Talk:Pitch Black (film)

message: this whole article (and the one at The Chronicles of Riddick) seems too long winded and detailed. do we really need to know every single thing down to crew man number two's shoe size? plus, some of the data seems opinionated. the ecclipse (not sunfall) for instance, is of an unspecified length, not "months long" as described in the article. or this line: "in a final show of Riddick's true nature" - what exactly is this suppposed to mean? the article needs shortening. keep it short and sweet, with nothing beyond the relevant data, please. 213.172.234.234 03:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are welcome to clean it up.  Some of it surely could be cleaned up but it seems of appropriate length.  If you want the ultra-condensed version then I suppose read the back cover of the DVD <?> Cburnett 03:59, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just what exactly is the 'relevant data'?  Wikipedia isn't paper, so we don't need to keep it short.  One could argue that a transcript of the entire film might be 'relevant data' (except for copyright issues, and perhaps Wikiquote might be better suited for that).   Ppe42 13:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Detail

message: I was under the impression that the creature stabbed Fry with it's wrist thing, not Riddick. Cburnett 03:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Fry says, "I said I'd die for them, not you." She gets impaled by the creature, dramatic pause, Fry is carried away, Riddick falls, Riddick says, "Not for me...", meaning Fry should not have sacrificed herself for him. Riddick somehow feels he is not worthy of such a gift. It's the first time he shows weakness, too. Previously, he had shown a fascination toward Fry's newfound heroism. From this experience, Riddick has changed. He states at the end, "[Riddick] died somewhere on that planet." NorrYtt 22:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah but I never quite understood why she died. She was holding the light. She was lit up just as much as Riddick.
I am certain that watching the movie for a second time would allow you to see the Director's brilliant foreshadow of Riddick's stabbing in the end.  By the end of the movie, Riddick is certainly a changed man; he is not a killer and openly shows remorse.  But in the scene before she is snatched away, we see Riddick wounded and struggling, Fry comes to help and he realizes that one of them must be sacrificed.  She has stated that she would die for "them", so he allows her to be sacrificed for her crew, and not for his sake, which is why he says at the end, "Not for me."  In that scene where Fry struggles to support him, we see her impaled (by Riddick's dagger to the "sweet spot"--he mentions this spot in an earlier scene- look for it).  We then see the blood drops to the ground from the injury Riddick has made to her back.  She looks at him with a look of first disbelief, then understanding, (she had been willing to sacrifice herself), and he looks at her with a look of remorse, he feels sorry that he has had to allow her to die in his place.  But he is a changed man, and he is only willing to stab her because she states that she would be willing to die for "them" (other crew members).   Finally, the creature,now attracted to her injury, snatches her away instead of Riddick.  I do not see how Riddick and Fry could have exchanged the looks with the blood dropping scene, if the creature had done the stabbing.  She is holding a light, so if the creature is going to grab her, it will be swift; no time for the exchange of looks between the two characters. I agree that all of this is inferred, and I could see how it might appear that the creature impaled Fry with it's tale, but since the Director to the time to dedicate so many scenes to foreshadow the stabbing, it appears very evident to me that it was Riddick who was responsible for her injury in the bak.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.34.59.200 (talk) 05:22, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who stabbed Fry? 

message: There is Text on this article that indicates that Pitch Black is followed by Dark Fury, and originally the article indicated that Pitch Black is preceded by Butcher Bay. I agree with this in that these should be ordered by their place in the Riddick Trilogy. Year 2144 01:55, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ReOrder 

message: Hasn't the name now been changed to "The Chronicles of Riddick: Pitch Black" ? 71.250.17.62 12:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I detect plot elements used in this film that were lifted from Conrad's novel, Lord Jim. Of course, there are elements in the film lifted from many sources apparently unknown to me; but with regard to Lord Jim, these elements in particular seem important: Fry's selfish action to abandon the pilgrims who -- in the end -- survive the ship's difficulties & Fry's redemption through sacrifice at the film's end. Is this observation useful in an encyclopedia entry? Fraxbeowor (talk) 16:48, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not unless it is observed by a reliable source. DP76764 (Talk) 17:03, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to Joseph Conrad 

message: can this be moved back to Pitch Black which is now just a redirect to the disambig page? Insist it persists 00:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not when ambiguity exists with the band and the soft drink.  The film does not have any primary claim to the name.  --Piet Delport 15:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although... about 100x more people are going to look for Pitch Black the movie than Pitch Black the band and soft drink (neither of which I had heard of previously,) and there are many things which are in similar situations, and have the disambiguation page as a link at the top--SalamandraNinja 10:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I will do that.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.218.43.84 (talk) 22:42, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move Back? 

