Talk:Red Road (film)

Denmark Low‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: British / Nordic

	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 British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Nordic cinema task force.

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Red Road (film) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 November 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Red Road is the first of three films in the Advance Party trilogy, each of which are to be set in Scotland using the same characters and cast, and directed by a different first-time director each time?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/November.

Wikipedia

Spoilers

My {{spoiler}} tag was removed. Reading the removal comment, I see that I used it incorrectly in the technical sense, failing to include an {{endspoiler}} tag after the end of the spoiler portion. But this is about the encyclopedic correctness of some sort of spoiler warning, not correct use of the tags.

However, I think some caution to readers is warranted, although possibly not the spoiler tag-pair. A significant aspect of the film is the mystery it presents to viewers. Dialogue is presented in a context that shows viewers that the characters have a history that leaves significant details unspoken, rather than providing expository details in dialogue. The viewer is meant to puzzle over why Jackie's behavior is so detached, except for her strong focus on her work. Explaining the reason for her interest in Clyde so abruptly in the plot section breaks the mystery. (It's a mystery for viewers and for Clyde; Jackie knows what she's doing, at least a few steps ahead, if not to the point of having a long-term plan.)

By contrast, in some films, the viewer's enjoyment is not about a mystery -- it's no spoiler to say that the couple at odds with each other at the beginning of a romantic comedy ends up together in the end. But in this case the unfolding mystery is central to the structure of the film; almost every scene contains a new "Rosebud" for viewers to discover.

So, what to do? One possibility that would serve the same purpose as a spoiler warning, while staying clear of the general WP:SPOILER guidelines against disclaimers, would be to add a section above Plot that points out the use of an unfolding-mystery presentation style. Gathering some of the above into a Mystery section, rephrased in encyclopedic tone, is one possible solution. In addition to cautioning readers who haven't seen the movie about the risk that they'd find spoilers in the Plot section, it adds worthwhile encyclopedic content to the article, pointing out something distinctive about the film's directing style. A simpler fix would be to add a simple sentence to the lead, along the lines of, "The film is presented to the viewer as a gradually unfolding mystery."

-- Steve Schonberger 00:53, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Red road.jpg

File:Red road.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) 09:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Film's Conclusion

Hello. As the article currently stands, it does not reveal the way in which the film concludes. Should this information be included? It is my understanding that in respect of films, most Wikipedia articles reveal the way in which a film ends. As such, most plot summaries contain spoliers. I have contemplated writing the 'dramatic conclusion' to the film, but I thought that I would invite feedback from people before I did so. Thank you (Galaxycat (talk) 13:38, 4 June 2012 (UTC))[reply]