Talk:Cube (film series)

Violates NPOV
The passage "the film comes across as a deliberate attempt to forget the ultra-tech mistakes of Hypercube.", among others violates NPOV and should be deleted.

delete discussion
This article should be deleted. All it does is reprint the summaries of the pages from each of the Cube movie pages. It very briefly describes the recurring themes of the movies at the bottom, but does not discuss the origin of the cubes at all, even though this is apparently disclosed in Cubes 2 and 0. And what is this mysterious revelation at the end of Cube 2? I haven't watched the movie. I came to the Wikipedia article to find out how it ends. --66.81.122.242 23:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Just because the discussion of the recurring themes is currently inadequate doesn't mean that it can't be further improved; this article was only created a few days ago. The reason why the description for Cube Zero matches that from the Cube Zero article is only because of the heritage of its creation; the other 2 movies have much further expanded summaries on their corresponding articles.  The Cube Zero article is really the one that needs to be expanded further.  Unfortunately, I've only seen Cube and Hypercube so far. -- Bovineone 00:39, 24 October 2005 (UTC)


 * This page shouldn't be deleted but all POV needs removal. How can the third film be described as rectifying the mistakes of the second when critics received the second film more warmly (see ratings on rottentomatoes.com)? How can the conclusion the "no comfort can be gained from a clone surviving" be justified? You may like the films or dislike them but Wikipedia is not the place for that discussion. 193.129.65.37 11:03, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree. I'd also like to note that even if critics did say the movie is bad, it doesn't mean it's bad.  It only means that it's been called bad by critics.  Many film articles don't seem to make this distinction.  -- Scarlet -=Spider-DavE=-  04:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Language
Needs to be a lot more formal. Satchfan 23:34, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've added the inappropriate-tone template to the article. -- Bovineone 04:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Cheers. It *really* needs it. Satchfan 07:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I kinda like the informal tone to it. It provides a depth to the article, and makes it a little more interesting to read than the other stuff on here, which isn't bad per se, but it's still a breath of fresh air. Also, you're not likely to find a guy who enjoys horror movies and the dissection thereof who will speak with elevated diction and tone on command. 64.40.48.193 04:34, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, and the tone of the articles should reflect that. Pstanton 01:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Original research
The "Themes" section especially seems to draw unsourced (and possibly unsourcable) conclusions from the film. See also the last entry from 193.129.65.37 under "delete discussion". 68.39.174.238 20:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Contact
Don't you have a feeling it pays homage to both Rubik's Cube and Tetris? Mostly to the former... I would like to make the idea reach the minds behind this work (guionists/scriptwriters of course, why people think directors are so much?) for a more complex scenario (before it becomes an overused idea) involving the rubik and tetris family of objects (Pyraminx, Skewb Diamond, Megaminx, Dogic, Alexander's Star, Rubik's Clock,Rubik's Magic, Welltris, Tetris Blast, 3d Tetris, Tetris Plus, Tetrisphere, Giga Tetris, Bio Tetris, the New Tetris, Tetris Elements and of course the original Tetris)... Well... This is the discussions so... It's not vandalizing and it could (I hope) eventually reach those who can tune their minds to the project. GTB.
 * I feel it is absolutely related to Rubik's Cube and Tetris, equally so. The players can only get out of the cube once all the cubes are aligned correctly, just like with the Rubik's Cube. And as for Tetris, the way the cubes move around and fit together is obviously similar. 80.6.152.186 (talk) 15:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Sequel to hypercube?
Does anyone know if another sequel is in the works? Cube 2: Hypercube was pretty much completely independent of the other two, and I'm just wondering if there are any plans to make a sequel to it (or another sequel/prequel to the original for that matter).
 * There are two fan-made sequels, according to www.uncubed.com, but no real continuation of the actual Cube series, sorry. The two fan-made ones are "Cube: Desperation" (I think) and "Cube: Blood Trap", both are probably in development hell. User:King Wagga

Cube Zero a Prequel ?
My complaint / question is simple, should Cube Zero be called a prequel? This is making a judgement with no factual basis, Cube Zero seems to be set after both Cube and Hypercube though it is left deliberately vague. Apart from anything else the Cube in the first film seems to be a first and only Cube, and the technology societal level seem to be mid 90's - when the film was made. Both Cube Zero and Hypercube seem to have far future tech - a machine that can record peoples dreams? There are also indications that no-one is even bothering to watch the people in the first Cube - which we also see reset / cycle multiple times during the film.

Lucien86 14:19, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Take into account that it isn't the userbase of Wikipedia that made that conclusion, it was billed as a prequel by the individuals who made the film. Whether their definition matches your own personal definition as to what a prequel really entails is irrelevant. --75.2.38.27 18:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Cube Zero is a sequel just look at the massive Character connection at the end of the Movie.
 * Did you mean to say prequel? The ending of Cube Zero leads right into the start of the original Cube.  -- Scarlet SpiderDavE  15:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

