Talk:Sphere (1998 film)

message: What the... hell, does any  of that stuff mention  have to do with the "legacy" of the film?  I want to delete it badly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:FB30:7AA0:4DB3:9FF1:6D2E:4A28 (talk) 18:36, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Legacy

message: I'll clean this up when I get the chance.zzymyn 09:26, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: "Several have commented"
Actors?  Hollywood people?  Random guys on the internet?
::lolwut? you see the irony in what you did, "~". Terrasidius (talk) 05:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  several what? 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 19:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Reading the article itself, and only having watched about ten minutes of the movie, it is clear Sphere is similar in many ways to Forbidden Planet.  Harry's headache in the book is Walter Pidgeon's Krell mind boost.  Harry's monster is the Krell Monster, the Id monster.
Googling finds a few other people on the net also make this connection:
http://www.mindspring.com/~jamesthomas/lit-film.html
http://www.amazon.com/review/R1A73U6441Q4J4/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm/
Anyway, just sharing.70.1.80.65 (talk) 09:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the list of comparisons to other works, all of which were unreferenced and uncited.  Even these sources noting the connection to "Forbidden Planet" are a self published manifesto, and a customer review at Amazon.com.  If there could be a more professional opinion given, and it can be cited, then it should probably be included.  Otherwise, it is simply an opinion. LonelyBeacon (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sphere is very similar to Forbidden Planet which was based on the Tempest 

message: I've rated this article as start class (low importance). 
Room for improvment: The comparison to book section seems very long winded and unduly weighted. the changes were not especially important or notable for the films reception (unlinke LotR for example), i guess this is why there are no 3rd party sources. As it depends only on the primary source, i woud drastically shorten this (and just use the book as a single reference). 
Better citations would be nice, eg reviews to show it's critical reception, citation for box office results etc. 
With these could be a C class.
But a good start :-).
think low importance is uncontrovertial. Not an especially popular, critical acclaimed or influential film, even within the SF genre.Yobmod (talk) 13:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: SF rating

message: The film also draws from ideas in the novel Solaris, in particular, the idea of an alien life-form manifesting the darker desires and thoughts of humans trying to examine it. This should be expanded in the article. Fig (talk) 10:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot also draws from novel "Solaris" 

message: I dont like how this article keeps saying the characters enter the sphere. That is completely inaccurate. Anyone that watches the film will clearly see that the sphere merely reflects their image. The audience is shown the person still being outside the sphere when suddenly their reflection appears in the sphere spontaneously. This is a big difference from entering the sphere. Plus in the movie none of the characters even think that they have entered the sphere. The inside of the sphere is never shown in the film. The article needs to have that important detail cleaned up. The article needs to replace all instances of "enters the sphere" with something like "is reflected by the sphere."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.160.131.17 (talk) 23:46, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  the article says they enter the sphere in the film but they do not