Talk:The Others (2001 film)

message: Let´s not get carried away by nationalistic feelings; The Others is a coproduction, but internationally recognized to be a Spanish film.
The fact that it´s in English has NOTHING to do with the nationality of a movie--this is such basic knowledge! It scares me to see such comments. The film is a co-production of the following companies, although it is held to be a Spanish film by the Spanish Ministry of Culture and veritable cultural "institutions" like the BBC:
Dimension Films (USA)
Cruise/Wagner Productions (C/W Productions)(USA)
Sogecine (Spain), 
Producciones Escorpion (Spain)
Le Studio Canal Plus (FRance)
Please replace the category!
---
This movie was shot in Spain, with a spanish crew, but was financed by the American company Miramax, and executive produced by the Weinsteins.  Why is it a Spanish film? Larry Dunn 17:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to mention that it's in English. I'll remove the category. Rigadoun  (talk) 20:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish Film? 

message: I disagree with the plot outline here. Surely Charles is himself dead, he is distant because of what he experienced on the battlefield, and because he is disgusted that his wife killed their children and herself. He leaves because he has to return to where he died. If others agree, it ought to be changed--Dub8lad1 16:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ===

message: Anyone know if this detail--certainly the eeriest part of the film for me--is based on real folklore? Marskell 08:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pics of the dead 

message: "Upstairs, Anne and Nicholas discover the old woman is acting as a medium in a séance with Victor's parents. Judging from the clothes of Victor's parents, it seems that the actual time period is some time during the early 1950s."
I thought the Victor's mother's clothes seemed more 40's than 50's, especially her hat. I also thought the implication of the film is that the murders had happened in very recent past (in real time) - perhaps not exactly the 5 days or so that Grace seems to think, but not a matter of years, either. I don't want to edit the page because the author may have some aha! detail that proves the filmmakers' intent to set the seance in the 1950's, but I'd sure like to know what it is. 68.83.143.100 05:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Time Period of Film

message: :Image:The others poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The others poster.jpg

message: Obviously someone linked the author to the kid playing nicolas... please fix that...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.215.113.7 (talk) 20:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong link on James Bentley

message: The plot description says Charles is not aware of the fact that he is dead. Is that for sure? My personal interpretation always was, he is dead and knows it, says goodbye to his beloved while still being shocked by what Grace has done to the children, and then has to return to his own eternal afterlife - heaven, hell, nimbus, haunting as a ghost on the battlefields of the front or so. Just an interpretation, and I can't exactly remember how I came to this conclusion, since some time has passed by since I've seen the movie. Has anyone evidence, sources or so? Or the other way round: can the actual theory in the article - Charles knows nothing about his own death - be proved?--JakobvS (talk) 16:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a comment made by the helpers that states that he probably doesn't know where he is.  Maybe later he gains some awareness, but the implication of the film is that he's oblivious.Luminum (talk) 17:32, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Charles being dead and knowing it or not?

message: Not sure how important this is, or to what standards WIkipedia expects these articles to be written in, but the order of events in the Plot section doesn't accurately reflect the way they occur in the movie. Also, the tone in sentences like 'It is then that they realize the awful truth [...]' seems to me to be a little more subjective than we have licence for in an online encyclopaedia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aron7913 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot: Order of Events 

message: Something that always struck me as odd about the movie, is the statement that the servants left about a week or two prior to when the movie starts; only to be followed almost immediately by the "haunting" or odd things in the house.  Realistically speaking, a house would not sell that quickly after a murder/suicide, meaning that there may be some kind of time dilation in effect for Kiddman and the children's characters. This is further suggested at the end of the movie as we see the family (the living) moving from the house.  The car they are loading their belongings in, though seen for only a moment, is several years more modern than would be found in 1945.  Given this, it could be reasonably suggested that time moves differently for the ghosts, most likely far slower, than it does for the living.  Would this be worth mentioning somewhere in the article?Kitsunedawn (talk) 21:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because it's original research. Those issues are speculations based in assumptions about the real world, and the film is a piece of fiction, and those disjoints could just be due to issues in the script that needed to be quickly passed over or even errors in the script itself. Since it is not addressed in the film, nor are there indications that time dialation was an intended element of the film by those involved with the film, it remains a speculative conclusion.Luminum (talk) 01:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time (a week or two ago) 

message: Does this film have any plot or remake connection to the film "The Others" 1957?  It was about a governess that battles to save two children from an evil supernatural force. Seems like a similar plot.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.117.211.198 (talk) 23:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Others 1957 film 

message: Seems so much like the M.Night film that was years later.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:642:4101:4167:7C3C:D4F4:2D20:FCB8 (talk) 01:38, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The Others actually came out a few years after. Jikybebna (talk) 17:19, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The original 6th sense?