Talk:WALL-E: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:21, 29 June 2008

Regarding the article's name, please consult this topic.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WALL-E 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.

Article policies

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

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Film Start‑class

	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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 January 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Talk:WALL-E/Archives

Citation(s) for use

Todd Gilchrist (2007-08-03). "Exclusive Interview: Andrew Stanton". IGN. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

Alientraveller 16:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Horn and Eric Moro (2008-04-07). "Wall•E Preview". IGN. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
Bill Desowitz (2008-04-07). "Stanton Powers Up WALL•E". Animation World Magazine. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

Alientraveller (talk) 13:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alientraveller (talk) 14:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alientraveller (talk) 12:58, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alientraveller (talk) 18:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I intend to implement all these after I see the film, which being in the UK will be after July 18. Of course, you're all welcome to cite them in the meantime using the appropriate citation templates. Alientraveller (talk) 16:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Stanton Gives Up the Goods on WALL-E and JOHN CARTER to Capone!

Alientraveller (talk) 17:40, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ALL EARS ON 'WALL-E'

Alientraveller (talk) 19:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Burtt makes WALL-E talk

Alientraveller (talk) 14:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interview: Andrew Stanton

Alientraveller (talk) 17:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Create the cast section ?

I say we should add the list of cast, I mean we need to get more orgenized.Anonymous person 50 (talk) 14:52, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wall-E to Wall•E

I want so see wall-E so badly! it looks so cute i just love mo walle and eve I thought Wall•E' name was always spelled with a "•", and not just promoted that way. It's just easier to spell it with a hyphen (-). Should it be changed to Wall•E in the article? -- Chris Brack :P 01:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, something to think about. BTW, you should sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). RC-0722 ^361.0/1 20:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, we've already covered this in the opening paragraph. It's a hyphen, regardless of what the hyphen looks like. No need to make typing the character's name more complicated than it need to be. SpikeJones (talk) 03:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My god, didn't we talk about this when the movie was first announced and decided going with the fancy bullet was not necessary? Can someone please move it back to Wall-E, please? SpikeJones (talk) 03:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, there's your ~~~~ -- Chris Brack :P 01:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of undoing an edit today that changed every WALL-E in the article to WALL•E. I would argue that not only is the '•' for all intents and purposes just a stylized hyphen, but in addition, having '•' littered throughout the article is extremely distracting, at least in the typeface I'm looking at. It's like having random boldface scattered everywhere... --Fru1tbat (talk) 15:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am the one that fixed all of the hyphens. I personally like to see things accurate, and as far as I'm concerned, WALL•E has always been properly known as WALL•E. When you undid my edit, you also undid all the corrections I made to AUTO's name. He is not OTT-O. Go look at the character list on the WALL•E website. Anyways, I'm going to edit it again to fix AUTO, but I'll leave WALL•E's name alone for the present. GlobeReacher (talk) 16:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Sorry about that -- I should have been more careful about the other fixes you made. --Fru1tbat (talk) 17:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If y'all are already decided, I won't reopen the argument, but I note that imdb, bcdb, metacritic, and comingsoon.net all spell it with the ·, and I've adjusted the titles in those external links appropriately. —Steve Summit (talk) 17:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the manual of style on trademarks, which says to avoid using special characters.--NapoliRoma (talk) 16:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to accurately portray the name of the movie and the character, it is a "•". If you simply want it so that more people can find it, have a redirect at "WALL-E". to quote the manual, "In the article about a trademark, it is acceptable to use decorative characters the first time the trademark appears, but thereafter, an alternative that follows the standard rules of punctuation should be used." So the name of the article should have a "•". The movie is not "promoted with an interpunct" - the interpunct is part of the name of the film and the character, similar to "I ♥ Huckabees". The entries for both films have been corrupted for the sake of keyboards, not for correctness. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 20:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another useful fact from SPARTAN-984.....

http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/SPARTAN-984 is my homebase.

I can suggest that just one simple look at www.buynlarge.com that the company Buy 'n' Large rules the planet.

Just to state it for those not smart enough to understand "rampant unchecked consumerism" as a company ruling the planet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.13.72.124 (talk) 19:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I love the BnL website! Great satire and social commentary, just like in the movie! Demosthenes, blog 20:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This story sounds veeery familiar...

Just a little interesting thing I noticed. The story to this movie seems a lot like that of an old Sega Genesis game called Vectorman, in the sense that the humans have left earth and left robots there to clean up while they're gone, and eventually one robot is left capable of doing his job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparx-1 (talk • contribs) 06:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting comparison, but if it's worthy of being in the article it'll require the appropriate citation. Alientraveller (talk) 16:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its setup is also very similar to many elements of the Roger Zelazny story "For a Breath I Tarry", although as with the above, I don't know if this is appropriate for addition to the article.--NapoliRoma (talk) 15:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Self Destruct?

"There they discover AUTO's assistant about to destroy the plant by launching it into space in a pod programmed to self destruct" I thought the self destruct was activated because wall-e pressed all of the buttons on the console. The assistant just wanted to send the plant back to earth. Can anyone back me up on this? --Maxhawkins (talk) 16:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought. The earth is pictured as the destination the bot programs in, which would be pointless if he just said to self-destruct. Then WALL-E hit's the button and it says self-destruct in 20 seconds, and he hits it again and it says 10 seconds. 71.212.32.190 (talk) 20:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, Gopher (the assistant) rigged it to self-destruct, and not allow WALL•E to stop it. Earth was the destination set by EVE before Gopher got a hold of it. Reference: http://youtube.com/watch?v=iJ3SRMGhjc4 GlobeReacher (talk) 21:00, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apple IIe startup chime?

