Talk:The Chronicles of Riddick

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
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.
Unknown
This article has not been rated on the importance assessment scale.
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've recently seen the film, and it doesn't appear to me that the war is among Necromancers and Elementals. It's said that Elementals declare themselves neutral; and Necromancers don't seek destruction of the Elementals, but unification of all human races (hence their politic of join-or-die)... Don't you agree?--euyyn 11:07, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think that's the general aim of the "Legion Vast", though the Lord Marshall seemed intent on gaining not only human lives but all the life in the galaxy, by converting it or annihilating it. (Hence his "...and I'll spare your planet... for last.") --Lazarus Plus 20:53, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

has anyone seen dark fury? was one of the statues of the "frozen" people a furyan? i thought there was a sign that said that.

wouldn't that mean that there are three furyans? riddick, the guy working for the necromongers, and the poor statue guy (who is alive)?

should that be included in the entry?


Contents

[edit] Goodbye Opinions

The logical inconsistency mish mash, I'm removing it. That seems very opinionated. TotalTommyTerror 14:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

It's not an "opinion" that the drastic change of temperature on a planet's surface is plausible only if it doesn't have an atmosphere. And it's also not an opinion that people need to breath air in an atmosphere to live, let alone to run. These are plain scientific facts that anyone with some common sense should know.

Sure, because all science fiction films deal with nothing but logic and reality. It's a sci-fi film, and as Sci-Fi is wont to do, some logic is suspended. Therefore, critiquing any logical inconsistency in such a film is subjective. TotalTommyTerror 17:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

this whole article (and the one at Pitch Black seem too long winded and detailed. do we really need to know every single thing down to crew man number two's shoe size? plus, some of the data seems opinionated. the article needs shortening. keep it short and sweet, with nothing beyond the relevant data, please. one more thing - tommyterror: logical fallacies are not a trademark of sci-fi films, as you would have it. they are simply the sign of bad script writing (which this particular film is well endowed with). a good script will have all the logical ties tied together in a sci-fi flick as much as in a historical drama. no need to be all high and mighty. 213.172.234.234 03:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Science Fiction Film?

Really? Pitch Black certainly was but I think Chronicles of Riddick should almost definitely be classed as a "Science Fantasy" film. I mean... Air Elementals? A spiritual guide popping up every now and again? (Director's Cut)

To be honest, while I really like both Pitch Black and Chronicles, and want to see sequels, I find it hard to buy that they're set in the same universe... it's one thing to leap from the horror genre to the action/adventure genre - but going from Sci-Fi to Science Fantasy is a little bit hard to swallow... (195.92.168.167 22:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC))

[edit] The Final Word: Vaako or Riddick?

Ok, so which ending is going to be considered 'canon'? The Theatrical Cut, where Vaako says "You keep what you kill." Or the Director's Cut, where Riddick mutters it to himself? A few days ago, the director's cut ending was the one written - and when I last checked, it was the theatrical version... wouldn't it make sense to create a section that explains the differences between the director's and theatrical cuts? (195.92.168.167 22:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC))

Certainly. Go ahead and add it if you wish. Cburnett 03:12, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
The way I see it, extra stuff in the directors cut are like deleted scenes: interesting but not canon. I would say the Vaako line is the canon ending. TJ Spyke 12:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Except that the director's cut would be how the director intended for the film to be. Which would make that version canon. TotalTommyTerror 13:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Like I've said earlier, we have to wait for the next movie to figure out which is canon, as far as the "canon" situation is concerned. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 16:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sequel Citation

Is there a citation for Vin saying a sequel(s) was in the works? I don't pretend to have my finger on the pulse, as I've never heard him say there was a sequel.

Because if he never said anything that snippet at the end of the article should be removed. TotalTommyTerror 07:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Richard B. Riddick

Shouldn't there be a separate article on the character of Riddick? It seems to be merged in with the article on The Chronicles of Riddick. I guess I'll go start writing one, but contributions are appreciated.--65.96.2.19 15:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

STOP. DO NOT MAKE AN ARTICLE. I don't meant to sound antagonistic, but there already is one; I'm pretty sure there is at least one link on here that links to his page. In the future, once again, not to be mean, but please check if an article is created before creating one. BishopTutu 21:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
If you already know about the other article, ignore this previous statement. BishopTutu 21:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Helios or Helion (Prime) ?

Maybe my hearing has gone bad, but to me I coulda sworn it was Helion-Prime. Googled it, can up with 34,000 results for Helion, 387,000 for Helios. Its not on cable atm so no way to watch the captions. Anyone know for sure? Coradon 03:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I just saw it on DVD, and I'm pretty sure it was "Helion." The reason Helios has so many more results is because of Helios. Just read the article(s). -Platypus Man | Talk 06:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Yup, just watched the DVD again. Not only do subtitles say Helion, the display screen on the ship as he gets to Helion says Helion. Coradon 09:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
It's Helion. BishopTutu 17:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thematic Elements

I disagree with whoever wrote this. Sure, they were TRYING to make an astute observation, but that's mainly POV. In the latter movie, one can maybe give the reluctant hero arguement, but in Pitch Black Riddick is the first to arrive at that spaceship and he is perfectly capable of operating it on his own. He first attempts to leave the planet alone, then with.. the female lead. She convinces him to go back and save the others and he ends up almost sacrificing himself for the others.

What happens then is that the female lead returns to help Riddick and finds him badly wounded, having survived an attack from multiple.. the alien thingys. From there she gets taken away beyond his conrol, he returns to the ship, avenges her death, and the movie ends. Dessydes 10:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/h/e/Talk%7EThe_Chronicles_of_Riddick_2092.html"