Talk:Chuck (TV series)

Added music

I added all the music from the first three episodes. Please add and correct things as needed! Feity 8:57, 09 October 2007 (UTC)

My Deletions

I deleted the two refs to 'My Computer Wore Tennis Shows' and 'Divine Right'. There were no citations backing it up. It'd be far, far different if one of the show's creators were quoted as saying 'Yeah, it's based off such and such' but there isn't and it's bad news in lawyer-town IF people start accusing each other of taking ideas. Also, I've read Divine Right and it's -nothing- like Chuck except in the most vague, vague way, i.e. 'Normal dude gets in deep crap over a message sent to him'. How many stories like that have been written? Thousands? (Not to mention the dude in Divine Right goes Captain Cuckoo Banannas)Lots42 02:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Irene Demova Virus

Is this a real virus? Also, is Irene Demova a real person?

Xaritix 03:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

No it is not a real virus. Lots42 13:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Nor is she a real person. 68.36.163.22 06:33, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Morgan's last name?

At the very beginning (just under the contents box), he's listed as Morgan Santos. In the Casting section, it's stated that his last name was changed from Pace to Grimes. The official NBC website has it as Grimes, so I'm changing the top one. Joliefille 07:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Goofs

An entry on the page under 'Goofs' states that though Chuck's computer broke, his email would still be on the internet. This is implying that Chuck could still access the email from the internet which is not always and necessarily true. Some people set their email clients on their computers to delete the email from the server when downloaded. Which would mean that if this scenario were true, the email would only be on the hard drive. I would argue that the NCS & the CIA could have an IT department smart enough to pull it from the hard drive in that case. Metamorphousthe 02:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree, and deleted the goof. Realistically, his ISP would have a copy stored on their backups even if Chuck downloaded it, but just as realistically, the NSA and CIA could have just gotten warrants to get the mail from the ISP (actually with the post-9/11 changes, they wouldn't need the legally required warrants), and/or could read the busted HD. And even more realistically, the NSA and CIA would have backups of the original critical database. 68.36.163.22 06:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Dramedy?

Is this show really a "dramedy?" It seems too over the top for that. I'd describe it as an Action Comedy. Calling it Science Fiction might not be correct either (Chuck didn't have the data downloaded directly into his brain, he just saw thousands of images on a PC screen, a process more like subliminal brainwashing.) Whether such a thing is feasible is questionable, but it's certainly not what most people would call Sci-Fi. Of course, this is only the first episode, more are needed to evaluate it properly. Just pointing it out. -Wilfredo Martinez 04:29, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Drama-comedy (or Comedy-drama) perhaps, Dramedy never. This "word" needs to be taken outside, beaten to a pulp, and then shot for good measure. --Squiggleslash 16:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

That's beside the point. So far, the dramatic elements (such as Sarah feeling hurt over Chuck not trusting her) have been few and not of lasting importance in the show. Even the deaths of some characters had little effect. So it's not a drama- yet. -Wilfredo Martinez 04:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Ugh! I hate it too. Dramedy is not a word, and the show is a comedy, not a drama. Fixed. Why must every comedy with a hint of relationships or a drama with a joke in it be called a 'dramedy'? Iorek 10:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'd consider M*A*S*H the prototypical dramedy. Chuck doesn't have that much comedy, so I'd consider Chuck to be a drama. — Val42 06:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Err, Chuck DOES have a lot of intended humor. Whether we find it funny or not is besides the point. On the other hand, I am convinced by now that it does have genuine emotional moments, so it is a drama as well.- Wilfredo Martinez 16:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh and it's definitely Science Fiction as well, as truth serums just don't work the way they did in "Chuck versus the Truth". -Wilfredo Martinez 16:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

But we'll need citations to support saying that it is a drama or a comedy. I think that it qualifies as science fiction, but we'll need a citation for that as well. — Val42 03:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

No we don't. The comedy/drama line is a little vaguer, I'll agree on that - the network likes to call it a drama as far as I recall (it certainly has character development and a bit of romantic angst, albeit not enough to take over the tone of the show with), but it reads like an action-comedy with drama portions to a lot of people; we could probably use citations to back up how its perceived in the media vs. how NBC's promoting it, vs. how the creator intended it, though frankly I think NBC was always intending to market it as a comedy AND drama series, what with the "new drama" label combined with the "saving the world for ten bucks an hour" tagline and such, which seemed more like they were pushing it as a comedy. Or, a strongly comedic drama. See, that's why it would be nice, at least, if we had cites for this part...

But, the Science Fiction genre is NOT debatable in this case. It just isn't, and if you think it is, you are, to be perfectly blunt... wrong. I normally would try to be less potentially-construed-as-pushy or whatnot on a point like this, but people are arguing "it's not this genre" when clearly don't know just how wide-ranging the genre really is, or they're arguing "people wouldn't think of it as sci-fi", which has nothing to do with the actual genre of the show in this case, and is speculation on "what people who aren't even me think". This has nothing to do with the noted misrepresentation of "truth serum", either, as that could certainly just be an error or carelessness on the part of the writers.

