Talk:The Dark Tower (2017 film)

"Promotional poster"

I believe this poster is a fan creation posted to IMDb. I've only seen it there and in a The Wrap article, but it is possible that the writer got it from IMDb. We know that IMDb features user-generated content, so I believe this is most likely a fan poster and not an official one. Any thoughts? κατάσταση 16:33, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

IMDb shouldn't have fan content on its page about the film. If it does, then it also needs to be deleted from IMDb. I'm not sure how we'd know though. McLerristarr | Mclay1 14:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

It's not on the IMDb page, so I think you're right. I'll remove it from the article. McLerristarr | Mclay1 14:24, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Title move

Why was the moved from "The Dark Tower series film adaptation" to "Untitled The Dark Tower series film adaptation"? This is not about the 2017 film itself, that would require a separate article, but the overall process and an overview of the series, should the plans all come to fruition. The intent of this is to be a kind of article like Marvel Cinematic Universe and DC Extended Universe. Jmj713 (talk) 16:24, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't think that's a good idea. I don't know of any articles that are about the process of adapting rather than about the resulting adaptation (which would include a background of the adaptation process). The main topics of the MCU and DCEU articles are the film series. There are articles about film series. If this film leads to a series, then we can make an article about the series, but the first article needs to be about the first film. Info on possible sequels will be included in the first film's article until a second film actually starts to be made, warranting its own article. McLerristarr | Mclay1 14:18, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 28 June 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved with support. (non-admin closure) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 01:52, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

---

The Dark Tower series film adaptation → The Dark Tower (film) – Article is about upcoming film, so should follow naming conventions guideline at WP:NCF. No other The Dark Tower film exists, so "(film)" disambiguation is accurate. Current title is unusual for Wikipedia and inappropriate. What's notable for Wikipedia is the produced film itself, not its long production history (which is covered in the article), and thus the page's title should reflect that. Wikipedical (talk) 21:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

As I wrote above in the "Title move" section, this is envisioned as an overview article for the entire project. Jmj713 (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

As it stands right now, there is no 'series.' It may never happen. Just one film, due out in 2017, which is currently in production. The development history section relates to that film. Once there is an actual, not proposed, series, it would be appropriate to have an encompassing article. -- Wikipedical (talk) 02:27, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Support This page really should be moved. No film series exists as of yet, it's just one film. Tammydemo 14:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Support As there's only one film thus far any article should focus on that. NathanielTheBold (talk) 22:01, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Massive spoilers for series in the introduction?"

The end of the introduction spoils the end of the book series. Most people reading it won't have read the books and might be put off or spoiled. It doesn't belong in that part, maybe under another subheading. Could we get that moved to somewhere else on the page and maybe shortened so as to not give away large plot details? GetRicht (talk) 08:34, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia generally doesn't avoid spoilers. I have no knowledge of the books or film, and the last sentence of the introduction is fairly meaningless to me. It doesn't seem to spoil anything. However, if there is a better way to write the article, you're welcome to edit it. McLerristarr | Mclay1 11:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

The fact that it's a sequel to the books rather than a direct adaptation seems important enough to mention in the lead. —Flax5 11:37, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

There's one case where Wikipedia *DOES* still avoid spoilers, and that's when the work hasn't been released yet. As the film will be very different from the books and will thus also end in a different way, it's save to say the narrative hasn't been released before. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 23:10, 4 March 2017 (UTC)