Talk:Xtro

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

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Film: British

	Film portal 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 British cinema task force.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Incest?[edit]

There's a comment in the article "Xtro also has a somewhat upsetting subtext of paedophilic incest." Can anyone clarify this claim? It's a while since I saw the movie, but I don't remember noticing any incest or paedophilia while watching it, and having talked to the director on the Internet I don't think he had any intention of including such a subtext. Mark Grant 23:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Xtro.jpg[edit]

Image:Xtro.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biased?[edit]

The beginning of this article "Xtro" Is a bit acid filled don't you think. It's not just not neutral, it's obvious by reading it that the person who wrote it doesn't like the movie. It's not filled with flaming hatred but still... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.42.15 (talk) 08:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No Production section!?[edit]

This article is missing information on the film's production, this should be added to the article in order to completely cover its subject. It would be nice to hear about the creature effects and interviews with the director--Paleface Jack (talk) 20:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Skinwalker" Photograph[edit]

There is a purported photograph of a skinwalker floating around the internet which, according to someone who saw the movie, is from a scene showing one of the movie's aliens. Here is a link to the picture: https://orion-uploads.openroadmedia.com/lg_e584d7-skinwalker-new-mexico.jpg On imdb there is another picture that seems to match the look of the alien (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086610/mediaviewer/rm2147163904). Can someone confirm this and include it in the article? I think it would be a worthwhile addition since the picture is often used to claim the existence of either aliens or supernatural beings. 91.114.255.12 (talk) 20:24, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 0 external links on Xtro. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086610/alternateversions.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 17:20, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Release[edit]

I know the IMDb (and therefore, several other publications) have stated that the film was released in 1982 in the United Kingdom, but I can't find any source backing this up. Using newspapers.com archives to find any release dates in the United Kingdom can only give me a few scant dates in early 1983. Looking through the BFI's library (http://collections-search.bfi.org.uk/web/Details/ChoiceFilmWorks/%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20150112457) on details for the film there is information on the films production in early 1982, but then nothing until February and March with reviews coming from Variety, The Hollywood Reporter and Starburst (whose review I've added to the article). I'm finding it very unlikely that the film had any screening in 1982 in the United Kingdom at all until any further information is found that can back this up in any sort of detail. Andrzejbanas (talk) 07:18, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At least the US release date on IMDb seems to check out. I looked up the movie title on ProQuest, and the January 28, 1983 issue of The New York Times (p. C18) lists screenings of Xtro at a Bronx theater. That was the earliest hit, though the OCR isn't perfect—the heading "WEEKEND MOVIE CLOCK" was OCR'd as "VEERIND MOVXE CLOCR"—so you never know. Nardog (talk) 19:24, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That I understand, I'm just trying to pin-point a UK release (which appears to be earlier, but there's not a peep for its release). I'll do more research but if we can't find an earlier time, this could just be another point where IMDb is wrong about an obscure genre film. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looking further into https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/ The earliest release I can find in the United Kingdom is again in 1983 in March 10 1983 in the Liverpool Echo. Without further information, I don't think we should bank further into basing release dates on IMDb. Thoughts? Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Someone just added unsourced information that to the article that stated the film had Film Industry Market screening in late 1982. These screenings are usually not public (as they are for industry personal trying to sell the film) and this information was unsourced. If this is the actual case, it wouldn't fall into MOS:FILM's standards for a public release. Anyways, just something to figure out if anyone can actually find sources for this information. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've found some more sources that back-up that March 1983 release, I feel like that's going to be it unless some miracle of a source comes along that says earlier. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding an in popular culture section? A frame from this movie is frequently used as supposed proof of "the rake" and similar cryptids[edit]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Humanoidencounters/comments/nv568z/friendly_reminder_that_this_skinwalker_photo_was/ 174.87.215.253 (talk) 08:39, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

maybe, if you can find third-party sources discussing it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]