Talk:Wayne's World (film)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hammesar.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Quotes

I plan on creating a quotes section for the fun things that Wayne and Garth say. Squiddybean (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:14, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Expanding On Characters

I plan to expand on the backgrounds of characters in the Cast section. Squiddybean (talk)

Creating new Filming Locations section

I am planning on adding a new section over the next few days that discusses the locations throughout the film as well as their actual location in the world. Squiddybean (talk)

GTA IV

A new car in the DLC is called Rhapsody named after Waynes World as it's the same car and also has them two in a picture on the dash, can anyone add this to the trivia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.252.55 (talk) 17:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Sonic reference

The Sonic game used in Wayn'es World isactually from Sonic the hedgehog 1, from the Starlight Zone level. I've so-forth changed it.

Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure

I have changed the year 1989 to the correct date 1988 to prove it. As I told the other users on the talk page. -- Mike Garcia | talk 4 July 2005 03:39 (UTC)

I have removed the template because the dispute has nothing to do with Wayne's World. The issue at hand is that Mike does not comprehend the difference between a copyright date and a copyright date. Cburnett July 4, 2005 03:47 (UTC)

On the history of the page, Infrogmation told me I can put the template dispute if there's no agreement here. -- Mike Garcia | talk 4 July 2005 03:49 (UTC)

Then I have to completely disagree with Infrogmation on this. This debate over the release date of B&T EA does not need to spread to other articles! Cburnett July 4, 2005 04:00 (UTC)

There, I fixed it. No need to have this incredibly unecessary argument. CodyM 16:11, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Alice Cooper's cameo

Why the famous Alice Cooper's cameo present in the movie was not cited? He talks about the socio-political history of Milwaukee. Great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.188.163.3 (talk • contribs)

It's had an impact, too:People are fond of pulling the "We're not worthy" thing (on their knees) in front of Alice in public areas.-Data can be seen in the introduction to the comic book "The Last Temptation".79.181.218.141 (talk) 21:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup

This needs to be cleaned up to WikiProject Films standards. I'd do it, but I have a lot of other work ahead of this right now, but I'll put it on my list. Anybody want to help out here? Thanks. --MPD01605 18:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll help. (As a side note, you posted that request on my birthday. I think I was meant to help you.) - Zepheus (ツィフィアス) 19:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

I accidentally removed the film projects temp because I was looking at Wayne's World and I didn't realise that the talk page redirects here (I guess that's a result of moving articles and then starting new ones with the old name). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wavy G (talk • contribs)

Plot

Is it just me or does it need a bit more of a synopsis instead of what amounts to what the characters do?

I have nothing to contribute on this point, I just corrected your spelling of "characters."--Absurdity 19:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Rob Lowe's character addresses the audience in the "1st Ending."

I feel that the "plot" section should have some... y'know... plot in it. I might fix this at some stage. I'd have to rewatch the film first. Or maybe just rip off the IMDb synopsis... Teutanic 23:25, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

reference

Before they stop and realize "What are we doing?" "Yeah we have tickets to alice cooper!" or something. What are they doing before that, skipping down the street and working in a bottling factory. I know it's from a show or something . . . Anyone know the reference?--70.38.103.150 06:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure. It's a spoof of the introduction to Laverne & Shirley. - Slow Graffiti 04:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Nuprin

I don't think the word "better" was part of Nuprin's original slogan. It may have been added later when an improved Nuprin was released, but the original Nuprin commercials just said, "Nuprin: Little. Yellow. Different."

Trivia

I see the Trivia has been -added- to. This is counter-productive, please. The trivia section should be shrinking until it goes away. Lots42 07:35, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Old data

From the article:

The film grossed US$121.6 million in its theatrical run, placing it as the eighth highest-grossing film of 1992 and the highest-grossing film ever based on a Saturday Night Live skit

Is this still acurate? It´s 16 years later and among others, there has been Austin Powers and a lot of other SNL stuff...

Robin.lemstra (talk) 10:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Austin Powers is not an SNL-based movie. - Y2J420

Criticism

At the beginning of this article you say that "Wayne's World," recieved postive reviews however in the Critical Response section the film recieved mixed reviews. Which is it? -James Pandora Adams

"Wayne's World" Reunion on "Saturday Night Live" 2011

Wayne's World On 'SNL': Mike Myers, Dana Carvey Reunite In Cold Opening

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/05/waynes-world-on-snl-mike-_n_819187.html http://www.tmz.com/2011/02/06/waynes-world-saturday-night-live-waynes-world-saturday-night-live/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.116.242.76 (talk) 23:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

No Stairway!

Can someone please research and then include a section explaining why, in the famous 'No Stairway To Heaven' scene, Wayne doesn't actually play anything from the song at all? (Hint: they couldn't get copyright clearance, so random guitar riffs were overdubbed. But I have no citation for that.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.29.196 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 28 June 2014‎ (UTC)

I like the idea and know what you write is true, but cannot find a reliable source. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 03:56, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Primary topic

Isn't the film the primary topic for "Wayne's World"? It gets twice as many hits as the SNL skit and is the predominant Wayne's World mentioned by sources, which would lead to believe that it's what would be expected to reside at the location without the parenthetical disambiguation. czar ♔ 01:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Wayne's World (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/20110117101126/http://www.stefburns.com:80/history.html to http://www.stefburns.com/history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:30, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Final triple-scene clarification

Should the plot specify the editing technique made at the end of the film? (viz. reversion 13:11, 20 November 2017‎ Popcornduff). As currently constituted...

