Talk:Taken (film)

message: Basic page up. Needs well as poster image.
Dave Dubya 20:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Basic

message: Nothing I saw in the film said 'CIA Agent'. I"m changing to 'Gov't Operative until we get a citation from someone in the production saying that he's CIA. ThuranX (talk) 12:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: William F. Buckley did work for the C.I.A., but he was not kidnapped and killed in 1985. You're confusing him with someone else. PNW Raven (talk) 14:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Pretty sure you're thinking of William Francis Buckley. -Ren  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adlauren (talk • contribs) 01:52, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  CIA Agent? 

message: The plot's a little sketchy at points. Mostly with the We parts, but whatever. I don't have the time and resources to change it up, but could someone try a little? Music is life. Live it fun. Listen to Ska! (talk) 16:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  We? 

message: Is the reception section unbiased? Comparing the reviewers that are cited in the article with all those on the Rotten Tomatoes site shows that of the well-known critics only those that gave positive reviews have been referenced here. This is especially important when it is considered that two-thirds (out of twelve) of these well-known critics gave negative reviews. (92.230.53.134 (talk) 20:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actual RS reviews should be cited, not unsourced aggregate numbers of fan/user reviewers. Considering the film was just released, I'm sure the section has much yet to go. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impartiality 

message: This film is directed by a French director, produced by a French studio, realised in France, so for which American element it can be considered as a French-American film? 194.199.63.85 (talk) 11:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume you mean "released" in France. Anyway, you're right. I agree with you. But I think what they were trying to get at is that some of it is set in USA (not very much of it though). ★Ffgamera★ - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 10:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Aside from the American-born scriptwriter who collaborated on the script, an American distribution company, and some American actors in it, there was nothing to suggest that it is an American-French film. 67.149.192.84 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 05:22, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: French-American?

message: "On TV this film is rated TV-14." what does that mean. I presume that is in a specific jurisdiction iwh which case the jurisdiction should be mentioned ed "In the Bulgaria or whatever" -- 09:32, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the rating probably means that it's been edited for TV and is suitable for people aged 14 years and over to watch. If someone else knows if it means something else, please comment. PNW Raven (talk) 19:17, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

text: It's a TV Parental Guidelines rating, used by American broadcast and cable-cast programs to help parents determine whether a program should be seen by their children. 108.246.205.134 (talk) 01:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  On TV  

message: Shouldn't it be Albanian mafia?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.211.242.163 (talk) 18:22, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Algerian Mafia?? 

message: the name of the Sheikh who was holding the knife over Kim's neck is Sheikh Raman, according to IMDB, and not Mohammed. where did you get the name Mohammed from ? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0936501/fullcredits#cast
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0936501/fullcredits#cast
216.80.92.69 (talk) 06:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  name of the Sheikh 

message: I have significantly edited this synopsis as it was full of errors and uneccessary exposition (Marko being left to die "screaming in agony" for example. It was also inaccurate re: dead prostitues etc.
Give reasons here if you alter my edit.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.225.189.243 (talk) 13:01, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summary 

message: Can I ask that anyone altering the plot synopsis NOT put in lines such as "leaving Marko do die a slow and extremely painful death". 
The above line is one example of random and inappropriate edits to this page that are unclear, untrue and misplaced. To dissect the above example, the Albanian slave trader that Bryan tortures is left to die (in an undeniably wonderful piece of universal justice) through electric shocks BUT we don't see him die, nor do we know how long it would take. My edit of "leaving Marko to die" is more accurate as it is an accurate summation of both Bryan's intention in doing it and the way the scene is filmed (he says "it't not going to save you!", throws the switch and walks out while we hear Marko screaming. It then cuts to a new scene).
Please keep Wikipedia factual. While I love this scene and concur that Marko's death was almost certainly slow and painful...that is conjecture and has no place on an objective Wiki plot synopsis. If this is altered again I will refer to 3rd party intervention.
--Cziltang mexico (talk) 11:16, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with the above wikipedian -- when editing please don't add extraneous detail for purposes of colour or padding to this plot -- it really is long enough. For instance if the cousins are away, it doesn't matter where they went. Point is the girls are alone. Less flora, more bare bones please or it makes a mockery of the well-justified tag about an overly long piece about a pretty straightforward plot in what is basically an action movie. Aim to improve rather than make a fan reading of the movie. Manytexts (talk) 01:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated superfluous edits 

