Talk:127 Hours/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about 127 Hours. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Spoiler
Perhaps the following sentence, which is included in this entry, should edited, so as to avoid the obvious spoiler.
"The film is based on the true story of Aron Ralston, the American mountain climber who amputated his own arm to free himself after being trapped by a boulder in Robbers Roost, Utah for nearly five days in May 2003." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.193.239 (talk • contribs) 13:24, October 18, 2010
- While we should not censor spoilers per WP:SPOILER, I simplified the premise in the lead section. We should still preserve the details in the synopsis section and discussion in the rest of the article body. Erik (talk | contribs) 17:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
- Really what has been done has made it confusing to whether or not the actual story is a true one or not. The way the opening paragraph is worded makes it sound like the actor is playing just another character. 124.191.165.101 (talk) 23:06, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- I added "real-life". Does that help? Erik (talk | contribs) 23:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- And I've added a link to the article on the autobiography Between a Rock and a Hard Place, which clarifies everything. Let other web sites fuss over "Spoiler Alerts" - the Wikipedia does not. --T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 20:42, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- I added "real-life". Does that help? Erik (talk | contribs) 23:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Really what has been done has made it confusing to whether or not the actual story is a true one or not. The way the opening paragraph is worded makes it sound like the actor is playing just another character. 124.191.165.101 (talk) 23:06, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Please don't spoil it for everyone - I'd give my right arm to see this film. Lugnuts (talk) 10:29, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
I just wanted to see on Wikipedia what is the movie genre and some asshole spoiled whole movie to me in first article sentence. If he is not out of reach, I would just slap his face for a good measure.
Um... the film is well-known and well-advertised as being based on a true story and being based on a book written by the guy who the movie is about. How could any line possibly spoil the movie when the movie was advertised on the same apparent 'spoiler'? Stop being a little poopyhead — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.138.234.82 (talk) 12:11, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Nationality
The nationality of this film is under dispute. The infobox and cats now say American while the lede says British. It seems Boyle, who is English, considers it "very much a British film".[1] However the film was shot and produced in the States and takes place in the States and stars American actor Franco. It seems the nationality is very unclear. I propose it be removed per Template:Infobox film. BOVINEBOY2008 05:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
- Removed per guidelines, if there is a conflict of nationality then it's best left out. --Τασουλα (Shalom!) (talk) 18:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
- Well it was filmed in the US, but it wasn't necessarily produced there. The principal production companies seem to be British. 86.129.245.47 (talk) 13:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- I also think we should put the nationality as British since, per Template:Infobox film, we have "a reliable source that clearly identifies the nationality in a descriptive capacity". Laurent (talk) 16:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- I would make the argument that it also is American as it was named a top 10 film at the American Film Institute Awards 2010. BOVINEBOY2008 16:57, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- There again the AFI is well known for appropriating British films in its Top 100 lists. The AFI site says eligibility for their awards is based on having "significant creative and/or production elements from the United States." Being set/shot in the US and having an American star would meet those criteria, but quite a lot of films that are not US productions could probably meet them too.86.129.244.141 (talk) 20:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Very true, but I would think that it would ignorant to say that it isn't a signification part an American. I consider it British and American and I think major institutes in both the UK and the US have recognized that. Granted, it is most significantly a British (hence it winning Best British Film of 2010 at the BAFTA Awards), but it is in some significant part, American. BOVINEBOY2008 21:20, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- I think it's pretty obvious it's a British film considering it's written produced and directed by British people. The actors playing in a movie make no difference in a movie's nationality. The studios are also British. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.233.92.150 (talk) 15:57, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- Very true, but I would think that it would ignorant to say that it isn't a signification part an American. I consider it British and American and I think major institutes in both the UK and the US have recognized that. Granted, it is most significantly a British (hence it winning Best British Film of 2010 at the BAFTA Awards), but it is in some significant part, American. BOVINEBOY2008 21:20, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- There again the AFI is well known for appropriating British films in its Top 100 lists. The AFI site says eligibility for their awards is based on having "significant creative and/or production elements from the United States." Being set/shot in the US and having an American star would meet those criteria, but quite a lot of films that are not US productions could probably meet them too.86.129.244.141 (talk) 20:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- I would make the argument that it also is American as it was named a top 10 film at the American Film Institute Awards 2010. BOVINEBOY2008 16:57, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- I also think we should put the nationality as British since, per Template:Infobox film, we have "a reliable source that clearly identifies the nationality in a descriptive capacity". Laurent (talk) 16:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Well it was filmed in the US, but it wasn't necessarily produced there. The principal production companies seem to be British. 86.129.245.47 (talk) 13:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Soundtrack
For info, I've split out the soundtrack into its own article here. Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 10:30, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Spoiler
Please remove the spoiler in the top section "for more than five days in early 2003 before amputating his arm with a dull knife." For people who just want some information about the movie without having to know the plot... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.248.77.241 (talk) 04:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- WP:SPOILER generally discourages that sort of change, but in this case the story is relatively well-known. I think this particular film is actually enhanced when the viewer knows the ending, anyway... --Fru1tbat (talk) 05:56, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Viewer should not now ending before movie. Otherwise, it would be told at the begining. It is just a spoiler, added by intention from anonymous editor. I am really pissed of now and I am glad that he is out of my reach because that sort of douchebag are just asking for beating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.207.31.93 (talk) 20:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
- Furthermore, please read Wikipedia is not censored. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
- Do you know what is censorship? It is not censorship if you remove some information from first sentence and leave it in plot. Wikipedia is not here for contributor but for readers and 0% of readers want to see spoiler at first article sentence. You can get all the info from plot section if you want but you will not read it if you want only some general info and not spoiler. First of all, use common sense and try not to be sociopath who only knows some rules without understanding. Then try to read articles about other movies on Wikipedia and you will not find any spoilers outside of plot section. It is not so hard to understand. 88.207.31.93 (talk) 08:54, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
- I know. I just don't want others to add major spoilers within the premise in a lead section of an article. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:37, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
See also
I created a "See also" section with Gerry and Into the Wild. I don't expect anyone to contest the edit, as anyone who's seen the three movies can't help being struck by their thematic similarity. But if someone should still insist on contesting it, I'd appreciate knowing why.—Biosketch (talk) 12:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)