Talk:Lathe of Heaven (film)

Do not delete
Nothing is gained by removing it. I can't add any details because I've never seen it. But even as it is, it does a job.--GwydionM (talk) 17:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * In future, just take off the prod notice! There is significant coverage, see http://news.google.co.uk/archivesearch?um=1&ned=uk&hl=en&q=%22Lathe+of+Heaven%22+%22james+caan%22&cf=all. Fences  &amp;  Windows  20:28, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Definitely a remake?
Is it definitely a remake of the 1980 version? Just because it's based on the same source, doesn't automatically make it a remake. 87.244.106.227 (talk) 18:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)


 * It looks like reliable sources apply the term "remake" to this, so it is probably fine as it is. I think the term is supposed to be loosely applied. The initial film adaptation was made in 1980, and they repeated the adaptation process (remade). The term just indicates that it is not the first time an adaptation has been done. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 18:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lathe of Heaven (film). 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090102142609/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/latheheaven.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/latheheaven.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:30, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Plot should be removed or replaced
This would be better served by having the Plot section replaced with a short synopsis and recategorized as a stub. The current Plot section basically just recapitulates the first 5-10 minutes in way too much detail and abruptly ends. The wording makes it terribly unclear this is what is happening, and a gross error occurs when it states that his lawyer sends him to see a psychiatrist. It's the judge. Also, it's far from obvious that it's a futuristic society. I'm a bit surprised that it won an award and suspect an argument could be made that its notability doesn't warrant its own article, but it would be better to remove what doesn't work and let someone have a crack at it then leave such a shoddy plot summary in place. 47.36.18.210 (talk) 22:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)


 * WP:SOFIXIT? DonIago (talk) 02:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)