message: People, people.
While Taken is a film that many of us LOVE, Wikipedia is NOT a platform for you to erase the work of other editors and leave your own (rather awful) plot synopsis.
I have just edited AGAIN a dire retelling of the plot that left out crucial points as well as adding things that were innacurate(how Bryan finds Kim at the end) and for some reason using the name Bryan at every opportunity when "he" would have been more appropriate.
The last editor really ballsed this up, more so because he/ she did so many edits that I had to manually change everything back due to editing conflict.
Again...as glorious as Taken is, only edit if you can actually contribute to the plot synopsis through trimming or proof reading.
This is highly annoying and an abuse of Wikipedia's "anyone can edit" rule.
--Keepkeepingon (talk) 18:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latest rather awful plot synopsis. 

message: I deleted these lines as they link to a Indian kannada movie which has no relationship with Taken- 
==Also See==
 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohanravinder (talk • contribs) 17:02, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unrelated Information 

message: I have yet a-bloody-gain changed this. 
Can the mentally ill, grammatically challenged and just plain stupid STOP editing the plot of this?!!!
Some of the details on the last one were utterly awful (e.g. Bryan pulling a "hidden gun" on the Sheikh at the end of the movie. Last time I saw Taken the gun was anything but hidden. Also, why waffle on about how the pimps get the girls hooked on heroin? Sight of dead Amanda handcuffed to a bed after being pumped full of heroin made that crystal clear).
Be good chaps and leave editing to those who are capable of doing it. While millions of us love this movie, don't piddle about with the work of more experienced editors.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.254.183 (talk) 22:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed again!!! There appears to be a trend amongst GCSE English students to pull apart the edits of previous editors on Taken. Leave alone you mongoloid wurzels!!! 
As an example. Bryan does not try to revive Amanda as she's blatantly dead! He also doesn't "fight his way out of St Clair's mansion". Last time I saw the movie he just walked out the building. Also, what fornicating relevance does him closing the door at the end of the movie have to do with anything. LEAVE THIS ALONE!!!
--92.40.254.136 (talk) 23:05, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits by idiots 

message: Well, the plot section was not nearly as bad as alluded to by some of the editors above, but it still had some major flaws. I corrected obvious grammatical and syntactical errors and cleaned it up a bit. By no means a major improvement, but certainly marginally better. WLight (talk) 00:54, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Summary again 

message: I recently watched the movie and I think the reason attributed to Amanda's death is inaccurate.  The plot says she died of a forced drug overdose.  Yes, she was forced to take heroin so she would become addicted, a common MO among sex traffickers, but to deliberately kill her with an overdose would be counterproductive to their main goal of making money off of her as a prostitute.  If you look closely at the scene, her head is slightly turned to the left and there is vomit oozing out the left corner of her mouth and more on the bed next to her.  It is more likely that while in the stupor caused by a heroin injection, she vomited and aspirated the vomit, causing asphyxiation.  This is a common cause of death among heroin addicts, including Jimi Hendrix.  John Bonham also died this way, although he was in a drunken stupor after consuming about 40 ounces of liquor when it happened.  In the interest of making the plot description more accurate, I suggest Amanda's death be described as due to a forced heroin injection ("overdose" implies they were trying to kill her) or, more accurately, due to asphyxiating on her own vomit resulting from a forced heroin injection.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jazzcatt1 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  reason for Amanda's death 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Taken (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120624220329/http://www.variety.com:80/review/VE1117936710 to http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117936710
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Taken (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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111231083309/http://www.allrovi.com/movies/movie/taken-v391752 to http://www.allrovi.com/movies/movie/taken-v391752
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/66GJPDjAs?url=http://thefilmstage.com/news/are-we-going-to-be-taken-again/ to http://thefilmstage.com/2010/06/10/are-we-going-to-be-taken-again/
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) 00:27, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)