Talk:Logan's Run

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peer review Logan's Run has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Novels
Literature Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] Discussion

Has anyone read Logan's Run? If so, take a look and what I've done. It's ages since I read it, but I've been bold and put down what I could. Cgs

I saw the film, but not the book... Martin
I only saw the film too, but I took a shot at editing the article a bit. Nice article! My minor changes didn't alter the content significantly. I have a question, though. Didn't Logan's Run have some sequels? If so, they should be mentioned in the article. —Frecklefoot 15:22, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
A sequel to the film or book? I don't know of either (although the TV series was based very much on the film rather than then book). CGS 17:56, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC).
William F. Nolan wrote a couple of sequels: Logan's World (1978) and Logan's Search (1980). (And a novella called Logan's Return (2000), which only got a limited release.) According to his web site [1], he's also working on a couple of prequels. —Paul A 01:21, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Is the age limit thirty-years (Plot Conclusion) or 21 (Plot Introduction)? Mlk 06:36, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)
In the first book it's 21. In the movie it's 30. Salsa Shark 06:43, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

If anyone has read the book more recently than I, it'd be great if you could clarify the plot differences between the book and the movie. It seems to me the current article is a jumble of the two. Salsa Shark 04:01, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that the current article reflects the plot of just the book. CGS 17:29, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC).

One thing I found very interesting; Logan's Run, like many other novels, was a cynical commentary on the times. Nolan imagined the youth protests and growing cultural obsession with the young and beautiful as leading inevitably to a youth-dominated and finally youth-only culture. Interestingly, the opposite is happening; in Japan, the US, Europe, all places with a culture that worships youthful beauty and innocence, spawning such ideas as the "wisdom of a child" being somehow greater than experience. In each of these cultures, the population is AGING. I would love to see an exploration on THAT twist of fate. Tom S.

I interpreted the book to be an excuse to write about sex mostly. Bad writers overuse sex. There was no real plot, the characters simply wandered from scene to scene. Let them have sex in an ice cave! Let them have sex in a desert! The movie was a huge improvement. The book over simplified the youth culture theme. Children under 21 aren't interested in maintaining civilization or the machines that maintain it. The movie did well to raise the age limit to 30. Children under 21 aren't as afraid to die as are 30 year olds. They're bubbling with hormones, by 30, people have cooled off and are more protective of life. The movie also explains how children can be born without women carrying the children. Neither the book nor the movie explains why it's important for women not to carry (bonding) or how the fetus is removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.179.30.13 (talk) 22:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hulen Mall

Logan's Run was filmed in several locations around DFW but Hulen Mall wasn't one of them. Hulen Mall did not open until late 1977 and was still a hole in the ground when the movie was released. I am aware there are a few websites that list Hulen Mall as a location, however these websites are incorrect.

The Dallas Market Center is where most of the interior city scenes were filmed. Much of it hasn't changed since 1976, and is worth checking out if you happen to be in town for one of their rare general public exhibits.

I changed the sentance about the movie to reflect the correct location information, however trying to cram all that information into one line is awkward at best. Perhaps expanded sections dedicated to the book, movie, and TV show would be in order? - Thatdog 8 July 2005 18:16 (UTC)

[edit] Future film release

A citation has been requested for the statement that a new version of the film will be issued in 2006 or 2007. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. -- Dalbury(Talk) 21:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MGM

As far as I know this was one of MGM's last productions. As the film on its original release was only a moderate hit it wound up production at the studio - ironic as the film just missed the late 70s sci-fi boom. According to IMDB Jon Voight, Lindsay Wagner and James Cagney were all first choice for the leads so is it a case that the film has hamstrung by having an English lead and American villain.

[edit] 2000AD and Logan's Run

The style of the guns issued to the Sandmen have a striking similarity to the Lawgiver sidearms issued to the Judges of the 2000AD comics. Not only do they contain six different types of round depending on the situation (Standard execution, Heatseeker, Ricochet, Incendiary, Hi-Ex and Armour piercing in this instance), but they also have technology to ensure that only the rightful owner can wield them, killing anyone trying to use the gun if they are not the registered Judge.

Anyone know if there has been any influence cited by the creators, Wagner or Ezquerra regarding Logan's Run? Slavedriver 13:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Scope of "the run."

Previously the article indicated that Logan and Jessica travel all over the world. In reality, they spend most of their time in North America and briefly visit a research facility in Challenger Deep. I updated accordingly.

For reference or possible inclusion elsewhere, their path in the book is as follows: Los Angeles, California, USA -> Molly (Challenger Deep) -> Hell (Northern Canada) -> Crazy Horse Mountain and vicinity (South Dakota, USA) -> Fredericksburg, Virginia, USA -> Washington DC, USA -> Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA -> Cape Steinbeck, Florida, USA. Jzerocsk 23:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comic

While one issue of the seven issue Marvel Comics run had a story with Thantos, that story was not set in the Logan's Run Universe, nor was it related to the story in any way. It was just a second story in the issue. 70.106.220.156

[edit] Are the 30-year-old in the story being euthanised ?

The word is used a few times in the article, but i'd argue that it's not euthanasia. The wiki dictionary definition is here, and it relates to a a mercy kiling to end an incurable conditon. Assuming you don't consider life itself to be an incurable condition (!!!) i think the word used should be 'killed' or executed. A more loaded term, yes...but more accurate I think.

