Talk:The Bedsitting Room (play)

message: Article says film came out in 1970, it's in 1969 category, IMDB says 1969 --Macarion 19:33, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Note

message: "The play is set in a post-apocalyptic London, nine months after World War III, which lasted for three minutes and forty-seven second" ... "The film is set on the third or fourth anniversary of a war which lasted two hours and twenty-eight minutes." - which is it? --McGeddon 15:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never read the play, seen the play, or seen the film, but can easily imagine that it takes place at a single time that's both (a) the third or fourth anniversary of war that wasn't a world war, and also (b) nine months after a world war. (Not that the rest of the description of the play seems to make it require internal consistency such as this.) -- Hoary 05:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've similarly not seen either, but it is trivial to see from any number of film adaptations that setting, timing, timeline, etc can be different than an original book or play. Those are not contradictoray statements since one is clearly about the play and the other is clearly about the film. --jzp 18:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Is it possible that, given the absurdist nature of this play and film, the time scale mistakes are deliberate and intentional, intended to provide some sense of the disorientation and psychological damage that would ensue amongst the survivors of a bona fide nuclear holocaust?
Calibanu 07:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  War duration 

message: I believe this entry has now grown long enough that it should be given a disambiguation page that separates the film from the play. LA Movie Buff (talk) 15:57, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good.  See WP:SS to see about how to separate film information from play information, and use the film guidelines to shape the new film article.  Let me know if you want assistance. —Erik (talk • contrib) 17:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In the meantime, as it is as much about the play as it as about the film, the disambiguator "(film)" remains inappropriate and misleading.  --  JackofOz (talk) 11:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with JackofOz. Three months after the page was moved, nobody has yet created a separate play article, and until they do no disambiguation is needed. And as already mentioned, the diambiguation used isn't even correct for the content of the article as it stands. Time to move it back? Jellyman (talk) 10:34, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need for a disambiguation page 

message: The cast list as it appears is introduced as if it is about to reproduce the one found in the published script, and then veers into semi-explanations of character name changes, casting details for stage productions and some but not all of the film cast. As it is also said to be accompanied by music played by The Temperance Seven (I strained my ears but could not hear them), I am left wondering if this is just due to editing, whether the script actually has this garbled text as reproduced here, or if it has just morphed into an absurdist parody of a cast list to reflect the confusion of the original work by Spike Milligan? Jock123 (talk) 09:44, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast List is very confusing…