Talk:Paranormal Activity (film series)

The Marked Ones' spin-off status
I've noticed that Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones is listed here as a spin-off separate from the main sequence of films. Spin-off or no, it IS the fifth film of the franchise and should be listed as such, regardless of titling. For that matter, though, how spin-off-ish is it? It has just as much to do with the Katie plotline as PA4 did, and is central to the over-arching plotline that has slowly been revealed over the course of the franchise. This article may lead individuals to skip the film altogether since it's 'just a spin-off', and will be missing a good handful of crucial details about the coven of women pulling the strings in the background. --76.77.128.216 (talk) 05:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm surprised this page hasn't been created already so I decided to create it. I'm not that good with certain skills and would really appreciate it if whoever is reading could help improve this article like short simple plots in each films section, production details, maybe even an article on the "demand it" campaign.

I look forward to working with you Wikipedians on this page, I will help as much as I can too and try to learn the new editing skills. --Charlr6 (talk) 22:22, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Official spin-off: Tokyo night
Tokyo night is not an official spin-off. stop adding it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.176.138.33 (talk) 20:53, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * It was listed in the Paranormal Activity template box for several months. The film carries the franchises name, so Paramount and Oren Peli could have sued them, but they didn't. And there are such things as 'unofficial spin-offs' anyway, should we just make a list of those? People have the right to know that UNOFFICIAL spin-offs exist. Charlr6 (talk) 21:08, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Why not add them too? I wasn't the person who added "Tokyo Night' to the template box months and months ago, which has now disappeared. But it is a spin-off, the other films are mockbusters, there is a difference. Charlr6 (talk) 21:46, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

the only diffrence is that the guy who added tokyo night was a japanese guy trying desperately to give the movie some fame by putting alongside real PA series ( heck - it`s even a remake of the original paranormal activity 2007 with a diffrent ending - and so some terms need to be applied to even name it spin-off - and it share more conditions with a mockbuster film )2.176.138.33 (talk) 22:00, 30 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.176.138.33 (talk) 21:53, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * "the only diffrence is that the guy who added tokyo night was a japanese guy...", so did you go onto the Paranormal Activitys template page and looked back months and months ago to try and find who put it on there and went onto their page and discovered it was a Japanese person? Could you send me a link to the 'japanese guys' page please?
 * "... trying desperately to give the movie some fame by putting alongside real PA series" I could say that you are a lazy unregistered editor on Wikipedia and is racist towards Japanese people and saw this as a perfect way to get rid of some Japanese persons work. Kind of the opposite of what you think the Japanese person is doing. In your eyes he is a Japanese editor who thought he could link the Tokyo Night onto the Paranormal Activity template to try and boost the fame of the film.
 * But as "Paranormal Activity" is the franchises name, the Japanese film company would have to have pay a small fee to use the name in the their films title probably. All the other 'mock busters' didn't bother and just named it very similar. And actually when I've gone round the net looking up Paranormal Activity 'mock busters', this is the one that is referred to a spin-off the most. Charlr6 (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Unless the unregistered/not logged-in IP is prepared to enter into a grown-up discussion on this subject, he/she shall not continue this unpleasant edit war with an editor who clearly represents the majority opinion. The reference to "Japanese" is not only inaccurate, but also, in my opnion,  a racist remark.  An apology is required.
 * Regard this as a first warning!
 * Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 09:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Racist ? hun ? i`m giving facts here and you are just yelling that only you know the right thing ! everytime people can`t stand the facts they go bragging about racism ! I`m asian myself for god sake ! what`s wrong with you ? have you even watched the movie ??? do you even live in asia ? such laws as copyright are not important here - be sure the company didn`t even pay the smallest fee ... - it is just how it is here ...

i`m simply trying to mainten the truth - cause every one knows PA does not have any official or even unofficial spin-off ... by putting it in wikipedia you will just mislead people who have not watched the series yet ... you can be as much as ignorant that u can be ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abolfazl3007 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

when you post it here people go watching it - expecting an official spin-off related in some way to the main series BUT what they see is an remake of the first movie made for people in japan. ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abolfazl3007 (talk • contribs) 16:32, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * So just because you live in Asia you aren't racist? And how do you know that the person who added Tokyo Night on the Paranormal Activity was Japanese? And not all spin-offs are directed to the source that inspired it, sometimes only briefly mentioned. Star Trek TOS and Star Trek TNG, occasional references to previous characters and situations. The X-Files and Millennium, I barely remember one single reference in each series to the other one. Paranormal Activity and Paranormal Activity 2: Tokyo Night are different, but people will still go in expecting to me scared. Like they know with TOS and TNG that they are both Sci-Fi and will know that they are based 100+ years from one another. The X-Files and Millennium have a completely different feel to them. The X-Files is sometimes mildly humorous, it's scary and intelligent with its stories and more light hearted than Millennium, which is dark and violent and very adult.
 * But from the sounds of it, it sounds like you might have just been a person who maybe saw Tokyo Night expecting it to be 'related in some way to the main series' (even though spin-offs don't always reference the main series) and you might have been disappointed so now you are on this page trying to delete it, and practically not let anyone know of its existence. Should we just change the word on this page from "spin-off" to "similar films inspired from Paranormal Activity"? People have the right to know about them. Charlr6 (talk) 21:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

if you can call tokyo night "spin-off" and say people have to know about it - then there must be a spin-off section for any major movie page in wikipedia - spin-offs even with exact same name from other countries which even share more similarities than this one ... so why no one adds them too ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abolfazl3007 (talk • contribs) 21:32, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * No recent major movies has had any spin-offs, and ones that have do have a part on the page mentioning them. And if the film gets remade, then there will be a small 'remake' section talking about the remake for a paragraph with a link to the main page. Charlr6 (talk) 21:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

The film's opening credits state that it is "Based on the film Paranormal Activity by Oren Peli" and the UK and German DVD covers state it to be "The official Japanese sequel". Until there is firmer evidence to reference that this is a lie and it's an unlicensed mockbuster, it surely at least shouldn't be listed in the "Notable mockbusters" section. Turtleheart (talk) 02:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * If you look on the history of the page I actually put the film as a "Spin-Off", but people didn't like that as you should be able to see above. You can change it to be in the official place, but it would get changed back. I believe it's a spin-off and sequel (which there can actually be)Charlr6 (talk) 09:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Development section
IP "122.176.162.255". Nice work on the development part. I would have left you a message on your talk page but you don't have one. But good work on that. It looks good. Could make it more into paragraphs and add a few references in, but it's good. Charlr6 (talk) 19:41, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Infobox
Does it even make sense to put the running time of all movies together? I haven't seen that with any other franchise. --2.246.14.40 (talk) 18:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It doesn't seem useful or insightful to me either but it is something that has spread like a rash and does occur in many franchise articles. It feels a lot like people adding things because they can, not because they have any actual reason for it or because it makes any kind of a coherent point. -- 109.77.214.141 (talk) 23:06, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

WHAT
why is there ratings for a horror film franchise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minemaster1337 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you asking why does this article include a Ratings table? It seems like we might both be asking the same question, see my question below, and also WP:FILMRATINGS. -- 109.77.214.141 (talk) 23:35, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Ratings
WP:FILMRATINGS says not to include film ratings. For some reason this article ignores the guidelines and includes a table of ratings anyway. Not only does it ignore the guidelines it ignores the even bigger rules and fails to WP:VERIFY and show WP:NOTABLE with references, which brings us back to WP:FILMRATINGS "focus on ratings for which there is substantial coverage from reliable sources". There does not appear to be anything notable (or even interesting) about the ratings.

Why should the table not be deleted already? -- 109.77.214.141 (talk) 23:04, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I have removed the table. I expect someone added it in good faith unaware of WP:FILMRATINGS, but still it should at least have been properly referenced WP:V. If someone really wants to add it back they should find references to show the ratings were somehow notable WP:N. -- 109.78.202.222 (talk) 16:11, 20 March 2021 (UTC)