That is totally wrong. The sound Wall-E makes when he is fully charged is obviously a Mac start-up chime, not an Apple IIe chime. Proof is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvixWtrraZE That is a start-up beep from a IIe. The referenced link is wrong. Lilmul123 (talk) 21:02, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Find a better source or delete it then. Alientraveller (talk) 21:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The startup chime is the one first created for the Macintosh Quadra by Jim Reekes. Here's an article about the origin of it: [[1]] As for its use in the movie, here's one reference: [[2]] I'll try to update the page. Mahousu (talk) 00:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article is too promotional in nature

First of all let me apologise if I sign this wrong- this is my second comment ever on a discussion page, normally I stick to reading wikipedia and contributing rare edits. This page comes across right now more like an extention of either a fan site or a text portion of the commercial site. I've read MANY other film pages on wikipedia (including Disney ones) and this one stands out- I have to suspect, even, that perhaps employees of Pixar have come and editted this entry. First, obviously the plot section is way too long as the page notes. Secondly, and most importantly to me, the reaction section is not only bulky but also it comes across like someone basically used quotes as a way to talk up the movie. Yes, the movie reaction IS positive, but shouldn't this section come across a bit more like an encyclopedia and less 'promotional'? I think perhaps more summaries of what people have said should be used if necessary to help trim down the size. I think we have to try to balance quoting critics positive reaction with making the reaction section of the article look like it came straight from the promotional site, don't you guys? Coroloro (talk) 21:50, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as you say, the reaction has been overwhelmingly positive, so it will be difficult to get the reception section sounding anything less than a puff piece. However, and speaking as the editor who added the current version of the reception section, I entirely agree that the reviews should be paraphrased better, with fewer direct quotes. Steve ^{T • C} 23:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've reworded the section to look less like a straight lift from the two reviews. The Variety one wasn't too bad, but the Hollywood Reporter review looked like a borderline copyright violation. It could still do with some comments from other sources, which I won't get a chance to add until after the weekend, but let me know if you think the tone is still off. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 00:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Axiom Italics?

Because the Axiom is considered a ship and has a specific proper name, shouldn't the name be italicized? It's italicized when listing the captain of the ship but nowhere else in the article. Traditionally, the names of ships are italicized, so I think this one should be as well. the_one092001 (talk) 22:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note...

Electrocution is a shock that results in death. When WALL-E uses the umbrellas in the thunderstorm, he is shocked, not electrocuted. When AUTO does it (to WALL-E)... it could go either way. Just make a note of that in future edits. :) 71.253.199.254 (talk) 04:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WALL-E and EVE's "kiss"

Just so I have this straight around the middle of the film while WALL-E and EVE are dancing through space a spark goes between their two heads. That is their "kiss". Their kiss is a temporary transfer of memory so when WALL-E loses his memory at the end of the film EVE having gotten WALL-E's memory from earlier is able to return the memory through another kiss. A scientific analysis to explain a seemingly impossible happening in the movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.148.8 (talk) 15:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Voices"?

There are a number of contradictions about the robots' voices which it would be nice if we could clarify:

There's the general statement, "There is little traditional dialogue in the film... To create dialogue, Burtt took various mechanical sounds, and combined them to resemble dialogue." But of course WALL·E's "voice" is credited to Ben Burtt, and EVE's to Elissa Knight.
Specifically, we have at one point that "Burtt used old Maritime military sounds to express [AUTO]'s emotions", but at two other points, AUTO's voice is explicitly credited to MacInTalk.

—Steve Summit (talk) 16:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the year 2815

The full-length trailer states the following: "700 years into the future, mankind will leave our planet, leaving Earth's cleanup in the hands of one incredible machine...". The way this is phrased has the Axiom leaving Earth in the year 2708 instead of 2118. Is this an inconsistency in the trailer vs movie, or are the dates entirely wrong in the article? SpikeJones (talk) 17:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is correct; the trailer is wrong (or worded poorly). I say this based on the movie itself. Mahousu (talk) 18:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the tense is wrong in the trailer in order to make it shorter and sound better to the audience. Correctly, it should have said "700 years into the future, mankind will have left our planet, leaving Earth's cleanup in the hands of one incredible machine." The second part is also incorrect, because when the Axiom departed, Earth was being cleaned up by likely hundreds of thousands (at least) WALL-E robots. Only one (that we know of) is functional by the time the movie starts, but at the time of the Axiom's departure, there were many more allocated to the task. The promotional taglines are meant to entice the viewer, so they're meant to flow together better at the expense of grammatical conciseness. The audience knows what the intent is and the movie clarifies this further. This is similar to the title for the movie Eight Legged Freaks. The lack of hyphenation would grammatically imply that the movie involves eight freaks that each have at least one leg. But clearly, the movie actually refers to freaks that have eight legs, in this case, spiders. the_one092001 (talk) 22:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Closing Credits in plot?

I am for including the story contained in the closing credits within the "Plot" segment as a post-script to the story. At the very least if we start a segment of "Cultural References" it is of note to indicate that the closing credits create a story arc exemplifying key points in art history as well as the restoration of Earth after the Axiom returns.
Fashnable1 (talk) 19:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 == Wall-E to Wall•E ==
+I want so see wall-E so badly! it looks so cute i just love mo walle and eve
 I thought Wall•E' name was always spelled with a "•", and not just promoted that way. It's just easier to spell it with a hyphen (-). Should it be changed to Wall•E in the article? -- Chris Brack :P 01:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 :Hmm, something to think about. BTW, you should sign your posts with four tildes <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki>. '''''[[User:RC-0722|<font color="#CC5500">RC-0722</font>]] <sup>[[Special:Contributions/RC-0722|<font color="#0000FF">361.0</font>]]</sup>/[[User talk:RC-0722|<font color="#FF0000">1</font>]]''''' 20:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)