Talk:Life of Pi (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Controversy: Hypocrisy of the American Humane Society[edit]

There should be an explanation of the inhumane treatment of King, the tiger used for the film. Nearly drowned, suffered repeatedly, and yet the American Humane Association gives their "no animals were harmed" rubber-stamp in the credits all the same. See this feature article for more info: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/feature/ 98.200.236.227 (talk) 05:32, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Reference to use[edit]

Thanks, Erik (talk | contribs) 14:27, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

"[...] due to Lee's desire to have an entirely international cast"[edit]

This is rather unclear, and unsourced. It appears to mean "a desire to have no Americans", as that's often what "international" as used in the US is an odd "politeism" for, but that'd be an odd thing to ascribe to the director without greater clarify. 84.203.32.85 (talk) 09:17, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

  •  Done. I added a quote from Lee on the topic. -Classicfilms (talk) 16:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

NPOV Section[edit]

I'm not part of the Wikipedia constabulary, but this sentence seemed quite out of place in the encyclopedic format:

"However, there are strong reasons to believe that the allegation is not without substance".

I don't want to just nuke it because I do not know the correct "official" reasons for which I would do so, but hopefully someone more experienced with WP can take a look. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davepl (talkcontribs) 00:18, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

List of articles[edit]

I will periodically add to this list of articles for potential use. -Classicfilms (talk) 16:46, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Plot[edit]

Why was the plot removed? I understand it is similar to the article for the book but I see nothing inaccurate. There is no consideration for spoilers here. Purplesky91 (talk) 18:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

The plot section at the time of my edit mentioned that Pi invented the story about sharing the lifeboat with his mother, the cook, and the sailor. While this is certainly one interpretation, it could also be interpreted that this was the real course of events and Pi made up the other story as a form of escapism from his traumatic experiences. I changed the wording of the plot section to make it more ambiguous in this regard. --165.123.239.244 (talk) 04:12, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Critical reception[edit]

Removed a strange reference from here that seems to just have been tagged on to the end of someone else's sentence. Not saying that the review is bad (Austrian website i believe), but the way it was included in the article was poor and seemed out of place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.146.91 (talk) 21:37, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Plot summary[edit]

Film plot summaries on WIkipedia need to be between 600 and 800 words. This one is over 1000. It is not necessary to recount what happens in every scene. I will try to start cutting it down to a reasonable length. Invertzoo (talk)

It is now 626 words. Invertzoo (talk) 14:24, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

What About the Poor Rat?![edit]

I viewed the movie at the "Royal Twin Theater" in Pauls Valley, OK., and so I didn't think about the lack of 3-D until afterwards, like when I read the article here. As I read said article, I didn't think about the poor rat, until later. Now I'm back to rectify that matter. So, what about the poor Rat?! There was a rat among the animal survivors, but the article for both the book, which I accidently read first, and the movie, don't mention the poor rat. I use "poor", because the rat seemed to me, to be seeking help from Pi, when it climbed up to his head, like a pet rat might do. Squeamish people in the audience squeeled during that scene, and then gasped when Pi tossed said rat into the mouth of the tiger, as opposed to "the eye of the tiger". In retrospect, it was like they were playing catch, or that he was giving the cat a treat. But anyway, why no listing of the cat among the animal survivors? Also, later, in the human parallel story version, the rat is once again left out. Which human would be a match up for the rat's role? Ignoring the rat in that version, seems to me, to infer or imply that in either case, the rat was just a rat. Hmm. I guess that's all for now, until someone replies. Hopefully with an answer as to why the rat was left out of the list of surviving animals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoStarDragon1 (talkcontribs) 06:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

HEY! I came back to edit it and insert my tildes and then it still says it was "unsigned" anyway. What's up with that? Is that why that confusing pop-up happened? But anyway, I had inserted, "(OOPS! I forgot my tildes! Oh, pun time! 'This year's Tilde Award Nominees are.....')" LeoStarDragon1 (talk) 06:53, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

When Pi is recounting his alternative tale to the insurance investigators he says, "The Cook was a disgusting man, he ate a Rat!", so the rat has no human counterpart - it remains a rat in both stories, the only difference is in which character eats it - in one story it is the cook (counterpart of the hyena) and in the other it is the Tiger, Richard Parker (counterpart of Pi). Fanx (talk) 10:03, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Useful CGI information for article[edit]

The video states that 87% of the tiger footage in the movie was CGI and 13% was real. 10 Million hairs were animated for the tigers fur. • SbmeirowTalk • 05:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Pi's Faith[edit]

