Talk:Southland Tales

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Headlines[edit]

Headlines. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:50, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Talk:Southland Tales (section) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Headlines. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Headlines. --J.D. (talk) 04:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More Headlines. --J.D. (talk) 14:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summary[edit]

At nearly 1400 words, the plot summary had got out of hand and was marked as overlong. I've trimmed it to the version in an earlier revision [1]. --Tony Sidaway 01:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bit pointless since that isn't actually the plot of the movie the public saw since it was there from before the movie opened to the public .Garda40 (talk) 02:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Right now the plot summary is too short and is just a hypey "set up" for the movie. I want to know the full plot, as is done for other movies (e.g. The Dark Knight, There Will Be Blood). 24.143.70.245 (talk) 00:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually somewhat inclined to believe the same. The plot of the movie is very, very murky no matter how well you try to spin or explain it, but the current, abbreviated "set up" plot summary is definitely not up to snuff vis a vis other plot summaries widely published on Wikipedia. -- Clayton —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nemoblue (talk • contribs) 14:55, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the plot description is too short. Compare the current version with that of Donnie Darko, which is around 1400 words long or Lost Highway. Just because the plot deliberately doesn't lend itself to a short structuralist description doesn't mean that one (the current plot summary) should be invented for it. I agree that the previous version [2] is too long but it needed to be trimmed line by line (scalpel) rather than butchered (hatchet). One square on the chessboard (talk) 16:31, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We have to discuss and decide how to treat this plot summary as it's not a typical case. As it is now, it seems like just guesswork. Because there is in fact no tidal generator and fluid karma is a msyterious liquid that's being extracted from a cavity that coils around the earth's core and that's what's affecting the earth's rotation. This is only known to someone who has read the comics however. The comics' plot is of course inextricably linked to that of the movie, however a person who watches the movie (which is the topic of this article) only knows what the movie tells us, which is that there's a tidal generator. There will surely be other situations like this within the plot, so we have to figure out if we want to tell it the way it is, or the way the movie tells it. I don't have an easy answer, so just trying to prompt discussion.--Jeff79 (talk) 11:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Future?"[edit]

Wouldn't it be more accurate to describe the film's setting as an alternate world based on the premise that the United States failed to stop the detonation of two nuclear devices in Texas in 2005? Calibanu (talk) 23:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Calibanu[reply]

Yes. This is clearly laid out in the films prologue. -- David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 21:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moby soundtrack ... what's in the film[edit]

I just got an import 2-cd of HOTEL which includes "Snowball," which I could SWEAR I heard in the film last week. Not mentioned anywehre. Seems that what's represented on the soundtrack CD (US) is but a tip of the iceberg of his music in the film.

Does anyone have a definitive listing of the tracks in the film (say, from the end credits) what would allow us to specify what music by Moby appeared in the film? -- David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 21:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


It appears that the soundtrack was originally intended to be a dual-disc set, what was released was close to just what's on the first disc. This would explain the obviously-missing tracks.

Evidence: eBay provides track listings for music CDs. It's not clear what the actual source for the listings is. They show the following as the track list for the Southland Tales soundtrack:

  1. Wave Of Mutilation - Pixies (UK Surf Version)
  2. Oh My Angel - Bertha Tillman
  3. Howl - Black Rebel Motorcycle Club (Extended Version)
  4. Look Back In - Moby
  5. Me & Bobby McGee - Waylon Jennings
  6. Chord Sounds - Moby
  7. Lucky Me - Roger Webb
  8. 3 Steps - Moby
  9. Broken Hearted Savior - Big Head Todd & The Monsters
  10. Teen Horniness Is Not a Crime - Abbey McBride/ClarKent/Sarah Michelle Gellar
  11. Tiny Elephants - Moby
  12. Forget Myself - Elbow
  13. Star Spangled Banner, The - Rebekah Del Rio & The Section Quartet
  14. Three Days - Jane's Addiction (Live Version)
  15. Memory Gospel - Moby
  16. If I Could Be With You - Louis Armstrong
  17. Planet Telex - Radiohead
  18. Tender - Blur
  19. Blackout - Muse
  20. Broken Hearted Savior - Big Head Todd & The Monsters
  21. Three Days - Jane's Addiction
  22. All These Things That I've Done - The Killers
  23. Real Thing, The - The Shakers
  24. Oh My Angel - Bertha Tillman
  25. Wave Of Mutilation - The Pixies
  26. Alendilch Strahit Der - Richard Wagner
  27. Lucky Me - Roger Webb
  28. Star Spangled Banner, The - Rebekah Del Rio
  29. Symphony No 9 - Ludwig Von Beethoven
  30. Forget Myself - Elbow