The reason I'm saying here that it is indisputably science fiction, is that the show blatantly and obviously uses, as part of its premise no less, a highly speculative (and potentially highly unlikely) use of future science and technology and/or mild alteration of the way science as we know it actually works... based on speculation of today's rough (but considerably less perfected) understanding of the human brain. (That's just if we ignore the less hard-to-swallow things like skin patch bugs that magically look like skin after being put on, or the level of technology built into Chuck's car or the level of connectivity and real-time video quality that TV has in the room where they contact their respective agencies...) Speculation on future (even if it's near-future) uses of technology and science that isn't in non-fiction form, is by default Science Fiction. So is anything that makes a scientific "tweak" to reality and examines the consequences, (which could quite easily be considered exactly what the show is doing. Hard to tell if it's more speculative, or more tweakative, if you will). Chuck just happens to be more naturalistic, less laser-gun heavy variation of SF set "now" or "nowish", is all. Re: the OP:

Calling it Science Fiction might not be correct either (Chuck didn't have the data downloaded directly into his brain, he just saw thousands of images on a PC screen, a process more like subliminal brainwashing.) Whether such a thing is feasible is questionable, but it's certainly not what most people would call Sci-Fi.

Bolding mine, for emphasis. Point by point, here is what is wrong with your assertions (though I appreciate the tentative "might not be" here):

(Chuck didn't have the data downloaded directly into his brain, he just saw thousands of images on a PC screen, a process more like subliminal brainwashing.)

"Subliminal brainwashing" may have been sensationalized in media or popular culture, but there's NEVER been definitive proof of its working, let alone to anywhere remotely near the extent or format of Chuck, in real life. Plus, there's that whole "Chuck's brain is special in that it can perceive more of these subliminal messages than average" thing, which is equally not based in very solid scientific research either, last I checked. Thus, it is "speculative fiction", and given the particular trope in use here, more clearly from the Science Fiction end than the Fantasy end, as it deals with using technological means (the flashing pictures on the screen) to tamper with the brain, as opposed to magical ones.

Whether such a thing is feasible is questionable, but it's certainly not what most people would call Sci-Fi.

Now, the truth serum thing could just be out of carelessness for all we know. But you can be damn sure the premise for the series was more deliberate. Not only is it "not feasible", the mere fact that even you find it "questionable" for it to be feasible without being necessarily aware of how debunked subliminal messages on that kind of scale are, only helps prove my point that it's incredibly speculative use of science. Also, how do you know what "most people" would "certainly not... call Sci-Fi"? I realize how tempting it is to go into statements like that, but it's a logical fallacy, as it's completely unprovable and really just a mask for one's opinion. Please avoid using it in the future.

Also, again - by objective standards, it counts as science fiction, because of just exactly how much obviously deliberate liberty it takes with the "science" behind the premise. That's all that matters on this end, really. (And now, I go to home ostensibly to sleep, for ye, I haveth a bloody cold -.-...) Runa27 (talk) 22:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Divine

I see the comparisons to Divine Right is back. If it's so noteable, please link for the love of bacon. Thank you. I still maintain my opinion it's only the vaguest of resembalances so far. Lots42 11:08, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, plot-wise, it bears a greater resemblance to The Scarecrow and Mrs. King. But I imagine the greater part of the show's demographic have no clue about that. :-)

The Dogfather 18:09, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

A Chuck Page

can someone make a page for chuck and maybe even some of the other characters —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mugatu3333 (talk • contribs) 00:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

At the least, there should be some episode synopses added to the article, or on a separate one. -Wilfredo Martinez 04:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Lost crossover

any solid facts on a lost crossover?? http://spoilerslost.blogspot.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.17.58.149 (talk) 16:52, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Chuck mentions, "Oceanic Flight 815 was shot down" when he sees a variety of imgs.--Pathofme19 00:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't that just mean Chuck saw an image from the show? I certainly hope it doesn't mean Chuck could really meet Jack and Locke and so on. Lots42 11:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Nah. The doctor who invented the image encryption technology showed Chuck some test images to see if they would trigger the right response. Chuck starts rattling off data but the editing chops it into sentence fragments. At one point he says "Oceanic flight 815 was shot down by..." and it shifts to something else. I think it's just an Easter Egg for the fans. Thatcher131 16:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

A few relevant links

I would suggest adding two links to the links section.

1) TV.COM - http://www.tv.com/chuck/show/68724/summary.html , and, 2) IMDB - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0934814/ .

Reason for adding these two links: (a) information is up-to-date and pretty authoritative, (b) information at these two sites is much more detail oriented than what is on Wikipedia. That is, more cast, crew, quotationos and episode information. (c) there is no relevant dmoz place for this info, no place on dmoz that I found that provides these cross references, so it seems appropriate to me that these be added to this wiki page.

I am going to this trouble to post here, because the Links section now has a big Warning! type preamble about not adding unless you practically swear an oath that it is essential to life - well, OK, not quite that severe, but it was dramatic enough when I read it.

Also, there are certainly many other wikipedia media show and movie pages that contain a direct link to both to the relevant page at IMDB and TV.com (which used to be TV Tome).

P.S. who votes on this anyway? -- Beginnersview 03:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

2) Here is a link to each episode, its basically an episode guide... with a small description and even some video!! Chuck Episode Guide-Mahalo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkzdiva (talk • contribs) 05:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Chuck New Opening.jpg

Image:Chuck New Opening.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)