Talk:The City of Lost Children

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject class rating[edit]

Unresolved
 – Article still provides virtually no encyclopedic coverage of the film, even almost 3 years later.

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 08:11, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And a human has re-rated it. This is clearly still a stub - even the IMDb page provides more information than this does. There's nothing here but the barest of statistical facts. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 03:48, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Plot" section needs work[edit]

Unresolved
 – Plot section needed improvement, but was mostly just deleted, and so needs to be rewritten.

While it's very informative, the Plot section is very disorganized and doesn't really follow the events of the movie in a coherent fashion. Oddity- (talk) 01:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, one could say that the plot itself is not very coherent. ;) But the synopsis halts about halfway thru the movie, with no sense of how events in this movie, at points, are interrelated like parts of a Rube Goldberg machine. -- llywrch (talk) 01:53, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As of my writing, the entire plot section has been reduced to two sentences. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 03:48, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Versions[edit]

There's a shorter (usual) cut at 1:12, and a longer 1:14 version released on region-free and possibly unofficial DVD (available on Amazon.com) called The City of Lost Children – As Originally Released (Korean release, with audio available in French or English, and subtitles available in French, English or Korean). This article should inform us as to the differences between the versions. I may order it and do the update myself, but anyone else should feel free to beat me to it. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 03:48, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As example of Steampunk[edit]

Klaw, Rick (2008). "The Steam-Driven Time Machine: A Pop Culture Survey". In Ann and Jeff VanderMeer. Steampunk. San Francisco, CA: Tachyon Publications. p. 355 This ref discusses the film as an example of Steampunk. Ref isn't incorporated into text of article yet, but is here to support category inclusion. AstroCog (talk) 17:42, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Video Game[edit]

There's a mention of the video game, but I think it deserves its own page. Anybody with enough info to contribute? Punkalyptic (talk) 04:54, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • oppose split. It's not a major game; just a film tie-in and not a great one of those. The appropriate level of coverage is about right with a section within the film article. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

of course it "meets WP:NGAMES". "The appropriate level of coverage" here didn't even mention it's a Psygnosis production or that it was released in 1997, I had to add such absolute basic data. Here's a lot of sample reviews for this "not major" game: http://www.mobygames.com/game/city-of-lost-children/mobyrank SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 20:25, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

strong support You're the man, thanks for bringing this up again! I've yet to find the courage to do it, partially cause I still haven't played the game and I would enter into spoiler territory to push for a split, but better late than never. And yes, I don't think anyone can disagree with it meeting WP:NGAMES, I own far less popular games that have their own page. I would go even further to claim that the game is more popular than the actual movie. Punkalyptic (talk) 21:09, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Put the plot at the bottom with spoiler warnings![edit]

Allow me to utilize this page's talk section to further reiterate that not everyone looking for information on a film or story is seeking to have it retold in its entirety a la Cliff's Notes! This practice is pervasive in Wikipedia and is actively rude to those who are seeking some basic information on a film. Plot retellings should NOT be the first thing on an encyclopedic entry about a fictional work, and should furthermore be hidden unless specifically desired by the reader. MAKE IT STOP! Thank you! 66.25.191.98 (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The placement of the film plot directly after the lead section and the inclusion of spoilers in it without warning (other than that implied by the section title "Plot") are both per Wikipedia guidelines established after much debate--see MOS:FILM and WP:Spoilers. If you want to see these guidelines amended, I would advise raising the matter at the talk pages of those guidelines. I think that it would be difficult to substantively change the established guidelines, but your chances will be improved if you review the archived debates to familiarize yourself with the arguments on the other side and then make a specific proposal that takes those arguments into consideration. If this sounds like a lot of time and effort (and it does to me), well, I'm sorry, but the community spent a lot of time and effort to establish these guidelines, so they ought not to be lightly abandoned. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 19:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well said, Hobbes! ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 19:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_City_of_Lost_Children&oldid=1210482082"