Jump to content

Talk:Atonement (2007 film): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Tassedethe moved page Talk:Atonement (film) to Talk:Atonement (2007 film): further dab
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs)
11,637,095 edits
m Replaced obsolete font tags and reduced Lint errors. (Task 12)
Line 61: Line 61:
== Wild About Movies ==
== Wild About Movies ==


I've [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Atonement_%28film%29&diff=183682877&oldid=183667360 trimmed] down the usage of multi-ref tagging for Wild About Movies. A tag does not need to be used every one or two sentences, just at the end of the paragraph or before a sentence that belongs to another reference. —<font face="Palatino Linotype">[[User:Erik|Erik]]</font> ([[User talk:Erik|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Erik|contrib]]) - 19:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I've [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Atonement_%28film%29&diff=183682877&oldid=183667360 trimmed] down the usage of multi-ref tagging for Wild About Movies. A tag does not need to be used every one or two sentences, just at the end of the paragraph or before a sentence that belongs to another reference. —[[User:Erik|<span style="font-family:Palatino Linotype;">Erik</span>]] ([[User talk:Erik|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Erik|contrib]]) - 19:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


== Dead nominations ==
== Dead nominations ==

Revision as of 07:43, 16 January 2022

Plot

No where in the plot section does it mention that Cecilia ad Robbie died before meeting up again. I'd say this was a pretty crucial point? I'd add it myself but I was half asleep when watching it. Vanillav (talk) 23:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean that they meet up with each other at the seaside then that is easily accounted for by indicating that the purpose of the last book was to being about the happy reunion of them despite having been separated by the prison stint and they having died in separate incidents as part of the last book. Redgrave's character explains that in her interview.2605:E000:9152:8F00:112A:4023:2176:3EB (talk) 10:13, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Plot section - copyvio

I removed the entire Plot section because it appeared to have been lifted from [http://www.amazon.com/Atonement/dp/B00005JPTE this Amazon page]. --85.158.137.195 13:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have also just removed the entire plot section, because it was directly copied from The Focus Features site [1]. I strongly suggest anyone thinking of doing it again read WP:COPYVIO first. AnmaFinotera (talk) 08:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well someone desperately needs to write a new one, the article tells nothing of what the film's actually about. Nova Prime (talk) 15:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that a new plot was inserted recently and this plot has been profusely edited. But it still may come from a copyrighted website? — Andy W. (talk/contrb.) 18:06, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Throwning Scene

I think it would be worthwhile for someone to insert into the plot, the scene where Briony throws herself into the lake for Robbie to save her. It provides depth into her character and gives her more motive. The current plot seems to skip over it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sworded lion26 (talk • contribs) 03:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also do think this section is missing. I isn't only giving her "more motvie", it is THE motive for she obviously was in love with Robbie and later in the hospital confesses it was so. She not only misinterpreted the scenes between Robbie and Cecilia, she was obviously jealous. Roadrunner gs (talk) 06:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're wrong and doing the novel a disservice by giving Briony such a shallow motive. It should of course be considered that jealousy played a part, but there are so many other reasons that could also play a part in her reasoning; her wish to protect her sister, her fear of the raw sexuality in the letter, even her frustration at the events of that day leading to one silly childhood act. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.25.22.11 (talk) 14:16, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I agree, the author of this article has severely misinterpreted the character of Briony. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.91.196.77 (talk) 19:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Briony is not jealous of Cecelia and Robbie. She states, in the movie and in the novel, that as soon as she told Robbie that she was in love with him (when she was ten, and years before she accuses him of raping her cousin), the feeling immediately went away. Her motive for fingering him in the assault was threefold: she misinterpreted what she saw by the fountain (because she could not hear them talking, and because she looked at them halfway through the scene), she thought he had already tried to assault Cecelia in the library (and that she had rescued Cecelia from further harm by walking in on them), and she read the note with the word "cunt" in it. She was not aware that the scene in the library was consensual, and so I am going to change the plot as it is written now, since it suggests that she was jealous when she saw Robbie making love to her sister. The drowning scene is interesting as character development, but I'm not sure that it's all that necessary to the plot, so I am neutral about putting it in. If it is put in, though, please be sure to mention that as soon as she told him she loved him, the feeling dissipated. Keener Reed (talk) 05:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP guidelines clearly point out that it is not the role of WP plots to interpret what happens in the movie but to present the facts. You cannot interpret that someone is jealous, only that they say they are or another character has done so. Also, what is said in the book is for the article on the book not for interpolation into the movie plot. That is always a problem with multi-media works. What happens in the book stays with the article on the book and what happens in the movie stays with the article on the movie.2605:E000:9152:8F00:112A:4023:2176:3EB (talk) 10:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Headlines