Forrestgump2000 (talk) 04:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Film date[edit]

Should this not be classed as a "2006" film since this was the date it was first released? IMdB also defines it as a 2006 film. DemonCleanerUK (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the end of the film's credits it says Copyright MMV - 2005 because that's when it was made. Is the year listed alongside the film the date of release or the date of copyrighting?--121.219.35.128 (talk) 06:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reconverting?[edit]

Krysta Now (Sarah Michelle Gellar), ex-porn star in the midst of reconverting; What does that phrase mean? KConWiki (talk) 03:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Connection to Donnie Darko?[edit]

Has there been any mention about any connection this movie has with Donnie Darko? While watching the movie, I noticed several similarities such as background sound (a low, continuing rumble?), a strong reference to water, mentions of vessals and artifacts. Could be simply down to having the same writer/director, but it might merit a section on the similarities and differences between the two movies. Kaotac (talk) 16:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the "similarities" you mention are stretching it a bit, at the least. I could see maybe including a few sentences here and there about how both films discuss time travel or the like, but an entire section is a kind of frivolous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.9.24.41 (talk) 16:50, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would make sense as this according to the writer/director of both films, this is a follow up to Donnie Darko. Don't belive me 67.9? http://worldfilm.about.com/od/independentfilm/fr/southlandtales.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.227.105.200 (talk) 06:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected pages[edit]

I have redirected three summary pages of the different bits of the film, regardless of the intend of the director, it was released as a single film and therefore we do not have four seperate pages to provide plot summaries for a single film. --Cameron Scott (talk) 09:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cast[edit]

The Cast section seems a bit disorganized. The first description refers to Krysta Now who doesn't come up until a few down. And then there's mixing between whether the sentence about each one is about the character, or about the actor. And then there's no little sentence for the characters down the list, which is fine, but maybe just one word about them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.98.77.154 (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Surely Kevin Smith's character is much more "supporting" than he is "principal".--Jeff79 (talk) 06:35, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moved.--Jeff79 (talk) 12:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

American-Franco-German[edit]

Why is this film considered American-Franco-German? 23:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Primer ( 2004 movie ) ends up with a pun: french ~ frank ~ franklin: To speak freely. Anyway, I actually checked up the discussion page because I was bothered by the term 'twin brothers' used to describe the two Taverners. They are time clones: The same person sent back in time, witout returning leads to two copies of that person existing at the same time. Artifact explanation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4DD4:D080:0:78E0:A11E:2200:8B77 (talk) 06:18, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's an LSD Comedy. How has this not been mentioned?[edit]

Like the wachowski's Speed Racer, the references are constant. Like a stoner movie, but for psychedelics. Not surprising that it went over the head of initial audiences. --Dr zoidberg590 (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Merger proposal[edit]

I propose that Southland Tales: Music from the Motion Picture be merged into Southland Tales. I think that the content in the soundtrack article can easily be explained in the context of the film itself, and the film's article is of a reasonable size that the merging of the soundtrack will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. In fact, there already is a section of the Southland Tales article that discusses the soundtrack, and the brevity of the soundtrack's own article is such that merging the article into that existing section of the film's article should not pose any problems whatsoever, and might make more sense than giving the soundtrack its own article.SecretName101 (talk) 03:08, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dramedy[edit]

Dramedy is not a word. I'm starting to get sick of having to keep removing it from articles. Please can people stop putting it in articles. Thanks Willowandglass (talk) 15:49, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Willowandglass: You've never heard of something before and it offends you (WP:IDON'TLIKEIT), so from your superior vantage point as the god of English, you decree it never existed and so it was not; which is to say, you cannot be bothered to do any research whatsoever, because... you just "know". Jesus wept. Oxford English Dictionary not good enough for you? Too British? How about M.H. Abrams' Glossary of Literary Terms (going back several editions), etc., etc., all of which disagree with your assertion, which is based on your own ill-informed personal opinion and, if I may be so blunt, in this age when searching for information is just that easy, your willful ignorance. Whether it's the best word to use in this general-use encyclopedia is another matter, which is why I am not reverting you. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 02:42, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Southland Tales. 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:

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) 12:17, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion[edit]

If anyone still remembers this thing they need to have a look at sourcing up the graphic novel pages, which are just plot summaries and are currently not adequate to justify their own pages. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:07, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Southland_Tales&oldid=1200111937"