Talk:Real Genius

message: I haven't seen this film in ages, but I'm absolutely positive that there was a plot thread where a mischievous group of students place a miniature bone-conduction walkie-talkie inside of an enemy's (probably Kent's) dental fillings (after drugging him, of course.)  They then used it to convince him that God was talking to him, causing him to go insane.
And I definitely recall a scene where he was at the professor's house, standing in front of the huge thing of popcorn waiting for a sign from above on "God's" orders (maybe he even put it there, I don't remember), when the laser came through the window (accompanied by an angelic "aaaah" in the soundtrack) and set off the popcorn.
Maybe I'm mixing this up with another film, but I'm pretty sure this was it. 208.54.14.1 14:00, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This scene did occur, I've seen the movie like a zillion times.--Reverend Distopia 20:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: WP can't describe every scene in a movie, even one as good as Real Genius. David Spector (talk) 14:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Walkie Talk

message: The source for the claim that Kilmer wishes to make a sequel is a deadlink.  Can someone replace with an existing source, or should the (now unsubstantiated) reference be removed? 12.22.250.4 17:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Link updated.K8 fan 22:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deadlink 

message: Removing this here, pending some sort of verification.
:* Lazlo's partial basis in Caltech Student Myth.
The problem with this link is that it's either horribly inaccurate (and therefore should not be linked here) or is a parody or joke (ditto).  The "article" linked is purportedly the transcript of an interview conducted by "Harry Gross" on the NPR programme Fresh Air with somebody called "Chuck of Arabia".  There are obvious problems with this, not the least of which is that the host of Fresh Air is TERRY Gross, not "Harry", and Terry is a woman.  Her only predecessor as host of the program was also a woman, whose name was also not "Harry".  The fact that Terry Gross is nationally acclaimed and reknown suggests that the "author" is making it up without benefit of research or is presenting unverified heresay.  The "dialog" attributed to Gross isn't up to her usual literate standards, also suggesting heresay or invention.  If someone can verify that TERRY Gross actually conducted such an interview (and that source should probably be NPR itself, not the homemade site of a massage group that runs a coffee shop and makes appearances at Burning Man), then feel free to return this link to the article. 12.22.250.4 23:19, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: [EDIT] On closer examination, the originating site belongs to "Chuck of Arabia".  The "article" is listed on the site as "an essay by Chuck of Arabia"; other such "essays" include his assertion that his father learned the "secrets of the universe" from "50,000 year old disembodied Lemurians", and a photographic reminiscence of a hiking trip through Utah.  This is not encyclopedic, and "Chuck of Arabia" is not a valid source for comment on an encyclopedia article.  Please do not return this link to the article. 12.22.250.4 23:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Mediasponge, thank you for your excellent contribution. Unfortunately, the WP no original research policy prevents the inclusion of any of it. I believe that WP policies, while well-intentioned, are far too restrictive and limit the detailed information that WP could otherwise supply. In this case, your information is falsifiable by other knowledgeable Caltech students, so such information, if false, would not be likely to survive for long. That makes it reasonably safe to publish. David Spector (talk) 14:24, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing questionable external link 

message: What method should be used? Alpha? order of precedence as shown in the movie credits?--Marhawkman (talk) 07:18, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  organization of actor names in info box 

message: Either it's a gaffe in the movie ("Is that liquid Nitrogen?" as Chris cuts a solid) or the question is about what's keeping the dry ice cool in the thermos, like imdb seems to think .  Nitrogen ice is never mentioned.  — Laura Scudder ☎ 23:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I always went with "liquid nitrogen cooled ice". I always thought they were talking about the stuff inside the freezer when they referred to liquid nitrogen.--Marhawkman (talk) 10:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Mitch's "liquid nitrogen" comment was not referring to the composition of the ice cylinder. Mitch was referring to the contents of the metal dewar on the table, which would have contained liquid nitrogen. Liquid nitrogen is often used in conjunction with other cold substances in order to act as a buffer between the cold substance (in this case, a cylinder of ice) and the outer environment. For example, the 1.2-Meter Millimeter-Wave Telescope uses a double dewar to protect the receiver: the inner dewar contains the liquid helium at 4K, and the outer dewar contains liquid nitrogen at 77K that acts as a buffer in order to maximize the liquid helium (which is far more expensive than the liquid nitrogen). This is a case of bad editing: the way the scene is put together, it definitely appears that Mitch is referring to the solid cylinder on the table (which is not dry ice, just regular ice--although probably is meant to be dry ice in the movie) rather than the cryogen in the dewar. The problem is that he appears to be looking at the ice rather than the dewar. It is a visual issue, not an actual script error. The "liquid nitrogen" comment makes perfect sense; it is the fact that they then immediately cut to a scene of Chris with the ice cylinder that makes it seem nonsensical. Tamarleigh (talk) 19:25, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nitrogen ice 

message: BUT Is it possible to pop popcorn with a lazer? Enough so that it could actually blow up a house.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.9.45.237 (talk) 12:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Mythbusters tested it, and found that the answer is NO.--Marhawkman (talk) 02:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As the article now explains, that isn't actually the case. The show proved that you could pop popcorn with a laser, but strongly suggested that a really powerful laser couldn't actually disrupt a house with a bunch of popcorn. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 10:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popcorn! 

message: Please tell me, Marhawkman, how the debris of the busted-up house -- broken glass (windows were shown breaking), wood splinters (wood beams were shown splitting), and nails (presumption from the house coming apart semi-explosively) would not be mixed in with the popcorn?
 