I'm updating the artcile to reflect this.

ahpook 17:38, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Termination -- that is what it is/was called by the state. The Runners called it murder. Being blasted by lasers (in an arena or by a gun) is not, IMHO, being euthanised. -- Jason Palpatine 15:36, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

In the book, the 21 year olds are killed in "Sleepshops" by a topical application of a lethal dose of "Hallucinogen, which wiped away a confused look of suffering and replaced it with a fixed and joyful smile." (Described in Chap. 10) This seems to be a painless method of execution. Only runners are killed with Guns. IMHO, if you consider the humane society killing excess kitties and puppies to be euthanization, then this is euthanization, too. JoKyR 20:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Split suggestion

Since there are three distinct works here, I suggest Logan's Run (1976 film), Logan's Run (TV series), and Logan's Run (nnnn film) (for the one in production). Any takers? ♥ Her Pegship♥ 03:52, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I second this suggestion. Furthermore, the listing of differences as it exists now should also go to the film article. --Reverend Loki 22:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps there should be one for the book as well. To be honest, the TV series was so short-lived, it may not be worth having its own article. Having an article for the upcoming film seems to go against WP:NOT's "crystal ball" clause. The Logan's Run remake as been in pre-production for a long time and the date is continuously being pushed back. This Letter dated June 13, 2006 purportedly from William F. Nolan himself indicates that the film is currently back in limbo with no director, no completed script, and no plans to start shooting. There's not enough encyclopedic information available about a film that doesn't even have a production team and what little information there is will likely be completely different by the time the movie makes it to the can. So I would propose a Logan's Run (1976 film) that makes mention of the television show and upcoming movie, a Logan's Run (novel) (and perhaps additional articles for the sequels) and if there is enough information to make it worth while, I wouldn't oppose a separate article for the TV series. Of course, if the new remake ever makes it to production, then an article should be generated for it. Jzerocsk 13:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  • A vote against the suggestion. I found it useful comparing the movie vs the book. However in this regard it would be usefull if the differences were made clearer, especially when refering to the ankh in Differences between the novel and film - Keith Kube - 30 June 2006
  • Another vote against the suggestion. Sorry, but the amount of information provided in each section is not extensive enough, IMHO, to warrant separate articles. If you have more (a lot more) information to add to the various sections, then it could be justifable -- look at what happened to 2001: A Space Odyssey (film) after the initial article became too over-bloated. I think the amount of information involved should be a significant factor in this decision. And there just doesn't appear to be enough here to justify it at this time. I believe -- as it stands now -- the article should remain intact. -- Jason Palpatine 15:43, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I revise my proposal based on the June 13 letter mentioned above. Despite the paucity of material, I think we should at least have a separate article for the book (Logan's Run (novel)), as it is a distinct work apart from the film. ♥ Her Pegship♥ 22:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed "Trivia" Section

I just do not feel that fan speculation about what sort of banging might be included in the unmade film qualifies as trivia. Happy cricket 00:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

The Trivia section is still there, but I'm removing the mention of the song "Carousel, Carousel". That would be homage to the film only, as the Carrousel [sic] concept doesn't appear in the novel. If the Logan's Run (film) article has a trivia section, it could be added there. Druff 03:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remake information

I've expanded on the information about the remake with solid citation. However, one citation, I found, this letter, is located on a personal webpage hosted by GeoCities. While the letter does not seem fake, the fact that it's found on this webpage but nowhere else (that I could find) makes it a weak source to use. If the letter can be located on a news website that recognizes it as the author's own, then I would be glad to cite it. In the meantime, I'm not sure if the link is appropriate, even as an external link. A second citation issue is the mention of director James McTeigue as Singer's replacement. McTeigue was first mentioned at Variety, but it was treated as a rumor. There was a leftover citation from TV Guide, but the link does not work. I was not able to find any search results that cited TV Guide mentioning McTeigue as a possibility, only ones tied to Variety, which I've mentioned called the information a rumor. If anyone can verify either the letter or the McTeigue possibility, that would be greatly appreciated. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 06:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

This section seems a bit long for here. Maybe it would fit better at the film page? JJL 16:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure, since the information reflects that it would both reference the book and the original film. I think it's most appropriate at the article of the primary source material. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 16:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crazy Horse Link

The article currently links to Crazy Horse the person, but in context should link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Horse_Memorial 72.158.52.66 16:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

That was fixed. Jacqke (talk) 17:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Logans world.JPG

Image:Logans world.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

An editor added the missing rationale. Jacqke (talk) 17:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Novel vs. Movie

An anon editor has been adding things from the movie ("The Circuit") which were not present in the novel. Please stop doing this. Only edit if you know what you're talking about. Sir Rhosis 02:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Question - and I may be showing my noobness at this, but is there a Wiki-preference for novels over books, or for the original work over the work remade into different forms? Wondering, because it would seem that the majority of people searching Logan's Run would be looking for the movie, not the book. Why aren't searchers sent to the movie first, with a disambig link to the book? Applejuicefool (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Logans world.JPG

Image:Logans world.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 00:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I added a fair use rationale for the photo--I hope I did it right. Jacqke (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)