Talk:9 (2009 animated film)
Film: American Start‑class | ||||||||||
|
Plot?
The article goes directly to discussing the characters without referencing any plot. If we have details on the characters, there should be info available about the story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.22.210.129 (talk) 18:39, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Vandalism Fact Check
Since there seems to be at least one user interested in adding themselves to the cast and crew of this movie, I thought this might make fact checking a little easier for future editors. See: http://www.filminfocus.com/focusfeatures/film/9/cast-crew Hanzo (talk) 12:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
LittleBigPlanet
Uh, hey all. I was just wondering if the movie or short film inspired the sackboy design in LittleBigPlanet. They just seem crazy similar, so I thought maybe the design team had some input. Merry Christmas, BTW. 70.179.98.58 (talk) 23:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
- The short film was done way before LittleBigPlanet -- 91.14.222.23 (talk) 09:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not saying Little Big Planet copied off 9 (I'm not that stupid), I'm saying 9 copied off Little Big Planet!71.31.84.190 (talk) 01:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- The short film was done way before LittleBigPlanet. --There are no names left (talk) 07:14, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Jungian Archetypes?
Is there an argument to say that this film is a demonstration of the 9 most common archetypes in storytelling? This film seems to play on this really quite heavily. Or more specifically, the 9 Enneagrams. See: http://www.listology.com/list/character-archetypes
Anyone got any background as to whether this was the motivation for the film?
Bobbyfletch85 (talk) 00:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Trailer music
I recall seeing a theatrical trailer that included Welcome Home but had another song at the start which I believe was "The Captain" by The Knife. Can anyone verify that there is indeed another song there? I have no sound on this box... --Mattgcn (talk) 21:38, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Backstory
The backstory section was completely unsourced, and way too much plot. Deleted. 67.169.145.35 (talk) 10:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
sections
Shouldn't there be seperate sections for each of the character The Movie Master 1 (talk) 23:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Short Film Move
I have moved the short film to 9 (short film). I propose we move this one to 9 (film) Delta (Talk) 04:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank You
Thank you, whoever fleshed this article out. I tought I would have to do it, but you did the job for me. I don't have an account, by I have contributed frequently to this article. Thanks for the help. - A wikipedian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.93.153.143 (talk) 01:41, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
5's Eyepatch
Have noted that the summary for 5 had the origin of his eyepatch described as a monster attack. However, the Scientist's sketches show 5 already with an eyepatch, indicating it was part of the original design. Edited the summary to account for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ObsidianWolf (talk • contribs) 02:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Needs a plot section
As of now it just looks horrible with just character descriptions and nothing else. RobJ1981 (talk) 00:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Old-style film reels = Alternate past/future?
Obviously no one can say for sure 'when' this film took place as it it's entirely fiction... however, I feel that there should be some mention of the idea that all of the 'war footage' between the humans and the machines resembles the sort of old-style film reels you would see during WWII... couple that with the fact that (aside from a few holograms) most of the technology appears to be from the first half of the 20th century, it seems to be an alternate 'past' of sorts. In my opinion it's worth some mention but the good folks of wikipedia deserve some say. Might I add, I realize that there is a 'timeline' section already in the article, but I feel like it downplays the idea that these events took place in a sort of alternate past - watching the film it seemed obvious to me that the time period was (at the very latest) the 1940's-50's - I feel this is nearly a 'major' part of the film.... although it is never confirmed. To be fair, I'm not 100% on wikipedia's rules and where this would stand.
Its set up sometime to look like around WWII. but the birth of 9 is on 9/9/09, which is the date the chancellor set up to be by when the state ruled the world. Sourced from backstory website.
I agree the war footage, as well as most of the tech used within (rifles, planes, artillery, tanks, cars, etc.) look vintage 1940s to me, but I think "alternate universe" might be a better-suited term. Unless it's specified somewhere, the 09 in 9/9/09 doesn't necessarily mean 2009, though. It could mean 1909, 1809, etc.. And let's not forget, 9/9/2009 was the film's release date. Spartan198 (talk) 03:58, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- The director called it a "parallel universe" in one of the DVD special features. Spartan198 (talk) 06:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- In the DVD extras they talk about the time period being WWII but with some features of modern of future technology. The banners and military resonate with the Nazis while clearly not being them. Definitely alternate or parallel reality rather than any time in *our* past or future. Sheherazahde (talk) 18:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I seem to remember when I saw this in theaters there was a newspaper that had a date from the 1930's. Was it 1936? Maybe not. "Over the Rainbow" (released 1939) is in the movie, so it takes place sometime after its release. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:48, 4 May 2010 (UTC).
Cat Beast
Altered the Cat Beast entry, as it had listed it as a cyborg, rather than a machine. If it were a cyborg it would have living tissue integrated with machine parts. Since the skull is not a living part, but simply used as the head(If you look, you can see that the jaws are opened and closed by the machine, rather than using ligaments or muscle), it is just a machine, albeit a very primitive and savage one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ObsidianWolf (talk • contribs) 15:18, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Spelling?