"although Pi gives up Islam through his thinking, he fully embraces Christianity." I don't remember this happening. In fact, I recall the writer saying something like 'So you're a Hindu, a Christian and a Muslim. Are you Jewish as well?'. So, yah, removing. MatrixM (talk) 08:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Actually I do think the movie implies that he gave up Islam, as when the writer asks him about the present time he answered that he was "Catholic Hindu". He only was muslim when he was a kid.--Krystaleen 08:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
He does say that he is a "Catholic Hindu", but that does not mean he has given up Buddhism or Islam. One of the themes of the novel is the universal nature of Pi's religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.75.173.232 (talk) 11:01, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

improvement[edit]

I prefer this article be re-assessed to something like C or B. furthermore, I'd prefer that key info from these sources be added:

---- Kailash29792 (talk) 10:12, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

BHO retracted "proof" ?[edit]

There was a statement here that the current President of the United States said that this film was "an elegant proof of God". Was that found to be false? If not it certainly needs to come back. Saw this film a few days ago and it's not even about anything remotely real, can't possibly be a proof of anything, so that statement has a value in the historical record Wikipedia provides, like other events of similar import/notability. 76.180.168.166 (talk) 07:54, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Guess it was the book article, bears repeating here, he was talking about the movie. 76.180.168.166 (talk) 17:35, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Article Goofs![edit]

1) article mistakenly links name of ship "tsimtsum" to some obscure hebrew term. unless there is a citation for this, it is unsubstantiated. it is far more likely to be a chinese/cantonese term, coincidentally similar to the hebrew one.

[no, i won't get into the SOURCE MATERIAL goof of giving a japanese ship a non-japanese name in the first place. or of having it ply an india-phils-canada route (impossible under international law), for that matter.]

2) article says tiger "appeared" from under the tarp, which completely ignores the fact that Pi saw it swim aboard in the first place.

3) max and the cats article says it's about a jaguar, not a panther.

4) any lawsuits related to the above? you don't just mention that a book/movie which grossed $600 million plagiarized something else as a passing comment!

5) any complaints about the racist portrayal of the japanese? it should go in the controversies section.

6) i contest the line "more fantastic story" in the plot summary. they are EQUALLY fantastic, and his tossing out a second one gives rise to the idea that NEITHER are true. in fact, it leaves this viewer wondering whether he was simply shipwrecked ALONE in the first place, and endured 227 days of flat-out BOREDOM. he himself refers to them as "two stories".

aside from a quick mention of A O Scott's interpretation, article is very non-NPOV in dismissing this take.

i had a lot more, but someone keeps vandalizing my post. so i'll leave it at this for now. 209.172.25.34 (talk) 19:54, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: #2 - Pi actually extends an oar to help Richard Parker into the boat when the tiger comes swimming by, or at least begins to until he realizes who/what the swimmer is. But it's too late by that time, and Richard Parker is able to climb aboard. The article makes it sound like Richard Parker had been in the lifeboat all along. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:2C4:DE01:4414:A972:990:2C21 (talk) 15:38, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

American?[edit]

How can this film be called "American". I have before placed a BFI reference before supporting UK / Canada / Australia / Taiwan. I used the same guideline that User: Taderuer gave me, on the talk page for Shaun of the Dead. This guideline was then neglected on that page and called by others to me as a "suggestion". This issue should be corrected on Life of Pi. Nobody is saying that the film is not "American". It just isn't only "American". I have added the reference here http://explore.bfi.org.uk/50c30bfa91d65 --WARNER one (talk) 16:01, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

These issues (determining a film's country) are never that clear, but the vast majority of sources, such as the New York Film Festival [1], in which this film had its world premiere, the American Film Institute, the Toronto International Film Festival, and many others, only identifies the United States, and nothing else.--Taderuer (talk) 13:49, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Haishang Films is co-producing, which makes it an American-Taiwanese co-production, as far as I'm concerned. It should be easy if you go by the official credits - usually printed on posters, but not even large websites care to pay attention to that, which makes it confusing for referencing those same sites later. Festival sites sometimes get lazy too. Trust only official credits. Production companies should define the film's country imho; neither financers, nor distributors, nor executives, nor filming locations. Punkalyptic (talk) 00:46, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Spoken languages[edit]

French should be added to the spoken languages. Depardieu's character only speaks French, characters interacting with him also speak French. Kumagoro-42 01:04, 27 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumagoro-42 (talkcontribs)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Life of Pi (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:38, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Life of Pi (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:30, 23 December 2017 (UTC)