Talk:Leatherface (2017 film): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:47, 26 February 2018

Leatherface (2017 film) is currently a Film good article nominee. Nominated by Dark Knight 2149 at 04:37, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Anyone who has not contributed significantly to (or nominated) this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 June 2015 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Film: American B‑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
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Horror B‑class 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
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sourcing

Apparently, there is a major difference between how I see sources and how Koala sees them. There is currently a source being used to cite a production start date of March 18. This was originally sourced by SSinsider, which does not appear to pass the kosher test for reliability. It's a website run by 2 people, neither of which appear to have any form of credentialing or identifiable experience in the film industry as reports or direct film workers. Their "partner" sites are even less reliable and there isn't any obvious editorial oversight. The date was then replaced with this source from Den of Geek that cites this article from Deadline as their source. First, we don't cite sources that cite other sources....we go to the original source for the most reliable information. Now, Deadline is considered reliable generally, but Deadline did not actually say production started on May 18. There is no reliable source confirming this specific date. We know from pictures that filming began in May, but not what specific date. These sources need to be removed and it needs to be changed to "May 2015", which is supported by reliable sources. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:32, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As long as a source, even a genre-specific source, has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, we can pretty safely assume, no matter what inspires their publishing, that they check what they publish before they do so. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 00:26, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article Needs Updating

The production portion of this article is now outdated considering it is now December and filming was said to continue trough June. There should also be information on the film's release (when it is scheduled to be released) as well.--Paleface Jack (talk) 21:35, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Updates?

Has there been any new updates on the film? It is slated for a 2016 release but the exact date has not been announced as far as I can tell.--Paleface Jack (talk) 18:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC) The film is slated for an October release in 2016.--Paleface Jack (talk) 23:30, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016

When was this film ever confirmed for a 2016 release? Smells like original research to me. DarkKnight2149 19:08, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB release date

Before anyone tries to add "2 January 2017" as the release date, you should know that IMDB is not a reliable source and that Bloody-Disgusting has just confirmed that that supposed release date is fake ([1]). So unless you have a reliable source, please don't try to add it. Dark Knight 2149 00:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm suspecting that this is just going to do direct to video or it's going to be release in a film festival, if not it may not even be release.--Paleface Jack (talk) 19:54, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

According to this new report, the hold-up has something to do with The Blair Witch's poor box office. Given that Leatherface is completely finished, it would be unwise for Lionsgate/Millenium Films to not release it. I think VOD sounds likely. Of course, cancellation is also a very realistic possibility. Dark Knight 2149 20:53, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We should probably include that into the article since it's important. I'll talk to you more about expanding the L:eatherface article tomorrow when I have the time.--Paleface Jack (talk) 04:01, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New plot details [2]. Dark Knight 2149 21:10, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New References

Here's some new references(will add more later):

http://deadline.com/2015/05/leatherface-nu-image-cannes-bus-657-i-am-wrath-1201420765/

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/leatherface/246002/nu-image-adds-leatherface-to-cannes-market - Don't know if this is trustworthy or not.

http://bloody-disgusting.com/news/3414334/texas-chainsaw-massacre-prequel-leatherface-finally-dated-release/

http://horrornchill.com/news/leatherface-release/ - Possibly untrustworthy.

Missing information

I'm going to look for sources pertaining to the film's extensive reshoots and substantial delay in terms of release. Right now, the only one we have is Bloody-Disgusting stating that it may have had something to do with Blair Witch underperforming. Dark Knight 2149 19:39, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the information in this article will need to be added to the userspace for my Leatherface expansion article. Here's the link if you don't know where it is: User:Paleface Jack/Leatherface (Revision)--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:59, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Paleface Jack: Will do. I've been doing a lot outside of Wikipedia, but rest assured that lending aid to that article is still on my to-do list (as is addressing this bit of feedback). Dark Knight 2149 22:00, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trailer

I'm not sure if it's even notable enough to create a "Marketing" section (probably not), but the trailer is out now. Dark Knight 2149 17:17, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is, as long as there are enough news outlets that announce it as well.--Paleface Jack (talk) 21:46, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent original research (Cast section)

Despite the fact that we know the film is a mystery regarding who becomes the killer ([3], [4], [5]) and that it isn't publicly released until September, various IP addresses/users have been trying to add "Jedidiah Sawyer" and "Leatherface" to Sam Strike and James Bloor in the Cast section without any link to a reliable source. I added these notes to Strike, Bloor, and Sam Coleman in an attempt to stop or slow these edits down, but it hasn't seemed to work. Honestly, the only other thing that I know to do if it continues is request page protection.
It should be noted that, back in early 2015, Sam Strike was initially reported to be playing Leatherface, before the whole mystery angle was clarified by news sources. This might be where some of the rumours are coming from. Dark Knight 2149 00:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I was thinking if we are going for making this article GA and possibly FA status we will need to find some appropriate images to use in this article. I was thinking for the development section we could use an image of Gunnar Hanson since the quote about Leatherface's characterization and inspiration is partially based on Hanson's quote.--Paleface Jack (talk) 15:36, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Paleface Jack: That's certainly possible. One thing that I was think of was potentially including images of Lili Taylor and Stephen Dorff side-by-side in the Reception since they seem to be getting praise from the both negative and positive reviews, similar to this image at Friday the 13th (2009). Just a thought. If we use the Gunnar Hansen image, we could probably use the quote and citation as the image caption. Dark Knight 2149 01:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just tested the edit. Which is better? The image or the quote box? Tagging all users on Talk Page: @Paleface Jack: @Bignole: @MichaelQSchmidt: Dark Knight 2149 01:02, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to use the image, you shouldn't have all that quoted text in the image caption. I would summarize it for the caption, with key points, and use the text itself to enhance the rest of the section. Otherwise, don't use that image. As it was, the text was almost as large as the image itself. A general rule of thumb is that your caption for you image shouldn't contact anything that isn't in the article. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 14:46, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would this experimental edit be any better? ~~I was also thinking about using an image that visually connects the actor to the character, such as this image or this (with the same caption and placement).~~ Those two image upload suggestions are cited to Getty Images and are probably non-free; best to avoid that agency like the plague. Dark Knight 2149 16:07, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Try it and see. If a better image comes along we'll be sure to use it.--Paleface Jack (talk) 03:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Negative reviews!

