Talk:Reign Over Me

	This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Film: American This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

I suggest we lock this page down for editing to only the registered user, as it was vandalised recently. The necessary corrections have been made and I believe this to be the correct next step.SAWGunner89 23:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the movie, I think the date -- according to the receptionist's calendar -- is "1/20/09". If I remember correctly, the calendar is always set to this date, even on different days. Did anyone else notice this? 76.167.32.127 18:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This may be a political statement. The date, which is Inauguration Day 2009 in the United States, can be seen on bumper stickers and T-shirts throughout the country. It's used by anti-Bush types (of whatever political stripe) to draw attention to the current President's absolute last possible day in office. Dyfsunctional (talk) 13:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The game is a very very very much sub theme yet it takes up a large portion of the article which is reworded in the game's own article. Try and expand the other sections since the film is just coming out.

]

My evaluation

I am a middle-aged Jewish man living and working in New York City. I saw one of the Twin Towers fall, as it actually happened (on a live network feed at work). It knocked me for a loop.

I think New York City (and America as a whole) have struggled to be able to express their feelings about this incident.

Rage and despair! But how to express it? Americans have a unique outlook on the world. We care about ourselves, but also about our friends (personal and nationally) and even faraway strangers (in congenial cultures, but also exotic or strange ones).

This is Hollywood's multi-cultural (black and white), upper middle-class response. Americans pull together and help one another. Even the cops, faced with imminent death, did not just kill Charlie (thought they had every legal right to do so, when he aimed a gun at the first cop). The second cop could have shot him from an angle, but saved Charlie from himself by tackling him.

Americans don't want revenge as much as they simply want to stop the evil. --Uncle Ed 02:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages are not soapboxes for personal opinions, per

review) - 02:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I guess you're right. My comment might not be as closely related to the task of improving this article as I thought. I value the input of others. --Uncle Ed 02:57, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; I hope you can find other venues for discussing the film. I hope to see it myself eventually. If you'd like to continue improving the article, take a look at Featured Articles of films under

review) - 03:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Films about 9/11

I wouldn't really say that this film is about 9/11 (as is listed near the bottom of the page, "List of movies about 9/11"). Does 9/11 make a huge (the movie wouldn't be possible without it) impact on the film, yes. But I wouldn't say that it's about it, per se. Thoughts? Iansmcl 05:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SPOILER

In the movie after the father has died an old man is at the dining table the morning after the funeral, is that the father or is it just a random character?

END SPOILER Iansmcl 05:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a goof, but an artifact of the film being edited down. That character is the Alan's brother, in town for the funeral. Several scenes with him and Alan were cut. —The preceding

unsigned comment was added by 66.92.44.77 (talk) 18:24, 27 March 2007 (UTC).[reply

]

Opinion

Torn from the love of his family, Charlie becomes depressed and shuts out all the pain with drumming, collecting old LP's and a 3-D video game where he must climb towering heights to destroy monsters. ("Monsters" destroyed New York's tallest towers and killed his family).

Wouldn't this be more of an opinion of the symbolism in the film? In my opinion, seeing the giants fall would just be reliving the day that the towers fell -- the fact that Charlie hasn't fully moved on from that day and he replays it over and over in his mind.Thebluetowel 22:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how much of our own opinions we're allowed to add to movie articles. If you think I went too far, take it out. --Uncle Ed 00:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read

review) - 00:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

The symbolism is not the one listed above and the real symbolic meaning of the game is mentioned in the trivia section with a reference.

Stabby Joe 12:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

The movie was visceral therapy for his father. That's when it hit Roush. Refusing to accept the death of loved ones. Seeking out an escape from that truth. Giants falling in slow motion. "You could see where someone who was dealing with 9/11 would be engrossed by a giant that keeps collapsing over and over again," he says.

Would that match the symbolism in the article? Thebluetowel 00:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This dreadful film seems to have attracted people with dreadful English. Someone appears to have written this summary while dashing for a train. Samples below:

Charlie uses noise-cancelling headphones ... to insulate himself from any contact or reminder of the upper middle-class world ...

[The word "with" is missing after "contact"]

Torn from the love of his family, Charlie becomes depressed and shuts out all the pain with drumming, collecting old LP's and a video game where he must climb towering heights to destroy monsters.

[... which sounds like he's collecting a video game along with the old LPs. And what's the apostrophe doing in the plural of LP? The author continues:]

("Monsters" destroyed New York's tallest towers and killed his family)

[Nothing like following up garbled grammar and syntax with a sweepingly bland "literary" observation!]

One day he finally opens up to Johnson (overheard by Dr. Oakhurst) and shares about his family.

[Shares what about his family? Plus the grammar makes it sound like it was Johnson (who remained silent during this scene) who was overheard.]

This seems good, but shortly thereafter ...

["This seems good"! James Joyce, come on down!]

Finally, Johnson conspires with Fineman to help him move out over the weekend ...

[So who is moving out? Johnson or Fineman?]

The girl Charlie falls for is named Donna, the same name is Adam's wife in Click.

[Either this should be "the same name as Adam's wife" or there should be a colon instead of the comma. In which case it should be "the same name is that of Adam's wife in 'Click'".]

thank you for all that constructive criticism, i wrote it sitting down right after i came home from watching the movie this is a run on sentence. --Uncle Ed 01:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie uses noise-cancelling headphones

I don't recall them being noise cancelling. In fact, because Charlie hears quite well while wearing the headphones, I'm pretty sure they are not noise cancelling.

