Talk:10 Cloverfield Lane

Spoilers?

Spoiler date, can we please add spoilers after a week or so? After most people have seen it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.8.62 (talk) 21:18, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

There are no spoilers. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 08:33, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

You can see WP:SPOILER for Wikipedia's policy regarding spoilers. Zamaster4536 (talk) 07:16, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Could we please stop removing the fact that this is a science fiction movie from the genre description? It seems a clear attempt to avoid "spoilers" but an encyclopedia article should not be trying to avoid spoiling a movie by leaving out crucial information. There are science fiction elements from the very beginning of the movie (people hiding from what they believe to be an unprecedented chemical attack of unknown origin), a victim of the alien attack is seen before the halfway point with symptoms incompatible with known realistic causes, and the last third of the movie has the protagonist fighting alien spacecraft. Resistance is Character-Forming (talk) 18:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with this section. But I will answer you here, since this is where you ask. This is not about it being spoilers. This is about treating subjects the same way on Wikipedia as they are treated in external sources. While your opinion might be that this should qualify as a science fiction film, the fact is that most external sources do not talk about this film as a science fiction film. Here is a list of some published reviews that never even mention the science fiction elements in this film, let alone call it a "science fiction film": [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. If the fact that this film has science fiction elements isn't important enough for these reviewers to mention it to their readers, then I certainly don't think it is important enough for us to include it in the first line in this article. WP:SPOILERS says that spoilers should be treated no different from other content. But that also means we should not go out of our way to stick them up the nose of our readers.TheFreeloader (talk) 19:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

The reason why many reviewers are not saying that it is a science fiction film is because revealing that would be a spoiler, and reviewers generally try to avoid spoiling the "twist" in a movie. Almost all of those links you posted are movie reviews. It is not because there is any doubt that this is a science fiction movie. This is an encyclopedia article, not a movie review, and thus it should list the genre of the movie correctly. There is no way this movie is not going to end up on lists of 2016 science fiction movies. Resistance is Character-Forming (talk) 17:26, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

When it does show up on such a list we can add that genre. Until then, unless you have a source to back-up your claim as to the reason why reviewers are not claiming that the film is sci-fi, you're engaging in speculation. DonIago (talk) 18:19, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree. We just don't have evidence to support that external sources regard this film as a science fiction film. Thus, that claim fails to pass WP:V.TheFreeloader (talk) 00:01, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

And here are several reviews and articles that do call it a Sci-Fi film: [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:38, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Sure. It already shows up as 'Science Fiction' on IMDB. It also shows up as 'Drama' on IMBD, in fact, at the top of the list, though not by actual numerical rating. Anything that has elements of a genre can be thus classified, but in terms of un-cherrypicked critics' response, I've just taken the opening page of Rotten Tomatoes' cited critics, 12 in all, and examined the full reviews of each (about 20 minutes ago). Not one reviewer called it 'science fiction', or 'sci-fi'.

There is no such genre, formally speaking, but toward the end, the term 'bondage-movie' came to mind, in the same category as the classic "The Collector', or "Whatever happened to Baby Jane?'. More simply, I would call it a Horror movie, and be done with it.JohndanR (talk) 22:39, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

spelling error

The page is protected, so I couldn't edit the spelling error in the first line. 'titel' should read 'title.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.115.226 (talk • contribs) 13:46, 15 January 2016

misquote

The 'Release' section quotes Mary Elizabeth Winstead. But looking at the source, it seems like she's referring to another movie, Faults, instead of 10 Cloverfield Lane. Quote should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:8100:1A4D:6D46:E80D:501A:3E33 (talk) 17:11, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Suggested quote: "you don’t know who’s telling the truth or who to believe. There’s a lot of, who’s manipulating who, and all of that. Tonally, it’s very different, but it has some of those same themes." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myztikrice (talk • contribs) 20:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Just a suggestion

Shouldn't there be some kind of a mention about how much of a secret and surprise this movie is? I'm not talking about it as a movie-goer, but as a researcher, about the fact that it's just come from out of nowhere in the midst of Abrams and Star Wars? --Matt723star (talk) 02:07, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Nature of relation

If this spiritual successor is explicitly not a sequel, could it possible be a prequel or midquel? 184.145.18.50 (talk) 00:02, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

how about crapquel? While not a comment on the movie's quality they were originally saying that the only thing it ever had to do with the original Cloverfield ANYTHING was that JJ stuck is nose into it and the studio wanted to cash in on the previous movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.197.144.134 (talk) 23:40, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Stop adding that line

We have no idea that they are or are not in the same universe. If you are going to write that, you have to cite that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Broncosman12 (talk • contribs) 13:55, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 10 Cloverfield Lane. 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/20080215075036/http://www.tagruato.jp/ to http://www.tagruato.jp/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.eonline.com/news/767635/teen-choice-awards-2016-nominations-announced-see-the-first-wave-of-potential-winners

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

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 22:11, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Setting

"Southern coast" and being near "Lake Charles", so my guess is this is set near Lake Charles, Louisiana. Plus is was shot in Louisiana and they mention New Orleans.