Talk:The X-Files: I Want to Believe

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.
Future This article has been rated as Future-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 Related task forces (nations and regions): Canadian cinema task force

	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. Feel free to add your name to the participants list and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The X-Files: I Want to Believe article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1

Contents 1 Name 2 2012 3 sequel or movie? 4 Plot of Novelization

[edit] Name

What's with this 'Untitled X-Files Sequel' thing, why not just call it X-Files 2, or something? Has this already been discussed? I don't know, but what I do know is X-Files 2 is a better name for the article, the fact that it is called 'untitled' just doesn't look right. Come on there has to be someone out there who agrees with me!! Captain la rose (talk) 04:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I do agree, but I don't see it as that big of a deal. According to recent comic-con interviews, the movie does have a title and it will be released "soon". I think we could wait on changing the title until we get the official one. Blackngold29 (talk) 04:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles on movies are titled with the official title of the movie. Currently this movie has no title -- therefore it is untitled. To make up a title, as logical as that title might seem, would constitute original research. Equazcion •✗/C • 05:21, 1 Mar 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Equazcion that the sequel has no official title. We didn't call The Dark Knight Batman Begins 2 when the article was around before the title was revealed. This film could be named anything. X-Files 2 redirects here, so there shouldn't be an issue of finding it. Inevitably, there will be a "full" title, unless it wants to be simple and merely called The X-Files, then we'd probably move it to The X-Files (2008 film). I think it's best to wait for an official title announcement. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 14:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2012

<<However, at a recent convention Chris Carter did comment that the date December 12, 2012 is a plot point.<<

Was he really referring to this film? I think he was saying that a third film would address that. While the date may weigh heavily on Mulder and Scully's minds during the events of this film, it sounds like X-Files 3 would be the true return to the mythology, and this film just paying lip service to it. Gillian's comment about it still being 4 years away supports this. —Simon Beavis

There has been no confirmation of an third X-Files film, I highly doubt he was referring to that. I understand that the film won't take place in 2012, and it will take place now (2008), however 2012 could still be a plot point, even if it will happen in the future. Blackngold29 (talk) 04:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

They their will be a third film if this one does well enough. And if there is a third film, it will be mythology driven. —Simon Beavis —Preceding comment was added at 14:29, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

And if it is mythology driven, people will be happy. This will cause the outbreak of the second hippy era, the peak of which shall occur in 2023. This will lead to worldwide nuclear disarmament, which will in turn lead to invasion by a variety of alien species we will no longer be prepared to stop. Now, if we're quite done predicting the future, perhaps we could get back to writing articles. Equazcion •✗/C • 15:10, 2 Mar 2008 (UTC)

No crystal ball involved. They said there will be a third one if this one does well enough. They said the 2012 date will be addressed. Someone obviously doesn't frequent AICN.

The ref makes absolutely no mention of the date having anything to do with this movie. The only time it appears there is in this blurb:

"Both Ed and Chris are very cognizant of the looming date 2012. And its affect on the "X Files" mythology. (December 12, 2012 is the end of the work date on the Mayan Calendar, and is mentioned by one of the characters in the last episode as the date for Colonization.)"

They mention the date having an affect on the mythology, not on this movie. The statement about the date should not be in this article. (PS "end of the work date" is a typo, at least I'm assuming it is. Supposed to say "end of the world".)Equazcion •✗/C • 04:20, 2 Mar 2008 (UTC)

You can remove it from the article if you wish, however, it seems pretty obvious that 2012 plays a large role in the mythology. Why would they mention this randomly in the middle of a discussion about the new movie, if it has nothing to do with the film? Blackngold29 (talk) 04:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Because the new film isn't all they were talking about at the time, and 2012 is getting closer. Either way, to say it "likely" has something to do with the movie is speculation. The ref doesn't actually say anything like that. Equazcion •✗/C • 05:12, 2 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I suppose we'll find out soon enough anyway. Thanks. Blackngold29 (talk) 05:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] sequel or movie?

I have concerns about the title of the article, "sequel" suggests it's, perhaps, directly related to the previous film, instead of being a stand alone film. Maybe a pedantic page move is in order? Rehevkor (talk) 03:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I would imagine that this film would get an official title sooner or later. From what I can tell, it's a sequel in name only. We haven't had a problem with this setup, especially with X-Files 2 redirecting here. We'd be moving it twice, so I would suggest sticking to this for now and moving the article to the proper and final title. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The title that Fox is currently using to promote the film is "Untitled X-Files Motion Picture" which definitely downplays the idea of it being a sequel to Fight the Future.- MajorB <talk> <contribs> - 02:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plot of Novelization

There was a paragraph recently added to the article: "The plot for the film has now been revealed through the back cover blurb for the novelization by: "Mulder and Scully are back in the thrilling novelization of the summer 2008 blockbuster movie based on the classic X-Files TV show! When a group of women are abducted in the wintry hills of rural Virginia, the only clues to their disappearance are the grotesque human remains that begin to turn up in snow banks along the highway. With officials desperate for any lead, a disgraced priest’s questionable “visions” send local police on a wild goose chase and straight to a bizarre secret medical experiment that may or may not be connected to the women’s disappearance. It’s a case right out of The X-Files. But the FBI closed down its investigations into the paranormal years ago. And the best team for the job is ex-agents Fox Mulder and Dr. Dana Scully, who have no desire to revisit their dark past. Still, the truth of these horrific crimes is out there somewhere...and it will take Mulder and Scully to find it!"

As seen here this is legit, although the paragraph should be re-written in a more encyclopedic format. Thank you. Blackngold29 (talk) 14:11, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I would discourage citing the novelization for the film. Literature and cinema are two different mediums, and it cannot be purported what will overlap and what will not. This has been discussed for some novelizations of major films, see links here. I would recommend waiting for the official synopsis that will be directly related to the film. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 14:30, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

That is a good argument, which I agree with. That being said, I propose a new section be created about the novelization. After the film is released this could also include differences from the film, etc. Blackngold29 (talk) 15:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

We sort of have a section for this at WP:MOSFILM#Adaptations -- it's for comparing the source material and the film adaptation, but I think the same argument could be applied for the film and its novelization. Also, for adding the novelization to the Wikipedia article, you could do something like at Road to Perdition#Further reading to show the details. We could add more details about the novelization, though I'm not sure how much film novelizations get covered. We could mention the premise of the novel and let readers decide what they think will be on screen or not. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

With novelizations, it's a case of innocently summarising them. The guidelines exist for book to film adaptations because people get so bogged down in their own views of the changes that often people don't research and make the article inform why changes were done. With a novelization, it's obvious the author has made his/her own view of the story by reading the scripts. Alientraveller (talk) 17:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)