Talk:Reign of Fire (film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Beowulf
I've read that this movie is meant as an allegory for the ancient story Beowulf, any official information? (there are a large number of similarities) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.176.85.30 (talk • contribs) 12:25, August 24, 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Plot
I don't think the plot summary for this is entirely correct. From what I remember about the movie there wasn't suppost to only be one male dragon in the world. Van Sant even mentions that they had a run in with another male dragon. Is this correct or am I wrong?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.158.58.34 (talk • contribs) 05:54, September 8, 2006 (UTC).
- It's been a while since I've last seen the movie, a real long while, but I'm pretty sure it was only a single male dragon. JBK405 01:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- That is the intention of the movie as far as I can tell, silly as it is. Perhaps they refer instead to one male dragon in England, thus allowing the English dragon population to die out and humans in that area to recover. Darth Tanner —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.154.52.147 (talk • contribs) 12:02, October 29, 2006 (UTC).
- emmm i dont know whether u want to put this in the trivia part but the opening scene at the construction site was actually filmed in Dublin, Ireland and the castle was actually down in Wicklow, Ireland so that technically doesnt make it an entireally British film —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.100.66.95 (talk • contribs) 02:37, November 11, 2006 (UTC).
- No, Van Zandt (I really think that's how his name is supposed to be spelled) says that this is the only male left. Van Zandt says that they traced the epidemeology (spelling?) of all the dragons that they had encountered back to the British Isles. That's why they flew a plane, as dangerous as it is, all the way there. It's implied that this male dragon has managed to kill all the rival males and any young that are born male. This is why no new males have popped up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.100.206 (talk) 19:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Trivia/Coincidence
In the trivia section it claims that this film "coincidentally" premiered on Sept. 11th 2002 in another country. This is not really a noteworthy coincidence (nor interesting trivia). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.14.100.36 (talk) 08:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC).
- It's noteworthy due to ABC's pulling the film from broadcast due to sensitivites over terrorism, since that gives the statement background and context. If that had not have occurred, then yes, I would agree that it is not noteworthy. MalikCarr 08:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] possible timeline error
I don't think the main part of the movie is set 12 years after the first part. Quinn says his adopted son was 3 years old when he found him and he's now a teenager so Quinn would've been a kid himself when he found him. Either the first part of the movie is takes place before 2008 or the main part tkaes place after 2020.218.215.135.195 11:09, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
The main part of the movie seems to be set in 2020, as stated by the movie (I just rewatched it). I updated the trivia section accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aluroon (talk • contribs) 05:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hard to kill?
The movie plot hand-waves away why the dragons were not more easily killed in the initial phases. A 20mm autocannon mounted on a truck would make short work of several dragons at once, let alone a pair of 30mm autocannons with radar guidance. And that doesn't touch what would be done by tanks hardened to nuclear standard, or attack helicopters or any of several support-attack aircraft and warships. Even if the effective range of the dragons' fire-breath was 1000 metres (unlikely), even third-world army units with a couple of BMGs could hold them off. That said, not a bad flick really. --Ossipewsk (talk) 02:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well, it seems like the males have impenetrable hide. The people had to shoot it in its mouth to kill it. And when Van Zandt kills that one dragon behind Quinn he shot it through its head. In the movie, too, the world powers used nuclear weapons, but the dragons either survived or fled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.100.206 (talk) 19:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Reign of Fire movie.jpg
Image:Reign of Fire movie.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 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) 04:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)