Talk:Futurama: Into the Wild Green Yonder

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Animated films task force.

Animation: Films / Futurama Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Animated films work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Futurama task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Screen Actors Guild#Predicted strike of 2009|Screen Actors Guild]] The anchor (#Predicted strike of 2009) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Title

Both E! News [1] and Can't Get Enough Futurama [2] report this title as "Into The Wild Green Yonder", rather than "The Wild Green Yonder". The latter also states it got its information from Executive Producer David X Cohen as well. 16:13, 11 August 2007

Several places around Wikipedia have I now seen people using the "The Wild Green Yonder" title (which I personally am quite sure is wrong), rather than the "Into the Wild Green Yonder", while my intuition is not a valid reason for changing Wikipedia, I still think that David X Cohen's statement is a valid reason. And I think someone needs to make a decision on which title we are using here. --Svip ^pong 09:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, until someone brings forward a reliable source that states the title as "The Wild Green Yonder" and then pending a discussion here to move this article there's no reason to be using the shorter title. It's possible that the papers have gotten the title wrong once or many times, I saw at least three different titles for "Beast with a Billion Backs" (million backs, billion bucks, etc) before that got straightened out. Star dust 8212 11:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The advertisement leaflets in the "Bender's Big Score" and "The Beast with a Billion Backs" DVDs which show the release dates for the films both use the title "The Wild Green Yonder" and not "Into the Wild Green Yonder". I thought that might be worth mentioning. Catalina 123 (talk) 17:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Plot Detail

On the Bender's Big Score Commentary someone mentions "that iron is a liquid that over time can become its liquid form" followed by someone saying, "wait, your giving away the plot of movie 4"...I don't have any other resources though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KIRBYGUY1 (talk • contribs) 02:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that was a joke....On thing I think was real though is that they refer to Number 9 Guy as the "Grand Curator....." of something.--86.43.64.115 (talk) 13:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

World's First review

Film website Screenjabber has the world's FIRST review of the next (and possibly final) direct-to-DVD Futurama film, Into The Wild Green Yonder (due for release in February).

It's here: http://www.screenjabber.com/futurama_wildgreenyonderDVD

I think Linkage is warranted?

Screenjabber (talk) 22:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)Screenjabber[reply]

Are you affiliated with Screenjabber? I have no insight right now how they are doing it on Wikipedia, but they might just add for content sake, though we have added your link at The Infosphere, as news bulletin. --Svip ^pong 23:43, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Title

Is it possible that the title Into the Wild Green Yonder is a parody of the Werner Herzog film title The Wild Blue Yonder? -- Carbidfischer (talk) 11:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's more possible for it to be a parody of a line from The U.S. Air Force Song because that's more well known. - Jasonbres (talk) 18:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Release

Just like Bender's Game, Into the Wild Green Yonder was released early in Ireland, again - DVD was in HMV as early as Saturday 21 February, at least. Rdd (talk) 20:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless it was a major event it was released early in Ireland, it is really not important, and indeed we should only concern ourselves with official release dates. --Svip ^pong 20:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plot outline