In Cube Zero Wynn asks Dodd about a rumor that there is more than one cube. If that is the case, it's even possible that all three movies occured in the same time only at different cubes. Regardless, Cube Zero is a prequel because it simply is. 89.0.134.23 04:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, the cube featured in Cube Zero definitely is a different cube from the first movie. This is due to the fact that the coordinate marker system for the cubes are different in both movies. Cube Zero's cube uses alphabets (eg A, G, H) to label the rooms while Cube's cube uses numbers (eg 156, 243, 191). Hence, they take place in entirely different places. Secondly, Wynn is not Kazan. The last scene merely shows a possibility of how Kazan might have ended up being selected for the cube. This means the Wynn-enacting-Kazan's-scene theory is invalid in proving that Cube Zero is a prequel to Cube. This is further supported by the clearly different names on both characters' shirts in both movies. Thirdly, the quote from the movie director merely said that the last scene in Cube Zero might be an implication that Cube Zero is a prequel to Cube. Note the word might. I fail to understand why the phrase 'Cube Zero is a prequel to Cube.' is pasted all over Cube-related articles and use that quote as evidence. The events that take place in the two movies distinctly prove that they are unrelated. Mysterial 21:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree, although it seems like Cube Zero being a direct prequel is a bit questionable, it does seem to be foundation precursor of the "Cube" series (via canon). So in one way, its almost like a meta-series. BTzJM--AKIRA70 (talk) 19:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the fact that it's called "Cube Zero" is a pretty good indication of it being a prequel. The events of "Cube" and "Cube 2" aren't really related either (less so than those of Cube and Cube Zero, I would argue) yet no one is "confused" as to whether or not Cube 2 is a sequel. The Zero suffix provides strong evidence as per naming conventions; would you wonder if Cube 3 was a sequel? The original Cube is meant to taken a "Cube 1" (many people will refer to the first of a series in this manner for clarification) so by saying "this is the Cube before the first Cube" I don't think there's any problem viewing it as a prequel. Were it named Cube: Square of Doom or Cube of Doom or something else, then yes, you'd have a case for not denoting any chronology if no connection to the events of previous films were explicitly made, but I don't see how the naming conventions behind "Cube Zero" could suggest anything OTHER than a prequel. Patrick of J (talk) 03:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Cube (1969)
This movie is not connected with the others why is it here ?

Race of Characters
How relevant are the characters' races to the plot? Do they merit mentioning? Eran of Arcadia 20:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.42.165 (talk) 23:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

they're not even correct anyway. Why does it say "Euro-american"/"asian american" when they're not even american? - sunawave —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.99.71 (talk) 13:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Cube 4
Can we have some references and more information, film company plot etc..

I read here: http://forums.lgf.com/showthread.php?goto=lastpost&t=642 that cube 4 (if it exists) is sub-titled Tresspassed and is a 30-40 minute fan film.

150.176.200.253 20:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I've removed the section for now, since it seemed to be entirely speculation or rumors. -- Bovineone 02:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Autistic Savant
Autistic Savant is not accurate because he was a prodigy before he had the lobotomy that made him mentally handicapped. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.92.192 (talk) 11:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Worth's Fate
I don't know personally what Worth's fate was in the first film (its been a while since i watched it), but it seems that this article contradicts the main article. It says in this article that his status is unknown, yet in the main article it states that he "lies down next to Leaven and dies". This should probably be cleared up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Speighticus (talk • contribs) 12:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Removed section: "similarly themed works"
I've removed the following section:


 * ''Similarly themed works
 * Each of the following films begins with a group of strangers awakening captive somewhere&mdash;though not a place quite as high-tech and obviously otherworldly as the cube complex&mdash;after having been abducted, and being faced with a structure of deadly challenges.
 * Breathing Room &mdash; featuring fourteen participants
 * Die &mdash; featuring six participants (one for each face of a traditional die)
 * House of 9 &mdash; featuring nine participants (as the title suggests)
 * Nine Dead &mdash; likewise featuring nine participants
 * Persons Unknown (13-episode TV series) (2010) &mdash; featuring seven primary participants
 * As well, the Saw films and Vile are somewhat similar to the Cube films, but the unwilling participants are not all strangers in the latter, which features nine, and often not strangers in the former. The 2006 film Unknown involves a group of five men with temporary amnesia, locked inside of a remote, abandoned factory, but not faced with a challenge structure. The film Predators involves a group of seven largely martial or hardened, armed strangers awakening in an unfamiliar preserve.
 * While the specific theme has definition, it does not yet have a designation as a film genre even as a niche, in any parlance. There are elements of remote observation, bondage, torment, penance, sacrifice, sport or puzzle, perhaps gorily expressed or psychological in form, and mutual distrust or personality clash, but the common attribute of storyline is that of a group of people awakening stuck in unfamiliar surroundings or unknown location, without complete understanding of how or why they are there and of who is responsible for them being there, which is merely the beginning of the matter.
 * Of the aforementioned titles, the Cube films are the only to involve what could be considered a maze or navigational puzzle. Some of the Saw films involve obstacle courses that effectively represent navigational puzzles, though.

None of this is cited, which it absolutely must be before being allowed back in. We as editors cannot make any connection between the subject of this article and any other film. We use referenced sources that make those connections themselves. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:29, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * And here we are months later and after removing the section again, as it is just not allowed for editors to make original comparisons like this, the original adder is essentially edit warring to keep it in. The worst part is the sheer admittance that he made it up. Not only does the text say that there's no name for this (because there's no source for this), but the adding editor is also the one who tagged the section as unsourced, almost as though they want other editors to find the sources to support his original idea. That doesn't work; if someone wants to add an analysis, they must source that analysis. Good faith tells us to tag before removal, but when the material is already tagged and the structure is in such clear violation of the guidelines, there's little to do but remove it. oknazevad (talk) 12:37, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Gender
As with, is there any need to list the genders of the characters in the various tables in this article? If there is indeed a connection between characters and famous prisons, an uncited claim here and in the Cube (film) article, perhaps there would be some relation between those prisons that are segregated by gender and the characters' gender, but this is (also?) speculation and not suitable for an encyclopedic context. Arlo James Barnes 03:16, 29 March 2018 (UTC)