From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Albums This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. WikiProject Films     (Rated B-Class)    (Mid importance) This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-Importance on the importance scale. Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film. WikiProject Science Fiction     (Rated B-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page. Please feel free to add your name the project participation list and/or contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale. Article This article is a Article.

I just figured out something, this could be where the terroist of 9/11 got the idea.

• in the movie, it show a 2-second shot of the World Trade Center getting hit. This may be different because it hits the tower with the radio antenna first and then it shows the other tower without the antenna on fire almost at the floors were it actually hit, the action in the movie is almost the same as what during 9/11.

• A Taxi Driver says in the movie,"Saddam Hussein is bombing us."

- Chris

• I get sick of people saying all this "9/11 in dollar bills!" "9/11 in Wingdings!" stuff. For one thing, the Chrystler building, the Grand Central Station, and various other landmarks are also destroyed. Remember, back then no one remotely imagined terrorist attacks as anything more than bombs going off on street level. Besides, neither WTC tower is actually knocked down, and the Taxi driver just says "It could be terrorist attacks" along with 3 or 4 other things.

-Tower7Revived

• I agree it's revelant to include a WTC 9/11 comment in the text of the main article. Let's be objective - the film showed an accurate future image - one of the towers on fire following a disaster. Summer audiences were asked to suspend disbelief and imagine a disaster event in New York, very close in time to something that actually happened 3 years later.

As far as terrorists getting ideas from it? That's far-reaching conjecture, not supported by any evidence and not neccesary to include in the article.

-rjp2006

More Wikipedia madness. When will the lame conjecture and personal interpretations end?

What I think is slightly more relevant is the fact that the clip in question was cut from post 9/11 showings on television for sensitivity, might be worth a mention.Eddus

Does anyone have a picture of "Dottie" (the meteor) for this page?, i think it's essential.

Movie text [1]

Contents 1 Dottie 1.1 Where in Paris? 1.2 YouTube links 1.3 Freedom's Heat shield? 1.4 one of the worst movies 1.5 Synopsis needs revising

[edit] Dottie

Take your pick. In sequence, there are some between the 6th and 7th, but they are so closeup and you do not get to see it in it's entirety. The ones I tried to take are the ones showing the entire thing.

Cheers! -therearenospoons 03:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where in Paris?

"strikes Paris near the Champs-Elysees," - I don't think so: we SEE the Ch-E, but isn't ground zero well behind it? Kdammers 05:47, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

After the strike, the overhead shot shows what I assume is an impact crater. Near the mid-bottom of the picture is the Arc de Triomphe (spelling?) Douglasnicol 15:04, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] YouTube links

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed or you would like to help spread this message contact us on this page. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 06:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

YouTube has already cut deals with many content providers. As such, I don't think you can remove links based on restrictions on linking to copyright violations. We need to respect copyright, but need not be paranoid about linking to things that may or may not be violations. -Quasipalm 05:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Freedom's Heat shield?

When Shuttle Freedom is landing on Dottie, it strikes various parts of it's heat shield on the asteroid numerous times, and the wing leading edges are also struck by bits of rock. Surely this would prevent the shuttle making a safe entry back to Earth? rgbriggsy112 2326 20 Dec 2006 (UTC)

[edit] one of the worst movies

The movie is corny and trying too hard to be funny. The plot is stupid and typical hollywood which shouts "The US saves the world again". The screen writer should be ashamed of themselves as they portray other cultures with their ignorant perception of what they would be like. (i.e. Shanghai is represented by poor families floating on wooden rafts eating rice) Would you bloody americans like to see Cowboys eating macdonalds as a symbol for america? No, you want beach boys, apple pie and the 67 mustang. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.214.156.18 (talk) 03:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

alrighty then User:Saget53 10:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

alright stfu —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.79.196.46 (talk) 11:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Synopsis needs revising

I am going to rewrite the introductory paragraph of the Synopsis here, but I'm posting here for commentary before I do so. To be precise, many of this introductory's paragraphs statements are contrary to the actual movie.

"Before the film’s title appears onscreen, a narrator (Charlton Heston) informs us that during the time of the dinosaurs, a six mile-wide asteroid struck the Earth at the present day Yucatan Peninsula, causing catastrophic damage to its ecosystem. We are also informed that the probability of a similar disaster in our time is very high (although in scientific reality the chances of a "global killer" asteroid hitting the Earth within a hundred years is very small)."

This paragraph is purposely misleading, and implies that the narrator states more than he actually does. He points out that "This is the Earth, at a time when the Dinosaurs roamed a lush and fertile planet. A piece of rock just 6 miles wide changed all that. It hit with the force of 10,000 nuclear weapons, sending up a million tons of dirt and ash, creating a suffcatating blanket that would blot out the sun for a thousand yards. It happened before, and it will happen again."

While the movie physically depicts the Asteroid striking the Yucatan Peninsula, the narrator does not announce that fact and the article should be more clear to that point. Also, at no point do the narrator OR visuals make any reference to the "timeframe" in which the catastrophe is bound to happen again. He simply states that it definatelly will happen again inventually, a reference to an elementary law of probability: Given infinite time, even the smallest possibility is inevitable. The statement that "we are also informed that the probability of a similar disaster in our time is very high" is the most inaccurate statement in the paragraph. Finnicks 22:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)