Headlines. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Top Ten List list

How about if we convert the Top Ten List list to prose? It will make the article more readable if we summarize the list, identifying the significance and mentioning a few of the more notable lists. As it stands now eyes just glaze over and the import of the achievement is lost in the detail.
Jim Dunning | talk 05:01, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the awards and nominations section could be changed to something of a table (as in the articles The Departed or Crash (2004 film)), it would be more readable. The top ten list can be taken out, possibly; just keep the very very notable ones and #1s I guess. — Andy W. (talk/contrb.) 23:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Converting the awards list to prose, with statements of their significance, would be more informative and readable, similar to No Country for Old Men. I vote against the table format in The Departed (and here), unless it were summarized on the article page and then table-ized (?!) on a sub-page. I find the list format difficult to read (scroll, scroll, scroll, . . .), like not seeing the forest for the trees. Same for the top-ten lists. Anyone else think so?
Jim Dunning | talk 01:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lead unsupported

Most of the information in the Lead lacks support in the article body. Either the Lead needs to be changed or a Distribution section needs to be initiated and the Production section augmented.
Jim Dunning | talk 02:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've rearranged sections to be more consistent with Film Style Guidelines and started a Distribution section (which should be beefed up). The Production section also needs some work.
Jim Dunning | talk 03:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wild About Movies

I've trimmed down the usage of multi-ref tagging for Wild About Movies. A tag does not need to be used every one or two sentences, just at the end of the paragraph or before a sentence that belongs to another reference. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dead nominations

I removed the Chicago Film Critics Assoc nominations since the awards were decided six weeks ago. I'm assuming three minor nominations are no longer worth mentioning in these long lists once the contests have been decided. So, that raises the question of how we maintain the numerous lists that are proliferating among the current film articles? I guess we could flag decision dates and maybe maintain a centralized list (yes, another list) of what nominations have been listed in which articles and then review and emend/update daily.
Jim Dunning | talk 04:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I disagree on removing nominations. Look at Crash (2004 film) and The Departed. Minor nominations are still in the table. — Andy W. (talk/contrb.) 20:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plot redux

Err ... the plot section is entirely skewed. Briony isn't freaked out and scared over Robbie's perceived attentions to her sister; she's jealous, and that's plain nearly every step of the way. She doesn't suddenly realize at age eighteen she got the wrong guy ... she knew it from the start, and accused Robbie by way of lashing out.  Ravenswing  13:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the novel Briony is frightened and confused. She was only 12 and people were much less informed about sex in those days. Have avoided the film because I found the novel harrowing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.7.144.187 (talk) 11:25, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dallas-Fort Worth Film Critics Association Awards

I was wondering whether the inclusion of the above trophy in the article is a good example of the alleged American bias of Wikipedia. Internationally, is it considered an important award? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.58.224 (talk) 02:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, in Australia we don't bother to see any film that hasn't won the D-FWFCA. In fact they no longer even try to distribute films that haven't won one. Greglocock (talk) 09:20, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Long take on the shore

I wonder if there is any way to insert a reference to the 5 mins long take on the shore, that I think is noteworthy. I am not so fluent in english to find a way to rephrase the sentences in the description of the Dunkirk evacuation... now they are a little too terse work on them... — Pietro Toniolo (talk) 10:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm planning on improving the article sometime next year. If sources mention it, I'll try to add the 5 minute take in, as I also think it was an important scene. Ruby 2010/2013 14:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are many sources; we can choose from the results of a google search. Many of them are reliable, like IMDB and such... — Pietro Toniolo (talk) 09:57, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This shot is in fact already mentioned in the article, under Locations. It could be mentioned more prominently under (say) Production. GrindtXX (talk) 00:04, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The locations section will definitely become a subsection once I get around to writing the article's production. Also, Pietro, IMDb is unfortunately not a reliable source, but I know there are plenty of others that are reliable, which I will be using. Ruby 2010/2013 01:39, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Sussex Regiment

The plot summary currently states that Robbie "is assigned to A Company, 1st Battalion, Royal Sussex Regiment". Can anyone confirm that this is mentioned somewhere in the film? As a matter of historical fact (see wiki article), the 1st Battalion spent the whole of WWII in the North African/Italian theatre, and was not involved in the Dunkirk evacuation. GrindtXX (talk) 20:45, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Atonement (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:05, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Atonement (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:21, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Atonement (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atonement (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:53, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just need to say.

When Briony is being interviewed she makes mention that Cecelia and Robbie never met as she had portrayed them in her last book. She says this without having ever said previously that part of the plot except when we see what we believe to be what might be called "real time". If you take everything in the film as being a rehash from when Briony asks for a stop in the interview then what has come before that blackout is Briony telling us about her book and her life. The part of what we see through what Briony sees is one part and the other what some may call "real time" is another--what is going on when Briony is not seeing.

I know speculation is not part of WP but there has to be a reason for the black out scene, coming into the elder Briony asking for a break, then she making reference to her book that she has yet to talk about excect for what has been shown in the film as if a narration.2605:E000:9143:7000:ADA5:BB4C:1D89:F571 (talk) 02:25, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

QMUL Educational Project by Vanessaxzm, Sammi00, Lydia Frost, Junehen, Valery

Hi everyone, we have been assigned this article as part of a university research project. Please assume good faith on our behalf whilst we edit this article. Our usernames are above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.23.49.40 (talk) 16:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Atonement_(2007_film)&oldid=1065984267"