Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2017 August 23
| Entertainment desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < August 22 | << Jul | August | Sep >> | August 24 > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
August 23
[edit]Aks
[edit]In the old 2001 aks film Hindi, did Raghavan's corpse get burnt into ashes before Spirit entered Amitabh?(2600:387:6:803:0:0:0:78 (talk) 03:59, 23 August 2017 (UTC)).
- Not in the film. Aks is fiction. If the answer is not in the film, there is no answer. (We could maybe have a fiction template for this sort of question/answer.)--Shantavira|feed me 11:12, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- A template? Really, Shantavira? For that kind of reply? every possible answer that a viewer could possibly have is found within a film? and if not, then there is no answer? I would tend to disagree ... and since when does non-fiction cinema answer all questions? Maineartists (talk) 12:09, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- The problem with this question is that it pre-supposes that the film exists in a greater context and that answers to questions not directly addressed by the work of fiction could exist. They do not. There are only two possibilities, each of which has a trivial answer: 1) The film answers the question directly. If that is the case, the OP would know the answer by watching the film. 2) The film never answers the question. In that case, no one could ever get the answer by watching the film. I'm not sure what reference we could provide for the OP for such either possible answer. The only answer is "watch it yourself and find out". --Jayron32 13:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- I actually do not think there is a "problem" with this question at all. The "problem" I see is trying to restrain the idea that a screenwriter or director might have concepts outside of the medium in which they work; and audience members might just leave the theater or mode of viewing with questions that were purposefully (or unintentionally) placed within the context of the film for further analysis. i.e. The films of Kubrick, M. Night Shyamalan or the Finale to The Sopranos. I for one do not leave the theater with a friend and simply sit in the car in complete silence without a question in my head because: "If the answer is not in the film, there is no answer" - or - "The film answered the question". To this day I believe that the final scene in The Piano is all a dream and Ada McGrath is still dangling under the water attached to the piano. The point is: perhaps the OP (maybe not in this case) came to the Reference Desk in search of "Intelligent Conversation". Much like any Q&A with a director of a film or a friend that would accompany you to a movie. Perhaps if you viewed this question with the tag-on: "What are you thoughts?" you'd see it differently. You may not answer, because it might not interest you; but you might not also respond with a blanket statement of dismissal. Maineartists (talk) 13:59, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- All of that is perfectly true and correct Maineartists. It is also entirely outside of the purview of this desk, which is to provide the OP with references that they can read to find the answers to their questions. What you and your friends chat about in regard to films, there's nothing wrong with that. It just isn't a reference we can provide to the OP. This is not a free-for-all forum for discussing what we think happened in films. Its a reference desk. There's no possible way to provide answers to questions like this in the context of what we do here. If you want to exchange phone numbers with the OP and carry on a conversation about fan theories and the like, there's nothing wrong with that. We just don't do that here. --Jayron32 14:59, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- The "problem" is that the user has been blocked multiple times and keeps returning and asking more questions about Hindu movies. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 14:26, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Since this is a "reference desk" and not a forum, (stop snickering!) the user should be referred to a Hindu cinema forum (if there is such a thing). —2606:A000:4C0C:E200:DD82:ED86:1C17:11D2 (talk) 15:06, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Please. I've seen discussions go on ad nauseam here as though it were lunchtime at comic con. Funny things happen on the way to forums. However, the referral is a good suggestion. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 15:22, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- I suggest looking at just one of the block logs for this user. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 15:30, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Since this is a "reference desk" and not a forum, (stop snickering!) the user should be referred to a Hindu cinema forum (if there is such a thing). —2606:A000:4C0C:E200:DD82:ED86:1C17:11D2 (talk) 15:06, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- I actually do not think there is a "problem" with this question at all. The "problem" I see is trying to restrain the idea that a screenwriter or director might have concepts outside of the medium in which they work; and audience members might just leave the theater or mode of viewing with questions that were purposefully (or unintentionally) placed within the context of the film for further analysis. i.e. The films of Kubrick, M. Night Shyamalan or the Finale to The Sopranos. I for one do not leave the theater with a friend and simply sit in the car in complete silence without a question in my head because: "If the answer is not in the film, there is no answer" - or - "The film answered the question". To this day I believe that the final scene in The Piano is all a dream and Ada McGrath is still dangling under the water attached to the piano. The point is: perhaps the OP (maybe not in this case) came to the Reference Desk in search of "Intelligent Conversation". Much like any Q&A with a director of a film or a friend that would accompany you to a movie. Perhaps if you viewed this question with the tag-on: "What are you thoughts?" you'd see it differently. You may not answer, because it might not interest you; but you might not also respond with a blanket statement of dismissal. Maineartists (talk) 13:59, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- The problem with this question is that it pre-supposes that the film exists in a greater context and that answers to questions not directly addressed by the work of fiction could exist. They do not. There are only two possibilities, each of which has a trivial answer: 1) The film answers the question directly. If that is the case, the OP would know the answer by watching the film. 2) The film never answers the question. In that case, no one could ever get the answer by watching the film. I'm not sure what reference we could provide for the OP for such either possible answer. The only answer is "watch it yourself and find out". --Jayron32 13:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- A template? Really, Shantavira? For that kind of reply? every possible answer that a viewer could possibly have is found within a film? and if not, then there is no answer? I would tend to disagree ... and since when does non-fiction cinema answer all questions? Maineartists (talk) 12:09, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps I should have simply prefaced my original comment with an "OT" and bypassed this whole forum. Maineartists (talk) 17:45, 23 August 2017 (UTC)