama!

kuzco: Demon llama!? where!?!?

I'm 'demonllama' on some communities, but on most demonllama is already taken by what looks to be at least 3 different people, mainly in the UK and US. Any objections, or it is too far off the topic... --glasnt^<3 01:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, that would be wierd. 'Nuff said.Julz

I'm thinking of making WikiProject Kuzco. The problem is I think it should be a fork of WikiProject Disney which needs support to come alive, so people need to show intrest in it on the proposed wikiprojects page to make Project Kuzco true. We have more than 5 articles so we can qualify.

People seem to be real insistant about stating in the Story section that the movie is set in the ancient Incan empire. It's not. As the production team says in the DVD commentary, this movie is simply set "long ago in a jungle", and uses an Inca-like background. The note to this effect in the Trivia section covers this point, and is far more apperance.

Kuzco is such a nuthead. He's silly. Kronk like squrrills.

Isn't the story of an Emperor who becomes reduced to living like a beast rather reminiscent of that of Nebuchadnezzar II in the Book of Daniel? 195.137.79.247 16:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I noticed the similarities as well when I watched it. 12.218.145.112 06:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It took me forever to find out who the characters were! It's at the very bottom of the page, usually the charactars list is the first or second paragraph! It's right at the bottom of the page and It's irrelevant and typed. Usually it's in a box and such... this page needs some major clean up! I got such a headache from reading the "Kingdom of the Sun" deal. We honestly don't need to know that much about it, and it's far too in distinct.Happykid536 23:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if it's noteable enough to, well, note, the ultimate fate of the guards that chased the two heros at the end. They were only obeying orders, yet they turned into beasts and fell to a seemingly hideous and seemingly splattering end. Lots42 19:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The section labeled 'Influences' smells like original research (most of it) to me. Lots42 (talk) 03:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't Wendie be in the box at the top where it lists the stars of the movie? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.202.248.68 (talk) 15:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought Kuzco built his vacation hut -on- his friend's hill, not on the next hill over. Lots42 (talk) 19:46, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I come with this proposal to merge the following characters into a List of The Emperor's New Groove characters:

• Kuzco
• Pacha (The Emperor's New Groove)
• Yzma
• Kronk Pepikrankenitz
• Malina (The Emperor's New School)
• List of The Emperor's New School minor characters

Mainly because none of these characters have managed to prove notability outside The Emperor's New Groove and related material. None of the articles have sections about coverage by reliable secondary sources independently discussing the characters or sections showing impact in popular culture. Thoughts? --LoЯd ۞pεth 06:58, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since there was no opposition within a week and there was no improvement of the articles, then the mergers are being performed. --LoЯd ۞pεth 06:08, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate statement: "New Groove and all but two of the five future traditional Disney Feature Animation films--2002's Lilo and Stitch and 2003's Brother Bear--would sustain losses during their theatrical releases".

In reality, of Disney's seven traditionally animated features of the past decade, New Groove, Atlantis, Lilo and Stitch, Brother Bear and The Princess and the Frog are considered successful. The three post-'Disney Renaissance' films that sustained losses were Fantasia 2000 (premiered in 1999), 2002's Treasure Planet and 2004's Home on the Range. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.164.148.81 (talk) 23:10, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. So fix it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.48.0.106 (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Many of the articles were selected semi-automatically from a list of indefinitely semi-protected articles. Please confirm that the protection level appears to be still warranted, and consider unprotecting instead, before applying pending changes protection to the article.

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:19, 17 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Is there like a guy on the loose who's so proud that he knows the words protagonist, deuteragonist, and antagonist that he now has to insert them into every WP article he can find? -- Imladros (talk) 10:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There may be, but I don't see anything wrong with it. It's correct terminology I guess. Niudla (talk) 19:27, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the fourth paragraph under the "Plot" heading there is a sentence that reads: "Kronk then tries to kill Yzma by cutting a rope to a chandelier, but because Yzma is so skinny, it falls around her instead of on her."

I find the idea that Kronk (who talks to squirrels, and couldn't bring himself to kill Kuzco) tries to "KILL" Yzma is far too big an assumption, and would mark a tremendous change in his character. A word like "incapacitate" or even "trap" is far more accurate and doesn't require as large of a moral leap.

97.104.252.74 (talk) 06:17, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done I changed it to "trap" instead of "kill." --McDoobAU93 18:55, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the 'Cast' section, there's a link to List of The Emperor's New Groove characters, with #Kronk_Pepikrankenitz appended (to link to that section). However, that section doesn't exist. In the article, it's called 'Kronk', so I request that the section link be changed to #Kronk here. Niudla (talk) 19:33, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Floating Boat A boat that can float! 11:53, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This film is a prequel to Hercules, that was released back in 1997. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.198.171 (talk) 22:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why you think this is so? Trivialist (talk) 22:58, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It specifically mentions the documentary is about the issues in relation to "Empire Of The Sun", without explaining the link. If the first paragraph of the piece is not read, the inclusion is confusing. Added the reference. 203.13.3.90 (talk) 01:38, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is more info on production with dates: http://archive.li/JJhpE --Evope (talk) 03:25, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Emperor's New Groove. 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/20150215054754/http://gawker.com/5896027/stings-suppressed-disney-documentary-leaked-online to http://gawker.com/5896027/stings-suppressed-disney-documentary-leaked-online

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) 18:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Until a secondary source says the film says it received positive reviews, this should not be in the article. The review aggregators should speak for themselves without analysis from Wikipedians. In particular, Metacritic's wording was previously discussed here, in which I highlighted issues in using it to state authoritatively that films received "positive reviews". The same issue holds true for box office performance. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:27, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of The Emperor's New Groove's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Mojo":

• From Tarzan (1999 film): "Tarzan (1999)". Box Office Mojo. Retrieved November 11, 2011.
• From Hercules (1997 film): "Hercules (1997)". Box Office Mojo. Retrieved February 3, 2008.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please add good article to this. It has improved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pingu the penguin and friends (talk • contribs) 19:38, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Follow process detailed at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:40, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is on page two (not one) of Mark Dindla's Place in the Sun that says. that the film changed its' title from Kingdom of the Sun to Kingdom in the Sun. I was deceived by the reference already on here. See the link for the correct reference below: https://www.awn.com/mag/issue5.08/5.08pages/strikedindal2.php3 Evope (talk) 03:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]