Talk:My Bloody Valentine 3D

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

Copyvio[edit]

--68.50.218.64 (talk) 05:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{cv-unsure|Bwrs (talk)|2=http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=My_Bloody_Valentine_%282009_film%29&oldid=195363145}}

Bwrs (talk) 23:26, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Removed. No evidence of any copyright infringements. PC78 (talk) 19:21, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was unanimous consensus for move.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

I propose moving this article to My Bloody Valentine 3-D, since most websites, including the official website use "3-D" at the end of it, and is also supported by the film's posters, so I see no reason why we should keep it here. --EclipseSSD (talk) 18:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support the move since the 3-D part of it seems widely accepted as part of the title. —Erik (talk • contrib) 19:22, 28 December 2008 (UTC) to My Bloody Valentine 3D barring any clarification from filmmakers that it should be "3-D". —Erik (talk • contrib) 17:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...Did have one thought... can it be clarified why it's better as "3-D" and not "3D"? —Erik (talk • contrib) 19:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. It just looks like a better title to me. --EclipseSSD (talk) 20:27, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support move to My Bloody Valentine 3D, as this is the form used on the official website and posters. PC78 (talk) 19:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Proposed title by PC78 looks to be the most common. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 20:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Seems uncontroversial. Note on title: though "3-D" gets three times as many ghits as "3D" for this film, the latter seems to appear more times in news sources. Steve T • C 23:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, so we've divided between "3D" and "3-D". Any way to make this outcome clearer? I get the feeling that when the time comes to review the film, we'll see more "3D". —Erik (talk • contrib) 05:42, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I guess since the official website uses 3D, I've got no problem with it. So, it's okay by me. --EclipseSSD (talk) 17:30, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And the film posters use 3D too. Lugnuts (talk) 20:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

There is actually a city called Harmony in Butler County, PA about a half hour drive west of where this film was shot. It states in the Production section that this takes place in the "fictional town of Harmony." Is the Harmony in "My Bloody Valentine" actually a fictional town or is this just a mistake due to the ignorance of the existence of the actual town? Ansline6788 (talk) 03:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)ansline6788[reply]

Name Change[edit]

The actual title of the film is 'My Bloody Valentine', not 'My Bloody Valentine: 3D'. The title of the film should be the same as it is credited in the film, and the '3D' does not appear in the run of the film, nor is it in the credits. Therefore I think the article should drop the '3D' from it's name, and have 'My Bloody Valentine 3D' redirect here. It can easily state in the first paragraph of the article that the films' promotional title is 'My Bloody Valentine: 3D'.

Film trailer[edit]

The new film traler is available: http://www.mtv.com/videos/movies/329166/exclusive-clip-on-the-run.jhtml. Maybe we should add it to the article? Sha-Sanio (talk) 13:49, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Plot[edit]

The plot section reads like the copy on a DVD; I don't expect it to be entirely dry, but it should be rewritten (at least sans elipses). I've seen neither film, or I'd rewrite it myself. Seijihyouronka (talk) 18:12, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear God it reads like a terrible review somebody stop this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.196.23 (talk) 17:47, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously.. I removed that last line about an old friend not being what he says he is (spoiler), may do a re-write later on. After I grab some lunch, that is. Skootles (talk) 16:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has completely screwed up this entry. It needs serious edits and repairs to remove references to sodomy and sex toys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.242.225.207 (talk) 06:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

INCONGRUITY: Anyone else wonder why the trees had already fully leafed out by Valentine's Day on February 14 which is the heart of winter in the eastern U.S.? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.50.218.64 (talk) 05:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The plot reads terribly! It is as if someone has cut and pasted words, screwing up the sentences! I wanted to read the plot as after watching the film, I was a bit confused as to what was going on - now I am even more confused. I would edit if I was sure what the plot actually was! NOidentity (talk) 01:11, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I worked on the plot. It should make more sense now. I also fixed some errors, like the idea that Sheriff Burke was Axel's dad, and the assumption that Irene was a prostitute simply because her trucker "boyfriend" tried to treat her like one. Not that it would be relevant even if she were a prostitute. Gehenesis (talk) 01:19, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

synopsis[edit]

The entire synopsis has been lifted from The Movie Spoiler [1] ~ NossB (talk) 22:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the plot summary to try and shorten it a bit, hope that helps... Kythereia (talk) 03:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote and shortened it even more. Hope that's OK.QuizzicalBee (talk) 15:15, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Not really sure how to work the whole Wikipedia thing, i just wanted to mention that someone has gone through the article and put in random references to homosexuality and sodomy (neither are present in the movie) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.181.253.141 (talk) 06:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, haven't edited anything before, but it would be nice if the whole thing wasn't listed, like who the killer is, what happens when they find him, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.21.198.206 (talk) 19:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia. We try to include all relevant material in the articles we provide. If a reader doesn't want to know what happens, then don't read the section titled "Plot".--Aervanath (talk) 17:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Wikipedia used to have a banner that would be placed, telling readers that the plot contained spoilers, but it was decided that since this is infact an encyclopedia, that this was unnecessary. Skootles (talk) 23:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correction on 3D[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}}

This movie is not "shot" on "new Real-D" techonology. No such thing exists. Real-D is but a company that markets a 3D *exhibition* process, not a capture system. It's shot in (generic) digital 3D process. Also, this movie is not only exhibited in Real-D 3D process. It's also exhibited in Dolby-3D theaters or those equipped with other 3D systems, such as Xpand or Masterimage or dual digital projection.

  • I've explained Real D is the projection technology, and linked to the article. I'm not sure about the other 3D systems, reliable sources are needed. —Snigbrook 15:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The film was shot using 3D Camera Platforms and integrated technology designed by Paradise FX, a Los Angeles based company (paradisefx.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.95.227.86 (talk) 01:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Critical Reception[edit]

I would like to add the reviews of Variety and LAT to the article.Sha-Sanio (talk) 13:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC) I have also added the weekend box office results.Sha-Sanio (talk) 14:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add the reviews of The New York Times, The Hollywood Reporter and Entertainment Weekley to the article.Sha-Sanio (talk) 11:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Undoing[edit]

The reason why I undid the previous plots is because I felt that was a kind of summary that you get on the back of a DVD case.--Yowiki (talk) 05:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DVD/Blu-ray Revenue[edit]

The DVD/Blu-ray sales figure has no 'as of' date. I think one should be provided, or maybe an estimate, or a statement like 'has grossed in excess of. . .' would be better. I've made edits in this regard. Please update if more current figures are available. Phenylphree (talk) 09:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on My Bloody Valentine 3D. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 17:41, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on My Bloody Valentine 3D. 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) 18:03, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:My_Bloody_Valentine_3D&oldid=1209283464"