Talk:Prom Night (2008 film)

	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.

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 March 2019 and 8 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jsantos93.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's NOT a remake

It says so on the DVD in one of the interviews. The only thing that each movie shares is the title. The director says it himself. Check up on that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.138.159 (talk) 09:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is.--BigBang616 (talk) 04:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. It's a re-imagining, like Rob Zombie's Halloween. I've already had this fight on this page, and the page for the original. No rational person will watch both movies and think this is a remake. The lead paragraphs on both pages make note of this. Crotchety Old Man (talk) 11:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to archive everything on this page, this is an 8 month old post. Darrenhusted (talk) 11:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is. A re-imagining is still considered a remake. If you look up remake it will tell you that a re-imagining is a kind of remake. "Re-imagining" is just a term that some studio executive came up with so that they wouldn't have the stigma of the term remake. Also, the IMDb considers it a remake. Allmovie considers it a remake. Several notable movie websites and magazines consider it a remake. Even the producers of the film intended for this to be a remake. If you click the link on the main page where it tells you that it is a re-imagining it links to the remake page. --BigBang616 (talk) 07:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you want to use an example of a re-imagining that you don't consider to be a remake, I wouldn't suggest using Rob Zombie's Halloween. That has the exact same characters in the exact same situation as the 1978 original. That is most definitely a remake. Rob Zombie changed a quite a bit of dialogue and added some extensive backstory for Michael Myers (so there are definitely major differences) but Rob Zombie's version is closer to a remake than this one. At least with this one you have the argument that none of the characters are the same nor is the exact motive for the killer's rampage (just the title and basic plot are the same), but with Halloween you have no argument.--BigBang616 (talk) 08:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yet the Halloween article says it's a re-imagining. Weird. Crotchety Old Man (talk) 13:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It does. I didn't say that it wasn't. What I said was that Rob Zombie's Halloween was closer to a normal remake than Prom Night. You may want to pay attention to what I'm telling you. Also, I mentioned that even according to the page that the word "re-imagining" is linked to states that a re-imagining is a kind of remake. You may also want to note that the page for Rob Zombie's Halloween says it is a "remake/re-imagining".--BigBang616 (talk) 01:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wording

I'll fix some of the grammar in the synopsis if nobody minds "and stabs her profusely". Hilarious Apple-I-mage (talk) 23:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Killing Donna?

The plot says "they didn't know that Fenton planned to kill them all," but Fenton only decided to kill Donna at the very end of the movie when she escaped from him in the closet. He wants to kill everybody around her so they can live together. Apparently whoever wrote that plot summary didn't comprehend the movie very well. 70.242.165.181 (talk) 13:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leaked onto torrent sites?

Has it really? I've only seen fake copies of it on all of the BitTorrent sites that I have checked. (They say that a well-known person in the torrent community, aXXo, released it, but it actually requires you to download something and is just overall fake.) And even if it were true, would the torrent tidbit be suitable for Wikipedia? (note that I have no problem with torrents or illegal downloading) I have removed this for now, but if anyone has any input on why they feel it should be here, or if they've found a legitimate copy that has been leaked, please discuss.Ihatecrayons (talk) 17:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Production?

What the hell is that even talking about? Looks like we have someone bored with their own meaningless lives and decided to just mess with pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.253.8 (talk) 05:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...If it's not a remake

Why is it tagged as so everywhere else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.79.5 (talk) 22:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a remake, but some people just don't want to admit it. For some reason, they think that calling it remake means it is bad so they don't want to use that term (one of the reasons the term "re-imagining" was made for other, similar remakes).

I don't think it's a remake. The only similarity between the movies seems to be that they both happen on prom night. The plots are totally different. Besides, lots of teen movies happen on prom night.

Definitely not a remake. --PureRED - Kyle Floyd (talk) 22:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm sorry that you don't see it that way. But it is a remake. When they decided to make the movie, the producers' intention was to remake the 1980 Prom Night, the script was originally written as a remake of Prom Night (although that may not have been J. S. Cardone's intention when he re-wrote the script), and the IMDb considers it a remake. Also, there are several articles in movie magazines and on movie websites which refer to it as a remake. Only as it got closer and closer to the film's release did people start to say that it wasn't a remake, seemingly only to distance themselves from the idea that all remakes are automatically bad. Think about Tim Burton's 2001 version of Planet of the Apes. It is unquestionably a remake, right? Well the only similarities between the original and the remake are the title and the basic situation (a man from our world visiting a planet ruled by sentient apes), other than these similarities the plots are very different and the films have several major differences. So, why is it people have no problem saying Planet of the Apes is a remake (despite the few similarities vs. the many differences) but have problems calling Prom Night a remake when it has a similar number of similarities and differences? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BigBang616 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You problem, pal, is that Planet of the Apes wasn't a remake either. Even Tim Burton said it wasn't one, rather it was a "reimagining".76.226.129.130 (talk)

Re-imagining is just a term some studio executive came up with so that they wouldn't have the stigma that comes with it being called a remake. It's just a different word with the same meaning.--BigBang616 (talk) 04:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a "re-imagining" of the 1980 Prom Night, and "re-imagining" is synonymous with "remake", then the definition of both "remake" and "re-imagining" must be "a completely different movie with not even the slightest resemblance to an earlier movie except for the coincidence of having the same name". You might as well call Where the Heart Is (2000 film) a "re-imagining" of Where the Heart Is (1990 film), since those two movies have about as much in common as the 1980 Prom Night and the 2008 Prom Night. +An gr 21:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reception - Sunday Herald

A couple days ago it said the Sunday Herald gave the film a 2/5, but now it says 4/5. Is this an accurate change? Dannysk89 (talk) 21:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)dannysk89[reply]

Teacher's name?

Who is 'Mr Fenton' who escaped from the mental asylum? The teacher? If so, why is his name given elsewhere as Ramsay? Are there two people? Does he take a fake name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.216.160 (talk) 09:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He killed a guy and used his identity--from what I've gathered. --PureRED - Kyle Floyd (talk) 22:02, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel?

Is there any chance for a sequel? Rubixmike14 —Preceding comment was added at 01:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I heard there will be a sequel, but I have no evidence on that, it could possibly be just a rumour, we'll just have to sit, watch and wait and see!Jonni_Boi (Talk) 13:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

deciding that the plot was overly detailed and that simply deleting some stuff wouldn't work, i dumped the entire section alltogther--Jakezing (talk) 02:36, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about a short summary of the film in the plot section? Possibly, in the same manner as they do when a movie is released on DVD? Not only that, it won't contain any spoilers.

Just a suggestion. What do you think? I could write it. Frschoonover (talk) 04:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a short plot summary rather than an overly long plot description with spoilers. I don't know if this is more appropriate or not, but it seems to be compared to an overly long plot description with spoilers. I hope that it's good enough to be on the article for this film. If not, than I tried.

Let me know what you think. Anything such as advice or comments are truly appreciated. 71.126.6.104 (talk) 18:12, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, someone has restored the entire plot with spoilers to the article. In my humble opinion, this actually makes the article look too huge and I think that the the short plot summary without spoilers is more appropriate. What do you guys here think? Frschoonover (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a crack at shortening it up after I've watched it fully. It's definitely too big and a smaller number of spoilers is OK. Farslayer (talk) 06:03, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dumped it again.--Jakezing (talk) 13:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minor vandalism

I just removed a little bit of minor vandalism that was left by another anonymous user. It was next to Iris Elba's name and I just removed that. Apparently, there are a lot of immature people out there who love to cause trouble by vandalizing on Wikipedia. I figured that it was the best that I could do. Frschoonover (talk) 18:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]