message: Here are snapshots i took of the 720p hd dvd movie.. i think they are much better suited
http://img259.imageshack.us/my.php?image=vlcsnap258550xc4.jpg
http://img371.imageshack.us/my.php?image=vlcsnap265616fq8.jpg
http://img72.imageshack.us/my.php?image=vlcsnap267897ne0.jpg —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.138.209.159 (talk) 02:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  hey guys how about using higher resolution pictures? 

message: Greetings all. I agree that this article needs an overhaul. I've only seen the movie a few times so I probably shouldn't lead, but sentences like "Is the escaped Riddick to blame?" don't seem like they have any basis being in an encyclopedia article. Jodamn 23:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  additional article changes 

message: I created The Chronicles of Riddick (series) a while ago to help keep down clutter on the film pages. Alot of the specific film's pages were getting cluttered with excess information on the locations and characters of the franchise. Now there is a page for the information that would be out of place elsewhere. However it still needs to be expanded quiet a bit. I put all I could remember from the franchise as a start, but I would really like anyone who edits these Riddick articles to add more. Things I think need more information are the planets in the series, the characters of the series, and the different races of the series. Any help would be apperciated. (Animedude 03:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Series Article

message: The Miscellaneous facts section strikes me as being basically a trivia section. Additionaly, the gears of war reference seems out of place in particular, and the attempt to determine the year doesn't seem valid. We have no way of knowing that the Pitch Black universe uses the same calender that's used today. (Unless I forgot something in chronicles.) I'm going to remove it, but save the text here in case anyone has any thoughts on integrating it into the text. (StarkeRealm 05:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia?

message: Whats up with this second commentary, My Forehead hurts after watching it. Seems like inspirations was taken from something with a title of "to catch a predator". Any concerns with this proliferation of prejudice towards basics. Is it me or was this guy trying to kill your animal? Watch out, This is a basic three man hit squad, you'll be left dryer, blind, crushed, burned, an cold. It seems inocent enough at first sort each other out, but dont fall asleep get dialed in a fed with miss information. I fell like i was going to have a stroke listening to it. Attack some one elses lower brain functions.      —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.242.208.223 (talk) 18:37, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So you're saying that December has 90 days? Or there are 90 months? I think it more likely that the calendar has fundamentally changed in their future. Also, it would seem from the orrery that the 22 years under discussion are not earth years but orbital years of the planet they are on.Rodney420 (talk) 15:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Commentary

message: The article says the planet's name is "Hades", but this name is not mentioned at all in the movie.  Where did this name come from? Eridani (talk) 02:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planet's name 

message: If the flying creatures are native to the planet, then they are not alien? Riddick and the other humans are. However, I haven't watched the movie in years, and perhaps the plot says the flying creatures also came from off-world. Bellagio99 (talk) 06:04, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are the creatures "alien" 

message: Was the story inspired at all by Isaac Asimov's short story Nightfall?  -Kylelovesyou (talk) 04:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ...and/or Arthur C. Clarke's 1950 short story "A Walk in the Dark"? 68.148.93.15 (talk) 14:34, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither of these are confirmed, nor can I find sufficient evidence that the comparisons are often enough drawn for it to be noted in this article. This isn't to say it wasn't, but it's just not noted.  drewmunn  talk  16:02, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Isaac Asimov

message: Isn't Jack a young girl? I thought that was the same person Riddick met at Crematoria in The Chronicles of Riddick. He called her Jack although she said she was going by a new name.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.84.160.64 (talk) 18:17, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack 

message: I don't see any source being referenced for those descriptions, and they seem made up to me. Like, "A relationship develops between Fry and Johns". Uh? No, it doesn't. Johns was never said to be a "war veteran" and he does NOT present himself as an "intergalactic police officer" (not to mention, "intergalactic" is totally made up); in fact, it's a plot point that everyone assumed he was a cop but he never said it. Imam "was travelling to New Mecca for the annual preaching". Nope, it was the hajj. Shazza and Zeke are not "settlers", they are prospectors. And when is it said that they're "travelling across the universe" (that's hyperbolic again) "looking for a new home"? When is it said that Jack's real name is Kyra? A more important plot point about Jack is that she's kind of a Riddick fan (starts dressing like him and such). Kumagoro-42 14:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character descriptions are messy