A recent edit took the entire plot written at the Infosphere, a wiki which I regularly operates. The content in question is protected by our licence, which states that you are free to use it, but on the condition that you cite your source, that's all. I assume the appropriate act for this article is to make a summarised version of the plot, rather than keeping this more full scale plot, which is more intended for a wiki which deals with Futurama, and cannot let trivial stuff go. And yes, I did write it. --Svip ^pong 11:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The plot summary has been completely overhauled. It's still quite long though. Cy3 (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not as long now, though I think it needs further tightening (personally I like them to be under 1K words and Wiki recommends under 900). I'll give it another look-see later.Doniago (talk) 23:18, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind that reducing the word count isn't the primary goal; summarizing the plot essentials in a readable form is. Granted, shorter passages tend to be more readable, but I think that (1) omitting the Vegas subplots and (2) trimming a lot of adjectives, adverbs, and sentence transitions run counter to this goal. A short article where too many sentences are too stripped down can be just as unreadable as a long article. Cy3 (talk) 07:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(grin) We could cut the Plot Summary and just include a link to the Infosphere's? Kidding. I'll take another look at the summary later, but I'd rather see an under 1K summary that contains _minor_ inaccuracies and omits details not essential to the plot than a summary that includes a lot of secondary details. If people want a seriously-detailed plot summary, they can certainly find it elsewhere. But that's just my feeling on the matter. I'd be curious to hear from others on the subject.Doniago (talk) 15:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Omitting details is okay for Wikipedia; introducing inaccuracies (even minor ones) is absolutely not. Cy3 (talk) 16:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I misspoke there.Doniago (talk) 16:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The plot summary is at exactly 900 words right now. I think it's perfectly fine and readable the way it is -- what the article needs is further expansion of the Production and Broadcast/Reception sections. Cy3 (talk) 12:50, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leo Wong's fingers

Did anyone else notice, early on in the film, how Leo Wong appears to have five fingers (including thumb) on his right hand? – Pee Jay 16:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

make an errors section Ultamatecharizard (talk) 16:54, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a joke, they mention it in the commentary. Smurfy 18:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had a feeling it might be an in-joke. Haven't listened to the commentary yet. – Pee Jay 00:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it is a joke, but as for an errors section, I know of one thing that could go in there (this was also mentioned in the commentary); towards the very last part of the movie (in the scene with all the characters) Bender comes in with the rest of the main characters wearing a feministas(sp?) mask. At 1:24:56, Bender is clearly seen without a mask. However, at 1:25:33, Bender once again has the mask on. Unoriginal Username (talk) 01:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alien Language

It might be worth noting that the Alien Language in the opening (Where the title "Futurama" appears, and Planet Express ship flies overhead) spells out "The humans shall not defeat us." 70.127.186.241 (talk) 21:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is also worth noting that this title can be interpreted as The Humans Shall Not Repeat Us, as the character for R or D is not repeated, nor is the F. How do we make this to the wikipedia page for this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsundquist (talk • contribs)

As you were just told on IRC, those 'facts' can make it into the article when they are cited to reliable and verifiable sources--not you personally, not a blog, not the article you're going to write in your university newspaper. //roux 07:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to disregard the fact that the entirety of Alien Language 1 (as well Alien Language 2) is known. --Svip ^pong 10:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leo Wong's cursing

Is there a translation available for Leo Wong's swears in Mandarin whenever he missed a gold hole? Couldn't find any. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.11.255.35 (talk) 02:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Futurama Status section?

Does that really belong here? Even though this is the last release (to date), it has very little to do with the movie itself. That type of thing should go in the article for the series. Unoriginal Username (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article contains references to sources claiming that the future of the series does depend somewhat on the commercial success of this movie (and the other direct-to-video movies). Some mention about the possible renewal of the series does belong here, I think (probably in a "reception" section in a few weeks). Cy3 (talk) 21:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

Pretty soon it will be time to add a "reception" section to this page. Here is a link to a press release claiming that ITWGY topped DVD sales in Canada for the week ending March 1, and US sales figures from the-numbers.com should be available in a week or two.

Here are links to some dispassionate movie reviews from established sources (relatively speaking; I haven't seen The New York Times or The Guardian reviewing the movie, but oh well). The reviews are somewhat mixed, but c'est la vie. If you have links to other reviews, please post them here. I am planning to update the article soon, but if somebody else can do a quality job of it, by all means go for it. Cy3 (talk) 20:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural references

Cultural references go here for the time being, and again remember that if there's no outside citation for it, it likely doesn't belong in the article.

Leela cites the galactic coordinates of the violet dwarf star as 167.84, -58.03. The star Mira is located at galactic longitude 167.76, latitude -57.98. Link (Cohen mentions that the coordinates do have some significance in the DVD commentary, but leaves it to the viewer to discern. The actual coordinates of Mira are verifiable, but whether or not that's what the writers had in mind is unclear.)

