Talk:Sneakers (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics 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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority 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.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

I expanded this stub, but it's still a bit short. If anyone wants to add to it, please do - or if there's anything specific you'd like to see included, I'd be happy to find it out and add it. CamelsRmammals 21:18, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 character analysis 2 Cleanup - 9 March 2007 3 Fair use rationale for Image:Top-geek-sneakers.jpg 4 Fair use rationale for Image:Sneakersmovie.jpg

[edit] character analysis

I've removed this from the article. Although I like it, it is original research and POV. Maybe something can be done to salvage it?

One of the most interesting aspects of the film is the divergence of the initially similar personalities of Martin and Cosmo due to a life-changing incident, that is, Cosmo's arrest. Cosmo is even perhaps more compelling of a character than Martin. In a sense, the real Cosmo died the night of his arrest, symbolically at the moment when he kicks and breaks the window as he is being dragged away by the police. The paintings of the Hindenburg that decorate his office are perhaps best seen as a metaphor for how his life came crashing down.

The version of him that survives and is revealed later in the film has been distorted and twisted by his incarceration and by the injustice of only him getting caught and not Martin, who largely put him up to his crime. There are many metaphors in the movie that suggest Cosmo is not a complete person. The sculptures in his office of the silhouettes of a man are another obvious statement to the effect that he is a scarred, hollow man. His office is a very sparse, bleak, and empty: just like his life has been without Martin.

The Cray computer and the sensors that protect the office parallel the intimidating intelligence of Cosmo himself and the emotional defenses he has erected to protect himself from the real world. To defend himself from the type of hurt and pain he has experienced he tries to eliminate (but actually bottles up) his feelings. There is much to support the idea that he himself is aware that this cannot really be done. For example, in the climatic rooftop scene it is clear that Cosmo desperately needs his old friend. We, the viewers, are left somewhat sadly knowing that Cosmo will live the rest of his life without Martin and in despair. One cannot help but wonder how Cosmo would have turned out if he had escaped instead of Martin. How much of our personalites are molded by our life experiences? Can we blaim Cosmo for his point of view if we understand how he developed it?

All of this makes for a compelling character that serves as the bedrock of the story.

Feel free to add back whatever is appropriate for the 'pedia. --Dante Alighieri | [[User talk:Dante Alighieri|Talk]] 20:56, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

"the divergence of the initially similar personalities of Martin and Cosmo"... I don't really think so. Cosmo had more sinister streaks to his personality even before his arrest. He tricks Martin into going for the pizza, muttering "One cannot trust anybody these days" as Martin leaves. This difference is merely amplified by their different fates on that day, but - ironically - it is also the reason for their different fates.

Anyway, this is OR, so it doesn't really belong in the article. DevSolar 07:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup - 9 March 2007

I did a sizeable amount of cleanup today. This article's not yet perfect, but with the exception of a few glaring errors further down in the page (Trivia, etc.), the article is very serviceable.

• Expanded the abstract and reformatted it
• Reorganized Sections to better fit Wiki standards
• Changed "Overview" sec to "Synopsis", cleanup to fit this purpose
• Removed "Plot" section: Possible Copyright Violation

I removed the section labeled "Plot", as it was extremely lengthy and was almost entirely composed of lines taken verbatim from the film (and not identified as such, but that's hardly the point -- it was simply a straight read of the film itself; not only did it copy too much, it didn't include key storytelling points and was difficult to follow for those not already familiar with movie).

If someone wants to retool a comprehensive explanation of the plot that conforms to Wiki standards, I encourage it. As it stands now, the "Synopsis" section serves its purpose well, so an immediate rewrite of "Plot" isn't necessary.

--

ManfrenjenStJohn 04:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Why was the "Plot" section a copyright violation? When listing a copyright violation, it's nice to include a link. I hope you don't mean that it's a copyright violation of the movie. A plot description of a movie is not a copyright violation of the movie. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 04:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for guiding me through this -- I've been reading WikiP since its inception, but I'm relatively new to editing. The "Plot" section was overlong and difficult to read; It bogged down the entire article. Copyright violation was definitely one of my concerns, as the section read like an exhaustive scene-by-scene description of the film, with most scenes described using strings of dialogue lifted from the movie but written as if original; not as a cite. I think it was just poor form and too much of a risk of a copyright violation on top of that, due to the absolute linear similarity to the film's dialogue. Feel free to revert it or review it without reverting it (if that's possible); I'd like to see if you agree. At any rate, I've read a lot of good wiki plot summaries and a lot of bad ones, and that one was ... well, one of the bad ones. It really struck me as How Not to Do A Good Plot Summary. (I know there's a policy that describes this, but I'm not familiar enough to cite it as I write this.) I think the "plot" section entry did far more harm than good. I stared at it for a good while to see if I could rework it, and decided that it would be more efficient to start from scratch. If I can find the policy I'm thinking of, I'll be sure to come back and cite it here. I'm happy to read your guidance on the matter. Thanks. -- ManfrenjenStJohn 06:32, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

One more thing: If need be, I can find a copy of the script for comparison's sake, but I think that probably won't be necessary. The section as it was written simply fails on its own merits. I do not mean to denigrate anyone -- rather, I'm actually trying to ingratiate myself. If I knew how to quickly track down the author to ask his/her opinion before I deleted it, I would. As it is, all I know how to do is to "be bold", and describe my actions here on the talk page. Let me know if I can be of further assistance. Thanks -- ManfrenjenStJohn 06:40, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. I think it was written by many many people. It's not a copyright violation, don't worry about that at all. I think I agree and disagree. I think there should have been a plot section, but maybe not as long. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 08:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I took it upon myself to jump in with a red pencil and edit down the plot summary. While it was not badly written, it was excessively wordy and repetitive in parts. Feel free to heap scorn upon me for my efforts. Konczewski 17:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Top-geek-sneakers.jpg

Image:Top-geek-sneakers.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 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 17:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Sneakersmovie.jpg

Image:Sneakersmovie.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) 05:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Rationale added to image article. Johnmc (talk) 09:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)