Talk:Law Abiding Citizen

Philadelphia Low‑importance

	Philadelphia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Philadelphia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhiladelphiaWikipedia:WikiProject PhiladelphiaTemplate:WikiProject PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

United States: Cinema

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force.

"Heroic but corrupt..."[edit]

Haven't seen the film yet, but does THAT line ever give a mixed message... Is that a proper description in anyone else who has seen the movie's opinion? 214.3.138.234 (talk) 18:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)Steve[reply]

"anti-convulsant and cardiotoxic..."[edit]

I havent seen this film yet , but in the description it says that the cardiotoxic (most likely potassium chloride) is replaced with a anti-convulsant . The anti-convulsants used in executions (primarily sodium pentobarbital) are the only drugs that provide pain-relief in the sense that they cause deep anesthesia . The drug renowned to cause the greatest pain in the lethal injection trifecta is the muscle relaxant 'pancuronium bromide' which causes paralysis , inducing suffocation . Anti-convulsants are widely regarded as the most painless of all fatally toxic drugs , which is why they're the standard for assisted suicide in countries where its legal . Muscle relaxants cause great suffering , but the paralysis disguises and masks the pain . Cardiotoxics are less painful but still very painful as they induce a heart attack much sooner than muscle relaxants alone . I guess my point is , the explanation of drug tampering in the films description makes no sense . (I've watched the film now and the scene shows a suggestion that the tampered drug was the 'muscle relaxant' not the 'anti-convulsant' . And later on in the film he says he switched the potassium chloride for something 'more deliberate' . It had nothing to do with anti-convulsants so the description is wrong . It should be changed ) . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.143.181 (talk) 20:07, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Community Review[edit]

If we're going to include the Rotten Tomatoes critics' rating, I think we should mention the community rating as well. It's notable that there is such a massive gap between the two (25% vs. 94%). 66.157.148.151 (talk) 00:35, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As of the 9th of January - 2010, Rotten Tomatoes was is of 24% (131 reviews) versus RT-Community's 76% (903 reviews). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.110.58 (talk) 10:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Making changes for an English 101 Project.[edit]

My English 101 class is doing a project where we choose film pages that we feel could use a little bit of an update or some improvement. I've decided I'd like to work on this one. I feel like the music section could be updated a bit. Also, since the movie is still in theaters the plot section must mostly be from memory. I am going to update the plot section a bit by changing a few sentences around and adding in a few things that I remember happening in the movie. I'll basically be making it more detailed. I doubt I add any new sections to the article. I'll just be touching up on the ones already in place. --Bobout185 (talk) 07:43, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made the changes that I had mentioned. I recieved no responses from that last post so I felt free to make them.

Spoiler[edit]

How about a spoiler warning in the "plot" section? I didnt see the movie yet, but after reading the plot i dont need to anymore... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.57.193.139 (talk) 01:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned elsewhere in various movie articles in wikipedia, there is no "spoiler warning" for movies in articles posted in wikipedia.To post an article about a movie without some detail of plot is pointless.Advertising and promotions give a general plot outline of any movie released to help the public decide if they're interested in seeing it.Ern Malleyscrub (talk) 00:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Reading an encyclopedia article about a movie is supposed to spoil the plot for someone who hasn't seen the movie yet. If it didn't, the article clearly lacked sufficient information. I suggest you look up "encyclopedia" at Wiktionary....KevinOKeeffe (talk) 05:25, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final Bomb[edit]

Is it ever actually mentioned in the movie what type of bomb Shelton used to try to blow up the final meeting? It does appear to be an incendiary, explosive, based on how it created a fire-ball around butler and on the external scene with Fox walking out; but the iridescent green glow is far different from the benzene/polystyrene mix that makes up napalm... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.153.29.23 (talk) 01:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re Final Bomb: I'm pretty sure they say napalm when they find it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jan-da-man (talk • contribs) 23:55, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More precisely a type of incendiary that basically did the same thing as napalm, but wasn't actually napalm. The bomb technician said it was something called 'Maglinite'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atheuz (talk • contribs) 12:40, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like...[edit]

...another version of a SAW movie. Violence for violence sake (plus a perverse type of ideology), and a thin storyline wrapped around it so you can sell it to the viewers. Have any of the reviews made that type of remark? Ingolfson (talk) 12:24, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.88.21.142 (talk) 09:55, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Additional names in the cast[edit]

I added darby and ames (Stolte & Stewart). I thought their names should be added since they also play important roles in the film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fred garcia (talk • contribs) 06:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bombs planted in gas tanks[edit]

I seem to remember in the scene after all the cars exploded that they explained that the bombs were hidden in the gas tanks. This article states that they were planted under the car. Leerex (talk) 09:52, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Detail?..."[edit]

I understand that Wikipedia has no intention of being a spoiler, but is there more detail on the deaths of Clydes family? If this isn't the right place to post this inquiry, please delete it and send a message/warning without the warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.239.210 (talk) 04:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Film Inspiration Inference?[edit]

The brutal crime portrayed in this film very closely fits the description of a 2007 Connecticut crime. Any fact to this similarity?

See: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/27/us-crime-homeinvasion-idUSTRE80Q1IY20120127 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.188.183.17 (talk) 20:53, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Law Abiding Citizen. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://chud.com/articles/articles/16578/1/FOXX-EARNS-CITIZENSHIP-WITH-DARABONT/Page1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:50, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Law Abiding Citizen. 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 14:45, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference...[edit]

Clyde Shelton's wife was Clarence Darby's only rape victim. The daughter was only confirmed to be murdered. All this speculation must stop. DawgDeputy (talk) 21:05, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy over ending of the movie.[edit]

There are some sources that are claiming that the end of the movie was changed because of Jaime Foxx. However, after a little research someone talking about the ending of the movie popped up.

I don't know how reliable the person is but someone who claimed to have worked for the production company during the production time of the movie claimed that Jamie Foxx did not change the ending of the movie or have any say in the ending of the movie.

This is just a statement for anyone who is curious of the rumors and wanted to know the background of the issue.

Original Reddit thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/c3b51s/a_question_about_the_law_abiding_citizen_ending/

Follow-up Reddit thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/c3okuy/jamie_foxx_didnt_change_the_ending_to_law_abiding/ IhateixlSTEM (talk) 06:50, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Law Abiding Citizen[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Law Abiding Citizen's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "BOM":

From Men in Black: International: "Men in Black: International (2019)". Box Office Mojo. IMDb. Archived from the original on June 12, 2019. Retrieved October 7, 2019.
From Straight Outta Compton (film): "Straight Outta Compton (2015)". Box Office Mojo. Retrieved January 29, 2016.
From The Fate of the Furious: "The Fate of the Furious". Box Office Mojo. IMDb. Archived from the original on January 22, 2021. Retrieved January 22, 2021.
From Frank Darabont: "The Majestic". Box Office Mojo.
From Be Cool: "Be Cool (2005)". Box Office Mojo. Retrieved October 1, 2021.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]