The whole article suffers from bad spelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbola (talk • contribs) 21:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- Then go through the article and fix the spelling errors. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 22:55, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- You can use the spell checker feature on Internet Explorer when in the editing mode. PNW Raven (talk) 21:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Reception - Rotten Tomatoes
I think saying that it received "mixed to generally favourable" reviews is being a bit too generous towards it. That and Rotten Tomatoes has it summarized as "Rotten", not "Fresh" as the article states. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.87.5.84 (talk) 06:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
we need a reference or citationBread Ninja (talk) 17:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
images
i dont believe we ened any images on the producer and directors in the characters section>Bread Ninja (talk) 17:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
I disagree, if somebody studied the different characters they could all be made with pages of their own. of IMDB there is a picture of each individual character
References to the short film
Should there be a section about references to the short film in the movie? There are a good few. «-Bfa-» 14:14, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Plot Differences Between RU and EN Versions
The back-story is COMPLETELY different for the two versions, and can severely change the way people interpret the movie. It should at least be noted. Why has it been deleted (without reason)? Genome852 (talk) 05:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
- Were the differences sourced to reliable sources? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
- As someone from xussr, I can comment that many movies here differ from their originals because translators feel creative. Probably more than half of movies are released under titles that have little or nothing to do with original title, as for the plot itself, it does not typically suffer beyond one third of poorly translated dialogs. There are, however, notable exceptions, which often happen when unofficial screen copies are translated by third parties and spread through torrents. With this particular movie, I have seen two different translations that are not "COMPLETELY different" from what this article says. 95.133.200.225 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC).
Characters
Extended content
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
The characters 1 through 9 are officially known as stitchpunks, as named by Shane Acker.
|
Taken from the article under WP:TRIVIA. Needs some good editing before this heap of useless information should be reinserted. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 14:03, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
- Collapsed the list. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 14:17, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
- And how should this "heap of useless information" be best edited so it can be reinserted? Evilgidgit (talk) 22:49, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
- To begin with, you might find somewhere, anywhere in the film where they are called stitchpunks, or where the creatures are named. Otherwise, it's all just original research. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
- I have added fact tags all over that OR plot segment, since there is nowhere in the film where those names are used. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 23:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah you went a bit overboard with them. They should have been placed at the first incidence of each of the disputed names. --Captain Infinity (talk) 00:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- I've cleaned that mess up; didn't look like you were going to do it. Reasons given in the edit summary. --Captain Infinity (talk) 20:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
- I have added fact tags all over that OR plot segment, since there is nowhere in the film where those names are used. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 23:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- To begin with, you might find somewhere, anywhere in the film where they are called stitchpunks, or where the creatures are named. Otherwise, it's all just original research. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
- And how should this "heap of useless information" be best edited so it can be reinserted? Evilgidgit (talk) 22:49, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
- And my fact tags got removed again without sources. I will keep restoring them till they're sourced, and will start reporting editors for vandalism for removing them. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 00:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Stitchpunk is a genre, not a label for the ragdoll automatons
Try reading about the origin of the word "stitchpunk" and you will see that it was intended to be a descriptive word for the design elements that give the film a distinctive look and feel for the viewer. I suggest calling characters 1 through 9 "self-aware automatons" or similar. Using the word "stitchpunk" over and over in the article just seems amateurish somehow, especially since it is not once referred to in the film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.35.22.193 (talk) 16:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
- Totally agree. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 04:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Article is still calling the dolls "stitchpunks" as of 4/25/10. I have gone through and removed all such references, changing them to "creations" as per the "9 Scientist" Facebook page which uses this term throughout its promotional entries. 76.218.69.148 (talk)
Agreed this should not be used to refer to the characters, took all out I could find. sherpajohn (talk) 03:21, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
- Still a lot of stitchpunk references, especially in the characters section. Was it decided to leave them there? Was the term used in an interview or something? --Stevehim (talk) 12:43, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Grammatical structure of the article
Is it possible for someone to add some? I suspect whoever added the plot summary did not have English as their first language. There is little indication who is being referred to at any given point and perspective shifts continually occur in the writing, as well as mixing past, present and future tense in the same sentence.
Characters section: 6's key and 5's eye
Is the key actually shown in the movie? I didn't see it until the Special Features showed deleted scenes.
What about 5's eye? Was it in the original design . . . then the info for the character should be corrected.
Ed8r (talk) 21:49, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Overlinking
There seems to be a tendency for some editors of this page to overlink (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Linking#Overlinking for what may constitute "overlinking"). I am cleaning up some of the excessive links. 76.218.69.148 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:10, 6 May 2010 (UTC).
Females
Under 7 it says she is the only female, but then 3 and 4 are called twin sisters. --Stevehim (talk) 16:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Coven?
I'm not sure 'coven' is an appropriate group pronoun to describe the protagonists. A coven is a group of witches or vampires. How about homunculi or automata? Adzze (talk) 01:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
:I agree that "coven" is inappropriate. I would be happier with "group". Sheherazahde (talk) 18:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Plot summary
According to the plot summary, this movie takes place before the invention of the paragraph. 96.228.30.201 (talk) 05:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)