Just noticed how the rating of the film on Rotten Tomatoes keeps on getting lower and lower. Hopefully it stays positive and doesn't go below 60%, it really looks like it could reinvigorate the franchise.--Paleface Jack (talk) 20:47, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Paleface Jack: As someone who has to wait until October to watch it, I'm honestly not sure what to expect. The film seems to be very divisive by both critics and fans. Some are saying that it's the best TCM films since the original, some are saying that it's one of the worst, and some say that it's just alright. I have a feeling that this going to be one of those films like Man of Steel or Prometheus, that everyone disagrees on. Dark Knight 2149 21:27, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully not, although I'm not sure what to think at the moment. Hopefully it's more positive.--Paleface Jack (talk) 23:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC) (As the rating continues to drop on Rt) Stupid critics. My guess is their comparing this to the original film instead of judging it on it's own terms. Has happened to many a film unfortunately.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:28, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Paleface Jack: I watched it yesterday. To be honest, I was actually very disappointed. I wasn't expecting it to be as good as the original, but I was unsatisfied with the origin and how it ended. When the credits rolled, I was thinking "Wait, that's it?" To each their own, though. Have you seen it yet? Dark Knight 2149 00:53, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did the story make sense for the character?--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:38, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Paleface Jack: As a whole, the movie itself wasn't a disaster by any means. However, at 90 minutes, the film was just too short. Without spoiling anything, the directing, acting, and writing are all good (it also has great cinematography and atmosphere), but it feels incomplete. Most of the plotlines and characters felt underdeveloped and like they needed more screentime. The reason I found the origin itself to be unsatisfying is because it's overly simplistic and doesn't address a lot of Leatherface's character traits (he transitions from human to full-on monster very quickly).

After all the delays, it feels like the studio got nervous and interfered, removing a lot of material to reach the standard 90-minute runtime of a Texas Chainsaw Massacre film. It could easily benefit from an Extended Director's Cut. If you haven't seen it yet, it is available to rent on V.O.D.. Dark Knight 2149 18:53, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I bet you it will get an extended cut.--Paleface Jack (talk) 18:56, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DVD/Blu-Ray Release

I found a couple of news articles claiming that Leatherface will internationally released on DVD/Blu-Ray on 19 December 2017, with images of alleged cover art and everything. This is just from today. Are these sources legit? Source 1, Source 2 Dark Knight 2149 02:43, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The strange case of Leatherface's international box office

I'm not sure if anyone has been following the edit history enough to observe the mystical adventures of this film's anomalous international box office, but the reported earnings keep fluctuating up and down. Have you ever seen a movie make less money over time? Yeah... I have no idea what is going on with that. My best guess is that the initial reports over-estimated how much the film earned and they just keep adjusting it. Either way, this is odd. Dark Knight 2149 01:38, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cannibals?

As far as I remember, the Saywers were supposed to be cannibals. Why are they feeding their victims to their pigs?--2003:6F:8C56:5115:5DA7:BFCB:535:32C8 (talk) 15:56, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The cannibalism was heavily implied in the original, but is almost never referenced in Texas Chainsaw 3D or Leatherface (hence why we shouldn't mention it in the article). On the Blu-Ray special features for Texas Chainsaw 3D, they outright admit that the studio was afraid of controversy after another film they made received backlash for including cannibalism, so they dialed it back.

In contrast, Leatherface was made more gruesome in response to fan complaints that Texas Chainsaw 3D wasn't violent enough (though still suspiciously devoid of cannibalism). Dark Knight 2149 07:54, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answer. Great information.--2003:6F:8C56:51E1:6593:474E:FBCD:92EB (talk) 09:47, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 07:54, 25 February 2018 edit Darkknight2149 (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 21,289 edits →‎Cannibals? ← Previous edit		Revision as of 09:47, 26 February 2018 edit undo 2003:6f:8c56:51e1:6593:474e:fbcd:92eb (talk) →‎Cannibals? Next edit →
Line 107:		Line 107:

	: In contrast, <em>Leatherface</em> was made more gruesome in response to fan complaints that <em>Texas Chainsaw 3D</em> wasn't violent enough (though still suspiciously devoid of cannibalism). '''[[User:Darkknight2149\|<span style="color:grey;">Dark</span>]][[User talk:Darkknight2149\|<span style="color:black;">Knight</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Darkknight2149\|<span style="color:grey;">2149</span>]]''' 07:54, 25 February 2018 (UTC)		: In contrast, <em>Leatherface</em> was made more gruesome in response to fan complaints that <em>Texas Chainsaw 3D</em> wasn't violent enough (though still suspiciously devoid of cannibalism). '''[[User:Darkknight2149\|<span style="color:grey;">Dark</span>]][[User talk:Darkknight2149\|<span style="color:black;">Knight</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Darkknight2149\|<span style="color:grey;">2149</span>]]''' 07:54, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

			::Thanks for your answer. Great information.--[[Special:Contributions/2003:6F:8C56:51E1:6593:474E:FBCD:92EB\|2003:6F:8C56:51E1:6593:474E:FBCD:92EB]] ([[User talk:2003:6F:8C56:51E1:6593:474E:FBCD:92EB\|talk]]) 09:47, 26 February 2018 (UTC)