Talk:The Langoliers

message: Are there differences between the short story and film.? Rich  Farmbrough 11:38 1  April 2006 (UTC).
::I just watched the movie.  Doesn't appear to be many, if any differences between the movie and the book, at least if the plot summary is accurate.
:::The novella and the film are basically the same plot except that some of the characters are given a bit of a backstory and their thoughts are described at certain points. The plot summary as it stands is very good IMO, although a few interesting details are missing. --ChrisJMoor 14:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summary 

message: Should have at least a section describing the langolier (creature). 189.5.149.178 03:42, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is not really that much detail to give. The book describes them as spheres with 'malevolent faces' on or inside them - I cannot remember anything about teeth though. The film portrays them as spherical but opening into a mouth similar to the worms as portrayed in the Lynch film Dune but with 'chainsaw' teeth and no face. --ChrisJMoor 14:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Langoliers 

message: I think the whole plot summary could benefit from a complete rewrite. Lots42 15:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ???? Am I missing something? You disliked the movie. I liked it. And? Neither opinion applies much to Wiki. Lots42 (talk) 00:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: Apparently one should not point out that Stephen King's plot for this piece has elements similar to certain science fiction stories.  Supposedly this counts as hinting that he steals ideas. Yeah, and he invented ghosts and accursed buildings too.  Truth is, all authors know that there are no original ideas.  Stephen King no more "stole" the concept of the past as a dead place which gets eaten/disassembled/etc than did Simak or Sturgeon or anyone else who has used it.  So let's put back the nicely informative para which points out the similarities.  Clock is running.   Djdaedalus 20:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Point one: -You- can put it back. Nobody is stopping you. Point two: The section deleted is also irrelevant because lots of things resemble lots of other things. Why not go to the article for Lord of the Rings and mention how it resemble the 'Castle Roogna' fantasy novel by Piers Anthony because both involve seiges on fortresses by monsters? Third point: Sheesh! Fourth: possible libelous info on real info is SUPPOSED to be deleted right away, that's Wiki policy. Lots42 05:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't want to start an undo war, old chap.  In any case consultation is an even more basic Wikipolicy than non-libellosity.  The concept embodied in the story is a little more off the beaten track than, say, your average siege (even with monsters).  It's worth pointing out to the casual reader that they can discover more about it at other sources.  Simak's contribution is particularly interesting, as he has several variations on the idea that the past is not just a previous version of the present.  Anyone else care to add their opinion (exclamation points optional) ? Djdaedalus 19:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thought: If the concepts in Langoliers are so unique they only match a few other books, write an article about -that-. Then link to the article with something like 'Frozen past in fiction'. I'd gladly support that, I'm a sucker for time travel stories. And for the record, if you revert the info I deleted, I won't delete it a second time, my strenous objections are already detailed here. Lots42 04:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to other works 

message: The previous plot summary was too long and detailed.  There was also a similar but separate plot summary on the page about the main book Four Past Midnight.
I have rewritten the FPM summary slightly to make it shorter and remove minor details, and put it on this page - I used a few of the existing details such as the list of characters.  On the FPM page I have changed it to a very brief summary. Lessthanideal (talk) 12:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks better overall, but it doesn't have as much coherence as the original.  Short choppy sentence-paragraphs here.  Mastrchf (t/c) 12:07, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-wrote Plot Summary 

message: In the book, the survivors know that their life is about to change, being the only people left from a flight that had recently vanished. But they go outside for some fresh air first. Are these concerns detailed in the movie? And or relevant to the article? Lots42 (talk) 10:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The survivors