This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Next (2007 film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shoudn't there be a spoiler tag?-- Irongrip 15:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
External link changed to Next Movie - Official Movie. ( Sudha 03:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC))
Changed the plot summary: from the official site: Next Movie ( Sudha 03:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC))
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)Some of the comparisons in the trivia section seem completely off base. I would have a hard time imagining that this movie is based on Dr. Strangelove, simply because both films feature nuclear bombs. 151.198.44.119 22:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
So what if the producers want to say it's based on Dick's novel? It's not uncommon for producers to want to cash in on a famous writer's name but anyone familiar with Dick's short story can see that it bears no resemblance whatsoever apart from having a precog in it (and even then his powers are very different) - even the term "loosely" is misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.8.53.40 ( talk) 13:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, i think the tag in the opening line about phil dick's story is inappropriately placed. it should be moved down to trivia or marked later on as an influence. this book and movie are not the same at all. this is 'lawnmower man' all over again... i mean seriously, remove it.
Did I miss something, or it this incorrect? It seemed to me that at the beginning, Julianne Moore's boss was barely convinced of his existence.
—wwoods
18:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
"Next is a 2007 comedy loosely based on the science fiction short story "The Golden Man" by Philip K. Dick. The film is directed by Lee Tamahori and stars Nicolas Cage, Julianne Moore, Jessica Biel and Thomas Kretschmann. The film was released April 27, 2007."
Can someone explain to me why Next is considered a comedy? Edgar 20:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
as title. httassadar 20:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know if there was/is any controversy about the film's plot resolution? It seems to me that it would, given how it does end. — metaprimer ( talk) 01:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know if there is going to be a DVD release of Next? If so, when? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.190.109.54 ( talk) 00:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
A big chunk of the Production section is indented for some reason. Is it a block quote from something? If so, it needs a cite.
—wwoods
03:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Ww. The original scripts is so much better. Thank you for publishing it here. I wish they would've made the film with that intent in mind, it would have been a much better, more successful film. Less boringly formatted to Hollywood's "kill the bad guy, save the girl" unimaginative format. The orginial scripts would buzz up so much conrtroversy and debate as to be THE movie of the year.-- Procrastinating@ talk2me 11:26, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
The final paragraph of the plot section is really sloppy:
"In the next scene, Cris and Liz are still sleeping in the hotel. It is before Liz can go outside to be confronted by Ferris. Cris is reflecting that "every time you look into the future, it changes... because you looked at it." Because the nuclear weapon the terrorists could hurt Liz, Cris has been able to see a day into the future. He calls Farris to make a deal. Then he says his goodbye to Liz, asks her to wait for him and goes outside to meet Farris."
This is just plain confusing. "Because the nuclear weapon the terrorists could hurt Liz, Cris has been able to see a day into the future." makes absolutely no sense at all.
It also doesn't mention anyone awakening, so it sounds like all of this happens while they are asleep. Also, they are not in a hotel, but a cabin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.238.108 ( talk) 01:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
The name is spelled each way several times throughout the article.
Ikip ( talk) 09:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
References
Cage mentions that 50 years ago it rained fish in Denmark.
Ikip ( talk) 09:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
I thought he went to the dinner twice a day at 9.08 and not 8.09
For some reason I have no power to change the first mini-paragraph of the article. But, this movie is not even loosely based off from The Golen Man, and quite frankly there are no sources. That's not to say that the screenwriter didn't copy Mr. Dick's idea, but no, this is not based off of The Golden Man. Unless, someone can find evidence. Which, if you dig, you'll find evidence to support my claim. It's like saying Inception is based off from some book about dreams; it's prepostrous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier ( talk • contribs) 16:52, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved, withdrawn No such user ( talk) 14:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Next (2007 film) → Next (film) – There are currently no other films named Next. Eventhorizon51 ( talk) 03:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Next (2007 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Next (2007 film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shoudn't there be a spoiler tag?-- Irongrip 15:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
External link changed to Next Movie - Official Movie. ( Sudha 03:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC))
Changed the plot summary: from the official site: Next Movie ( Sudha 03:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC))
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)Some of the comparisons in the trivia section seem completely off base. I would have a hard time imagining that this movie is based on Dr. Strangelove, simply because both films feature nuclear bombs. 151.198.44.119 22:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
So what if the producers want to say it's based on Dick's novel? It's not uncommon for producers to want to cash in on a famous writer's name but anyone familiar with Dick's short story can see that it bears no resemblance whatsoever apart from having a precog in it (and even then his powers are very different) - even the term "loosely" is misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.8.53.40 ( talk) 13:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, i think the tag in the opening line about phil dick's story is inappropriately placed. it should be moved down to trivia or marked later on as an influence. this book and movie are not the same at all. this is 'lawnmower man' all over again... i mean seriously, remove it.
Did I miss something, or it this incorrect? It seemed to me that at the beginning, Julianne Moore's boss was barely convinced of his existence.
—wwoods
18:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
"Next is a 2007 comedy loosely based on the science fiction short story "The Golden Man" by Philip K. Dick. The film is directed by Lee Tamahori and stars Nicolas Cage, Julianne Moore, Jessica Biel and Thomas Kretschmann. The film was released April 27, 2007."
Can someone explain to me why Next is considered a comedy? Edgar 20:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
as title. httassadar 20:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know if there was/is any controversy about the film's plot resolution? It seems to me that it would, given how it does end. — metaprimer ( talk) 01:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know if there is going to be a DVD release of Next? If so, when? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.190.109.54 ( talk) 00:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
A big chunk of the Production section is indented for some reason. Is it a block quote from something? If so, it needs a cite.
—wwoods
03:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Ww. The original scripts is so much better. Thank you for publishing it here. I wish they would've made the film with that intent in mind, it would have been a much better, more successful film. Less boringly formatted to Hollywood's "kill the bad guy, save the girl" unimaginative format. The orginial scripts would buzz up so much conrtroversy and debate as to be THE movie of the year.-- Procrastinating@ talk2me 11:26, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
The final paragraph of the plot section is really sloppy:
"In the next scene, Cris and Liz are still sleeping in the hotel. It is before Liz can go outside to be confronted by Ferris. Cris is reflecting that "every time you look into the future, it changes... because you looked at it." Because the nuclear weapon the terrorists could hurt Liz, Cris has been able to see a day into the future. He calls Farris to make a deal. Then he says his goodbye to Liz, asks her to wait for him and goes outside to meet Farris."
This is just plain confusing. "Because the nuclear weapon the terrorists could hurt Liz, Cris has been able to see a day into the future." makes absolutely no sense at all.
It also doesn't mention anyone awakening, so it sounds like all of this happens while they are asleep. Also, they are not in a hotel, but a cabin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.238.108 ( talk) 01:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
The name is spelled each way several times throughout the article.
Ikip ( talk) 09:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
References
Cage mentions that 50 years ago it rained fish in Denmark.
Ikip ( talk) 09:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
I thought he went to the dinner twice a day at 9.08 and not 8.09
For some reason I have no power to change the first mini-paragraph of the article. But, this movie is not even loosely based off from The Golen Man, and quite frankly there are no sources. That's not to say that the screenwriter didn't copy Mr. Dick's idea, but no, this is not based off of The Golden Man. Unless, someone can find evidence. Which, if you dig, you'll find evidence to support my claim. It's like saying Inception is based off from some book about dreams; it's prepostrous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier ( talk • contribs) 16:52, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved, withdrawn No such user ( talk) 14:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Next (2007 film) → Next (film) – There are currently no other films named Next. Eventhorizon51 ( talk) 03:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Next (2007 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After 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 these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)