The movie references the Keeler gap in the rings of Saturn, the Keeler crater on Mars, and the asteroid 2261 Keeler, all named after astronomer James Edward Keeler. (Source: DVD commentary) Cy3 (talk) 11:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Encyclopod looks just like The Spelljammer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.237.226.242 (talk) 08:19, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Production/development section

This article still needs one. I'm planning on starting one up, using the DVD commentary and recent news articles as sources, but if someone one else wants to get on it, go ahead. In relation to the previous item, the scientific references listed above will probably go in here, as ITWGY is by a large margin the most scientifically literate episode of Futurama and DXC notes in the commentary that the writers (especially Keeler, who's a mathematician by training, and Cohen, who's a physics/CS guy) made a concerted effort to make it so. Cy3 (talk) 10:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"I thought you only preserved the DNA of endangered species"

Twice in the last couple weeks Wikipedia users have inserted several sentences into the "plot" section explaining the part about the Encyclopod harvesting Hutch's DNA. In my view, it is a minor joke (about humans being endangered) which is not integral to the plot and doesn't need to take up so much space in the "plot" section. If you disagree, please explain why. Cy3 (talk) 16:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree that I don't find it all that necessary for it to be in the article, the reason why is slightly important is due to Cohen's mention on the commentary that there is actually a third Waterfall. Something he discusses early on, but as the scene approaches, he reveals that the Encyclopod is now the last Waterfall (that we know of), given how it has Hutch Waterfall's DNA. It is probably a very layered joke, in that is also a reference to the fact that Waterfalls always die and thus are "an endangered species". --Svip ^pong 18:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the part about Hutch's DNA into the "continuity" section, as discussing it requires referencing previous events and really clogs up the plot summary. Cy3 (talk) 13:25, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Court Justices - Katey sagal?

In watching he DVD, I saw something interesting. It appears that Katey Sagal (in head-in-a-jar form) is one of the court justices (the one on the viewer's furthest right, justices' left). Basically, the jar just has a woman's head with "Sagal" on the label. I couldn't tell if there was a strong resemblance to the actress. There's no mention of it in the commentary - they were too busy raving about Snoop Dog.

I was wondering two things: 1) Did anyone else notice this? 2) Is it worthy of mention in the article or in another Futurama article?

Thanks,

--KNHaw ^(talk) 23:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

She was mentioned in an interview (http://www.canmag.com/nw/13626-future-futurama-david-x-cohen) to be one of the judges. In addition, we also have a list of the judges. --Svip ^pong 23:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm glad I wasn't seeing things and also glad to find infosphere... although I suspect my work productivity is about to take a dive now that I have. (*GRIN*)

--KNHaw ^(talk) 05:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Rule of Thumb for Plot Summaries

If it requires more words to summarize a minor plot point in the movie than it does to act it out, then the point should most likely be omitted. Cy3 (talk) 21:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the plot summary is the majority of the article it is also to long--Jakezing (Your King (talk) 18:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Official renewal announcement; Futurama status section deleted

Comedy Central has made an official announcement that they are bringing back Futurama, so the entire section speculating about the effect of the movies on a possible renewal is obsolete and has been removed. Cy3 (talk) 00:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Futurama: Into the Wild Green Yonder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090215100510/http://www.craveonline.com:80/articles/filmtv/04647510/rhymes_with_raining.html to http://www.craveonline.com/articles/filmtv/04647510/rhymes_with_raining.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:25, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Futurama: Into the Wild Green Yonder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Futurama: Into the Wild Green Yonder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110605180836/http://www.comedycentral.com/press/press_releases/2009/061009_futurama_returns.jhtml to http://www.comedycentral.com/press/press_releases/2009/061009_futurama_returns.jhtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:59, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]