Dissatisfied, Wayne and Garth reenact the scene, unmasking Benjamin as "Old Man Withers" in a "Scooby-Doo ending". They reenact it again in a "mega happy ending" in which Cassandra signs a record contract and reunites with Wayne, Garth begins a relationship with a waitress, and Benjamin learns that money and good looks do not bring happiness

... it is not clear to the uninformed reader what is happening here. Have Garth and Wayne proceeded to a different time/location to act out their own preferred versions of events? Perhaps for an audience *within* the film? While the 'real' events continue regardless elsewhere? Is it not warranted to briefly mention that G+W turn to the audience and literally rework the ending a couple of times? Or is it specious reasoning to claim that an editing technique may not be mentioned at all in a plot summary, when it will be observed that a defining character of Wayne's World, even to the extent of defining the plot's final conclusion, is a constant transgression of the fourth wall? Cpaaoi (talk) 15:45, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

I don't think it matters, to the plot, that they break the fourth wall here. If you think it's important, I would be happier with something like: "Wayne and Garth stop the film to address the audience and blah blah". Like, actually describe in concrete terms what's happening in the film. Actually saying like "oh btw this is an example of breaking the fourth wall" is intrusive in a plot summary - we don't need the editor's interpretation of its editing here. Popcornduff (talk) 15:58, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. For the record, it is a matter of fact, not "editor's interpretation", as well as a key motivator of the film's action, but - hey. Cpaaoi (talk) 17:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 16 November 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Per Dekimasu comments, as Wayne's World is a broad concept article covering the film and other media. (closed by non-admin page mover) Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 11:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

---

Wayne's World (film) → Wayne's World – Wayne's World the film is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, far more widely known than the original SNL sketch at Wayne's World. The sketch should move to Wayne's World (sketch). Popcornduff (talk) 09:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Calidum 19:52, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose derived from sketch. The most that could be argued here is a TWODAB rather than a sudden flip, nightmare for links. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:03, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
• Comment: There has never been a clear consensus about how to handle "source material" and film adaptations. The sketch was around for three years before the film adaptation. While the film article's page views outnumber the sketch article's, making it primary in that respect, long-term significance is another criterion to follow. Google Books shows these results for review in that regard. In general, I'd rather not have a film adaptation "usurp" the source material in primacy unless the source material was relatively obscure, like what was the case with Road to Perdition and Road to Perdition (comics). No strong feelings here at this point, though. I'm open to reading others thoughts. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 14:32, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
• Support I'd say that the film is the primary topic. Similar to a short-story being an inspiration for a full-length film. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose - I've never liked primary topic discussions as I feel that everyone is both equally wrong and right. That said, I'll add my beliefs to this discussion. I don't believe that a derivative material should ever be a "primary" topic. If we use a system which has primary topics, then that topic should be the one that all other works originated from, as it allows for an easy visual cue to readers. In this situation the sketch is the primary topic. This is also in WP:CONSISTENT with Coneheads / Coneheads (film) and MacGruber / MacGruber (film). --Gonnym (talk) 11:27, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oof, I don't like consistency arguments because it means things don't change even if they're wrong... and is it really so consistent at all? Counter-example, though non-SNL: The Simpsons shorts.

What "easy visual cue" do you have in mind here? I'd put money on the overwhelming number of visitors to the Wayne's World page expecting it to be about the film - and there's nothing in the title to suggest otherwise. Popcornduff (talk) 11:41, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Well, I don't like editors cherry picking articles to break up a consistent naming style because they feel one should be different. That for me is a bad style that should never be supported. You really feel this should be changed, then go ahead and get all the articles of the same type and nominate them together. The visual cue I was referring to is that viewing an an article without any disambiguator vs one with one, the one without a disambiguator would look as the "original" work. Regarding your example, first, it is not an SNL sketch, but looking at that article and from some videos online, I couldn't see if The Simpsons shorts were called "The Simpsons" or if the name was just later an unofficial name to refer to the characters. If it isn't even the official name then there isn't really an issue here. --Gonnym (talk) 19:46, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose currently, but if there were to be a separate WP:BROADCONCEPT disambiguation-like page drafted which summarizes the entire franchise, we could discuss putting that at primary. -- Netoholic @ 11:42, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
• Support. The film would be WP:PRIMARYTOPIC over the sketch inasmuch as that is the most likely expected target for anyone searching for this term. Otherwise, maybe we should move the dab page to the undisambiguated term? --woodensuperman 14:00, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
• Support Pageviews back up the fact that the film is the primary topic._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:35, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
• Support Yes pageviews support this move. With the pages located to the advantage of the sketch, the Movie has a 4:1 edge. Certainly, moving the pages will result in a more pronounced difference.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:31, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose, because Wayne's World is already a broad concept article including information on the films and other media in addition to the sketch. Rewrite the lede if necessary to make it clear that while it was "originally a recurring sketch" on SNL, that's not what the whole article is about. Expand the section on the films to a better summary style as well. But I don't see a compelling reason to move the dab either, since the article at Wayne's World covers what would need disambiguating. Dekimasuよ! 20:12, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose Per Dekimasu. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Quotes

“Wayne’s World! Wayne’s World! Party time! Excellent!” -Wayne and Garth (1:12) “Party on Garth!” -Wayne (3:55) “Party on Wayne!” -Garth (3:50) “I’ll give you a No-Honk guarantee”, Wayne to Garth(6:00) “Psycho hose beast” -Garth, about Stacy (10:15) “Get the net!” -Wayne to Stacy (12:17) “She’s a babe! Schwing!” (14:46) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squiddybean (talk • contribs) 19:55, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Mike Myers, his ex, and the gun rack drama

I distinctly remember there being an entry in the article about this particular scene in the movie. The story being that Myers wanted to include a scene as a reference to a really weird event from his own past lovelife, involving his at-the-time girlfriend presenting him with a gun rack on his birthday (I think). Did I imagine this, or was that part of the article simply removed for some reason or another? Captain Seasick (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2023 (UTC)