Mythbusters showed that a house really couldn't be destroyed that way, and that's fine, but given that that's what the movie depicted, please explain how mentioning that debris dangerous to kids would be mixed in with the popcorn is "POV pushing", as you put it?  It seems to me the opposite, that you're the one pushing a POV contrary to what would be fact if what was depicted had actually occurred.  -- Davidkevin (talk) 02:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: commented on your talk--Marhawkman (talk) 20:22, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Pushing?  Who? 

message: In the film's opening credits, it says "also starring" after the first four actors (Kilmer, Jarret, Meyrink, and Atherton).  Does that really mean the rest of the cast are stars of the film?  I would delete Prescott, Gries, and Lauter from the infobox.  —Codrdan (talk) 19:37, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if it's people from WikiProject Films or what, but someone around here has been giving a really ridiculous amount of deference to Hollywood butt-kissing jargon.  I keep having to clean up infoboxes and cast lists sections and other text that lists so-and-so as "Special Guest Star" or whatever, just because the credits of the film/show in question used language like this. It's meaningless drivel. All it really signifies is "I think I'm special and I'm going to get a special mention in the credits and get paid extra, otherwise I won't be in the show".  It's just like all the random whoevers that get listed as "executive producers" of various projects they never actually touched, but who have some prior tie to the intellectual property behind the production. WP really, really, really needs to not brown its own nose. Credit people for what they can be proven to have done, without weaselwording and without inflating their roles. Neutral and even. No minimizing of people's importance, but no more exaggeration and "Extra-Super-Special Guest Buttmunching" either. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 10:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines#How many actors in Cast section?.  Is that what you're talking about?  I'm with you on keeping fake stars out of the infobox, but it would be good to have some decent guidelines. —Codrdan (talk) 11:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah, "also stars" is a euphemism for any minor role in a movie.  But in many cases the Hollywood distinction between minor and major roles has more to do with who got paid most for their appearance.  "minor" characters might get just as much screentime as the major ones.  I don't see why we need to mirror Hollywood.--Marhawkman (talk) 18:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Also stars" in the infobox 

message: In the Trivia section, what's the other point on the line to the house's coordinates?  There has to be one more point (the plane's location) to make the inclusion of the naval station notable.  Do we know where the plane was when it fired on the house?  —Codrdan (talk) 23:52, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There wasn't any plane and there isn't any house.  It didn't really happen.  Trying to determine a real-world location for a fictional plane that just as easily could have been a space station or a stratospheric balloon or whatever, with a stroke of the editorial pen, is futile (or worse). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 10:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The trivia point is about the coordinates, not the plane or the house.  I'm just trying to figure out what it means. —Codrdan (talk) 11:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm gonna have to try finding it.  It looks like the movie makers DID use real maps/aerial photos.  but they might have used fake coordinates and maybe didn't give coord for more than one end.--Marhawkman (talk) 18:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The line to Point Mugu

message: This is unsourced and so I've moved it here until it can be properly cited.--J.D. (talk) 18:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The themes in the film are part of the plot.  The film is the source. —Codrdan (talk) 21:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Themes

message: :This is unsourced and so I've moved it here until it can be properly cited.--J.D. (talk) 18:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Mythbusters'' 

message: :This is unsourced and so I've moved it here until it can be properly cited. Not to mention it is in list form.--J.D. (talk) 18:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Source, please? Meaningless anyway, since any point on Earth is on a "line" that crosses (includes) any other point on Earth. (Also, the shortest and straightest "line" (meridian) between any two points on a sphere is called a Great Circle Route.) David Spector (talk) 18:01, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

text: Just because an idea is considered or evaluated by scientists doesn't mean it's "actually in scientific development." The efficient and powerful single laser described in the film doesn't exist and may not ever exist. It's great science fiction, though. The article could stand being expanded. David Spector (talk) 18:01, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

text: It does look like a similar concept (except for its use of multiple inefficient lasers in its COIL), but stating so is Original Research unless a reliable source for the statement can be found. David Spector (talk) 18:01, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: In what way was "the dorm in the film...based on Dabney House at Caltech"? I've never been there (though I've heard all the "DEI" stories), but I can tell you the dormitory scenes were all filmed at two of the dorms at my alma mater, Pomona College in Claremont, CA: Mudd-Blaisdell and Harwood Court. I lived in Harwood Court my junior and senior years and loved seeing all the familiar hallways.  12.248.13.138 (talk) 19:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Where it was filmed is not the point.  The claim is that the behavior and atmosphere are based on Dabney House and Caltech. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 01:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Dormitory "based on"?

message: The Wikipedia article on the War of the Worlds movie, 1953, mentions the academic affiliation of Gene Barry's character as Pacific Tech, which would make the use in Real Genius a reference to that work.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_%281953_film%29.  War of the Worlds and Real Genius are mentioned as cultural references for Caltech (as Pacific Tech) here:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Institute_of_Technology#In_media_and_popular_culture    Tomligon (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Pacific Tech

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Real Genius. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100307210633/http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/episode/episode-tab-02.html to http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/episode/episode-tab-02.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:36, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified