Talk:The Tourist (2010 film)

Genre confusion
There seems to be some confusion with the genre of this film. Right now, it's listed here as a drama/thriller, but on the Golden Globe Awards, it was nominated as a comedy. Can somebody clarify this situation? - Areaseven (talk) 09:17, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No one knows. All Hallow&#39;s Wraith (talk) 22:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Genre discussion
My wife and I just saw The Tourist for the first time, and we watched it twice thus far, and it could be watched again. This movie has no more "comedy" in it than a James Bond movie might offer some comic relief, but is not a comedy. It certainly came across as a drama/thriller with a very good helping of mystery, in that the movie also leaves just enough not totally answered, so you start watching it again to find any clues to what the answers are, such as if Elise really knew or had a clue if Frank was Alexander, and how cleverly Frank (ie. Alexander) was manipulating the whole affair, and many more such questions. In that regard mystery is also woven into this film. The pace (scene to scene) movement of this film, esp. where Elise was concerned, seemed much like a slow intriguing/mysterious dance

Needing to fix the releases of box office results and dates of release.
Hey guys,

It appears that the date of box office results and the release of the results need to be fixed. I have looked at Box Office Mojo, and there is a slight discrepancy between the date of the foreign and domestic results and what they add up to. What does everyone else think?

SilvestertheCat (talk) 10:41, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

What is the book johnny depp is reading on the train?
I've been trying to figure out but haven't haD ANY LUCK

61.49.232.130 (talk) 04:04, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


 * The Book is Berlin Vendetta, by Charles Torbett. See this.


 * SilvestertheCat (talk) 06:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

writing credits
The section on Production never once mentions that Julian Fellowes, writer of Gosford Park and Downton Abbey, was brought in to fix up the dialogue and the characterizations, because von Hacklesdorf (or whatever his name is) did such a miserable job on both. This is not stated directly, but strongly implied on the extras on the DVD, where Fellowes has a prominent role speaking about helping to write the film. I would suggest that the part of the Production section to do with the writing needs another go-around, based on a long look at what the various participants say on the DVD extras. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theonemacduff (talk • contribs) 06:34, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Cultural reception
Hi Guys,

I would like to ask further information about this edit:

(cur | prev) 15:11, 21 October 2013‎ Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk | contribs)‎. . (30,744 bytes) (-3,075)‎. . (Reverted to revision 577007678 by Somedifferentstuff (talk): Last clean version. You are mis-understanding Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. (TW)) (undo | thank)

In fact, I tend to agree with this:

(cur | prev) 13:39, 21 October 2013‎ Bob Random Thoughts (talk | contribs)‎. . (33,819 bytes) (+3,098)‎. . (Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RS carefully. It clearly says: "Self-published sources may be used as sources of information about themselves". This is not purporting to be a source for anything other.) (undo | thank)

However, I did not want to revert again, so I would like to launch a discussion about those tweets and reliable sources.

Thank you!

Crazyforreading (talk) 16:28, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Cultural Reception Sources
Hello, I would like to raise a issue here regarding the sources for the "Cultural Reception" section. I believe that twitter accounts of famous personalities can be used as a reference for the particularly measuring Cultural and Social responses about any issue. I do understand that WP:RS indicate that social networking sites like facebook, twitter account can only be used as sources of information about themselves but what good is a social platform when it can't be used to measure social response itself? Thanks Mr RD (talk) 17:05, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Mr RD, as you saw, I already made my view on this matter known here and here; I relayed to newly-registered editor Rafaelgriffin, "If you want to report what people stated on Twitter, you are going to have to use WP:Reliable sources for it."


 * And I have nothing more to state on that. Therefore, I will alert WP:FILM to this discussion. Others, also note that Rafaelgriffin redirected The Tourist to this article/away from Tourist (disambiguation). Flyer22 (talk) 17:26, 21 November 2013 (UTC)


 * We should not reference Twitter here. People being famous is not a reason to cite their opinions about a given film. We include film critics' individual opinions because we consider the ones published in reliable sources as authoritative in their fields. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:36, 21 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Exactly, it is trivia and just because you are famous doesn't make your opinion notable. If secondary sources cover what is said on Twitter that puts a different complexion on matters, but the Twitter quote are just a collection of soundbites. Betty Logan (talk) 17:40, 21 November 2013 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, these people are usually opinion leaders one way or the other, and as such they can heavily influence the general reception of a film. Crazyforreading (talk) 09:40, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * And if it can be substantiated that has occurred i.e. a secondary source analyses the impact of Twitter comments, or a film review magazine thinks a tweet is important enough to re-publish then we would consider their inclusion like we would with any material published by a secondary source. Obviously though, we don't want to start a culture of Wikipedia editors selecting tweets on the basis of what they think is significant; significance needs to independently established in some way. Betty Logan (talk) 11:09, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Comedy
I am mystified by the reference to comedy. The film does not take itself seriously, but it is not comedy.Royalcourtier (talk) 20:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Spoiler in the casting chapter
I guess it's better to only write that Johnny Depp is Frank Tupelo because writing more is a major spoiler to anyone who hasn't watched the film yet. Why won't we change that?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.19.220.223 (talk) 02:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)