Talk:Slither (2006 film)

message: I wonder whether it would be worthwhile for the article to distinguish the three ways the monster preys on native animals (including humans) (other than eating): the dart thing that takes over Grant (and the cat), the tentacles that impregnate Brenda (and wound Bill), and the oral slugs that get most others.  It's a bit odd to call all three modes "infecting" when they have different effects.
I think only Brenda, Jack, and the others Jack sees in the basement mention their great hunger, so can we assume that Jack and the basement people are impregnated? —Tamfang (talk) 10:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  dart, tentacle, leech 

message: Just checked some of the references for the controversy section. They seem to mostly either not support the assertions they're attached to, not be WP:RS, or be misleading in how they're used.  
The first ref for the section here is a blog. 
The next ref here is used twice. The first assertion it's attached to ending with "both films sharing a trick ending where a domesticated household pet is infected by a surviving alien parasite, the only difference between the two films being that Slither changes the pet from a small dog to that of a cat", despite this being entirely unrelated to anything at that link. I can't see how that's a supporting ref for that.  
The second use of the ref is for a cherry picked truncated quote that omits the point it was leading up to. Then describes the rest of the article in misleading terms, saying it goes on to 'directly compare' them, implying that it asserts similarities in line with the asserted controversy, rather than the conclusion of the article being the exact opposite of that.
The reference for claiming Dekker "commented on the controversy" here, is explicitly false. He's says of his own film, that it's "already a remake and a rip-off of so many other things. Making a remake of a rip-off is just plain ridiculous", and merely references Slither in the context of discussing the possibility of NotC being remade to make the point that there probably wouldn't be much audience interest in the general idea. 
The next reference here, again has nothing to do with the assertion it is attached to "Further controversy ensued after Gunn, who is a self-proclaimed cult horror fan, claimed he never saw Night of the Creeps until after he made Slither, a claim that was greeted with a backlash, challenged as dishonest by several critics and horror film fans, especially when it was pointed out that the likelihood that Gunn never heard of Creeps when surrounded by, and working with, hundreds of cast and crew also familiar with the film suggested he was covering up his knowledge of the film"
The next group of refs, all attached to this "In his defense, Gunn has stated, however, that both Cronenberg's Shivers and his 1979 film The Brood were the two biggest influences on the story in Slither, along with the 2000 manga Uzumaki by Junji Ito." The first doesn't appear to be on the site it points to anymore (which is a problem itself), but looking at it on Wayback here, doesn't say anything about Night of the Creeps, so mentioning a range influences isn't 'in defense' of this at all, so that's a bit WP:SYNTH. The same goes for second ref. here, only mentions Night of the Creeps when the interviewer mentions people have told him Slither is reminiscent of it (not asserting a rip-off or anything similar), which Gunn answers by making a general point about wanting to harken to movies of the 80s rather than do films similar to current trends. 
The next one, the entire site it was on no longer exists (again a problem in of itself), looking on Wayback again here, there's nothing mentioned in the context of a 'defense' since no assertion about made about it to defend, merely him again mentioning influences and similarities. 
The last one there is a second separate link to the same article mentioned earlier (should be fixed) by Steve Palopoli on Metroactive, and is the only one there that arguably supports the claim that he defended the allegation by talking about other influences, but again ignores the conclusion of that article.
The bit about the worms behavior is unreferenced, appears to be WP:OR, and the part about the homage to Troma films at the end seems unrelated to the subject of the section. So there's problems with WP:SYNTH, WP:OR, WP:POV, WP:UNDUE (it's a large section for what comes down to a side point), dead links, and references not supporting the assertions they're provided to support. Number36 (talk) 22:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember this controversy, but it was mostly among cult horror fans.  The whole section is really overblown and undue.  I would just nuke it and replace it with a neutral summation.  Palopoli is a good source for these sorts of things, as he writes about cult films fairly often.  Bloody Disgusting also commented on the similarities: , .   According to this article, Dekker and Gunn are Facebook friends.  The controversy exists mostly in the minds of outraged fanboy bloggers.  The Hero Complex blog in the Los Angeles Times might also have covered this.  I would personally rewrite this section, but I feel lazy, and I'm honestly a bit tired of this controversy.  When I saw the initial trailer for Slither, I was one of those outraged fans who yelled, "Ripoff!", but ten years makes a big difference in how much you care about inconsequential ephemera. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

text: , I concur with . You can go ahead and take out the section and perhaps instead put in a sentence summarizing the comparison made to Night of the Creeps. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 15:41, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Controversy' section. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Slither (2006 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070209024246/http://www.ew.com:80/ew/article/commentary/0,6115,1181146_7%7C%7C451056%7C0_0_,00.html to http://www.ew.com/ew/article/commentary/0,6115,1181146_7%7C%7C451056%7C0_0_,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:56, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Guys there's no denying that the slug aliens in this movie appears in the MCU film Guardians of the Galaxy. I edited to add that point, but was removed because no reliable source, but here is a screenshot from the movie: http://marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com/wiki/Collector's_Museum?file=Slugs_Collector.png
That doesnt mean Slither is set in MCU, but the aliens of the slithers (as a character) exist in the MCU, kinda like how Quicksilver co-exist in both seperate Xmen and MCU universes (only the difference is Slither is not Marvl to begin with, but creation of James Gun, who directed Guardians of the Galaxy).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.252.184 (talk) 01:41, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guardians of the Galaxy connection. 

message: Hmm 67.185.238.57 (talk) 04:11, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this based off the book by Edward Lee??