Talk:Fingernails (film)

Film genres
I don't think it's correct to categorize this film as science fiction. I mean, it might be seen partially as that, but there's a strong absurdist angle, akin to The Lobster (which has in fact "absurdist" listed as one of its genres in the Wikipedia article). Elements like the bonding exercises being mostly depicted as idiotic reenactments of romantic movies, or the fact that the instructors at the institute perform the extraction of the fingernail in a torture-like fashion with no medical experience or anesthetic. It's clearly not meant as actual speculative science-based fiction. The test is never presented as plausible science at any point. --Kumagoro-42 (talk) 03:09, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with getting rid of it for the simple reason that MOS:FILMGENRE says the primary genre or subgenre should be listed. "Romantic drama" already covers a genre and subgenre. The "science fiction" is a lesser component in its genre hierarchy. DA1 (talk) 15:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * We need to look at what reliable sources are calling the film and apply due weight. We can't cite our opinions about this. What do the sources say? Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 15:43, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The BBFC classifies it as "sci-fi romance".
 * The Guardian: "A tender love story is placed atop a contrived and quirkified sci-fi premise".
 * RogerEbert.com: "Christos Nikou’s dystopian sci-fi film".
 * The New York Times: "a disarmingly sweet science-fiction romance from the Greek director Christos Nikou".
 *  Mike  Allen   15:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Haha... GMTA. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 15:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The New York Times says "science-fiction romance", and Variety says "science-fiction romance". Los Angeles Times has "sci-fi romance" in the headline. The Hollywood Reporter doesn't say a specific genre but mentions sci-fi and romance. I think we need to remember that "sci-fi" is very broad as a concept. We cannot interpret this ourselves. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 15:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Others:
 * Time Out: "melancholic romantic comedy"
 * Telegraph: "romcom", "sci-fi romance"
 * Empire: "bittersweet romance"
 * The Atlantic: "The Greek director Christos Nikou’s first English-language feature is neither a sci-fi parable with a body-horror bent nor a deconstruction of the romantic comedy. Rather, it’s a cheeky, gentle, and gracefully performed meditation on that perennially maddening question: What the hell is love anyway?"
 * RogerEbert.com: "dystopian sci-fi film"
 * FilmThreat: "sci-fi tale"
 * Screen Daily: "romantic sci-fi drama"
 * Collider: "pseudo-sci-fi film mixed with a romance and doesn’t quite excel at either"
 * Entertainment Weekly: "romantic dramedy"
 * Thanks, Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 15:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the common denominator that most critics agree on are "sci fi" and "romance". Maybe even romantic drama?  Mike  Allen   16:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if we need "drama". Generally Googling about, it seems like "sci-fi romance" and "science fiction romance" are common enough terms in common parlance. Screen Daily's use of "drama" is as a noun, and I think that tends to be used by writers when it's already articulated to the readers that they're reading about a film. That said, sometimes I wonder if we should encourage "Genre" sections for less-than-100% cases, which would help illustrate a film's thematic structure. (I've wanted to do one for Fight Club in particular but have not gotten around to it.) Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 13:31, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree. We should keep it short and simple. Science fiction romance works for me.  Mike   Allen   17:44, 29 May 2024 (UTC)