• I own the exact same model (Bose). --Uncle Ed (talk) 17:05, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson's grooming and apparel and demeanor are so attractive that women are constantly hitting on him at work

Constantly? I don't think so. The one woman who did in the movie needs a therapest. There was no indication that this happened often. In fact, Johnson's reaction and loss of what to do suggests this was the first time.

Charlie apparently only knows three people: [...] and an exploitative bar owner.

I don't recall the bar owner as being a friend, and certainly not being exploitative. I may have missed it.

[...] he eventually has to tell his story to somebody if he wants to heal his wounds.

Charlie's internal situation [...]

Torn from the love of his family, [...]

Eventually Charlie finally opens up to Johnson [...]

This appears to me to be a mixup in the order of paragraphs. Since the first and last paragraph descibe plot that happen a few seconds apart in the movie, the paragraphs should be next to each other (and the word Eventually removed). The two middle paragraphs can be moved up prior to this.

unearths a gun from the a pile of boxes but no bullets

Should be "but he has no bullets" or "but he cannot find any bullets".

He goes outside and points his empty gun at a taxi driver, drawing the attention of two patrolling policemen.

Maybe we should mention that this is a suicide attempt.

...Charlie leaves and rushes inside the courthouse to find the Timplemans and confront them...

Who are the Timplemans? This name is abruptly mentioned and not explained anywhere else in the article.

I hired it yesterday (Aug 25) in Sydney Australia. Not sure what the real release date was but it's been in the video stores (Blockbuster and Civic Video) already. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.162.104 (talk) 14:10, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

I hired it on the 25th in Melbourne maybe we are just better at having movies out. Planetstasiak 03:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried (but failed) to come up with a way to cleanly list the movies references to use both Shadow of the Colossus and God of War video games. Charlie's fixation on both the falling Colossi and revenge on a god give insight into his state of mind, which I believe to be important plot points. I was able to find some quick points for references - IMDB's trivia page for the movie has both listed - but making those references in the plot summary does not seem to be the best style nor would linking IMDB as a reference. I noticed that the original reference to Shadow of the Colossus was removed by a previous user. I feel they missed the point of it being in the movie altogether but I would agree that with them if they removed it do to is location in the article.155.178.180.5 (talk) 18:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.178.180.5 (talk) 17:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"When fate brings Charlie and his former college roommate Alan Johnson (Cheadle) together "

"At a pivotal moment when Charlie and Alan both need a trusted friend, the restorative power of a rekindled friendship provides a lifeline needed to move forward."

Just a few examples of the flowery language. This fails to concisely and appropriately summarise the plot.

Also I think Donna should be mentioned - although a small part of the plot I feel she was significant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.42.188 (talk) 22:47, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Under the Plot section there is a link embedded in the phrase, "he wears a headset constantly to let music drown out the upsetting memories of his wife and children" to the article on Postraumatic Stress Disorder.

Not my article and I don't edit articles here anymore, but get rid of that presumptuous link. The article on PTSD does not support that presumption. --cregil (talk) 00:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds credible to me. Done. Willondon (talk) 00:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At least since April 2015, the article's edit history has shown disagreement as to whether or not the movie is a "box office bomb". Describing it as such in the lead seems to contradict the article, which states that it recouped its production costs. The article at

]

Cinemascore

This film was surveyed by the audience polling company CinemaScore and received a grade A-. I added this information with a source to the article.[1]

notes that it is one of few reliable sources of Audience response that can be used in film articles.

I restored the edit and MarnetteD reverted it again, this time with the edit summary "audiences are fan polls - they are of no critical or scholarly value".[3]

says CinemaScore is a source that can be used and that it does provide useful information to readers about audience response. I don't think MarnetteD's personal opinion overrides those recommendations. I understand that some editors dislike including anything other than reviews from critics in the Critical response section and some prefer to put CinemaScore in other parts of the article but entirely rejecting including it at all is a first. -- 109.79.172.238 (talk)

Audience surveys are still fan polls. That is not an opinion it is a fact. They are deprecated per

WP:MOSFILM. MarnetteD|Talk 23:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

WP:MOSFILM

does not currently give this indication, please show the guidelines or discussions which say CinemaScore is deprecated.

Perhaps you are referring to the guidelines against included web polls and other

WP:USERGENERATED content such as from other wikis? CinemaScore and PostTrak are reliable professional audiences surveys conducted in cinemas, they are quite different from Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, or IMDB user voted web polls. -- 109.79.172.238 (talk) 23:40, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

To be absolutely clear I'm talking about the Project Film guidelines, the section about Audience response where it says:

Polls of the public carried out by a reliable source in an accredited manner, such as CinemaScore and PostTrak (include both if available), may be used

And that section also clearly states "Do not include user ratings submitted to websites such as the Internet Movie Database, Metacritic, or Rotten Tomatoes, as they are vulnerable to vote stacking and demographic skew."

CinemaScore is acceptable, IMDB is clearly not. -- 109.79.172.238 (talk) 23:48, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MarnetteD restored my edit (at least for now), but from the edit summary still seems to disagree with the value of CinemaScore again dismissing it as a "fan poll". As I said above, the guidelines specifically recommend including CinemaScore. If you disagree with those guidelines then please do start a discussion on the project film talk page at

]