| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Daredevil (2015): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StanTheMan (talk | contribs) m (→Re-name) |
StanTheMan (talk | contribs) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
:I never liked that. If we're going by IMDb standard, and we're certain not obligated to do so, that's how IMDb does it. It just looks neater. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 13:43, 29 December 2015 (EST) | :I never liked that. If we're going by IMDb standard, and we're certain not obligated to do so, that's how IMDb does it. It just looks neater. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 13:43, 29 December 2015 (EST) | ||
:: Well, having a series with a particular year in the title when it isn't limited to airing in just that year seems just a bit goofy and misleading I think. Unless it's a case of need, such as ''Mission Impossible'' where the years are listed for differentiation due to there being the same title repeated on both different and exact forms of media (in that case, two seperate full-run episodic TV shows, as well as a film), again I just think having the year listed is kinda silly in that regard. That said, I think TV shows should be noted as 'series' in the title if the title is repeated between film and series, as I think just years works better for films (It could be listed like the X-Files revival miniseries page - ex 2015 Series, etc). But I agree that's certainly not as 'neat'. All-told, just making some thoughts - It's not a huge deal, and whatever happens I don't make the final call on these things of course. In that case I'm glad I brought it up first. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 01:31, 30 December 2015 (EST) | :: Well, having a series with a particular year in the title when it isn't limited to airing in just that year seems just a bit goofy and misleading I think. Unless it's a case of need, such as ''Mission Impossible'' where the years are listed for differentiation due to there being the same title repeated on both different and exact forms of media (in that case, two seperate full-run episodic TV shows, as well as a film), again I just think having the year listed is kinda silly in that regard. That said, I think TV shows should be noted as 'series' in the title if the title is repeated between film and series, as I think just years works better for films (It could be listed like the X-Files revival miniseries page - ex 2015 Series, etc). But I agree that's certainly not as 'neat'. All-told, just making some thoughts - It's not a huge deal, and whatever happens I don't make the final call on these things of course. In that case I'm glad I brought it up first. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 01:31, 30 December 2015 (EST) | ||
:::Rules of the site state that we follow the naming conventions of IMDb, which has this series listed as Daredevil (2015). --[[User:RedRobinAlpha|RedRobinAlpha]] ([[User talk:RedRobinAlpha|talk]]) 17:48, 30 December 2015 (GMT) | |||
::::I always interpreted that as a means to distinguish between variations, like ''The Godfather, Part II'' or ''The Godfather Part 2''. The title is certainly not ''Daredevil 2015'', like ''Godzilla 1985'' or ''Airport 1975''. But as I said, I just think it looks neater. In the off chance there is a conflict, like with ''Resident Evil'', we can further. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 13:38, 30 December 2015 (EST) | |||
:::::And I don't think it's necessary to name the seasons ''Daredevil (2015) - Season 1''. As far as I know, there's only one live action ''Daredevil'' series. The "Season 1" should be enough to distinguish it. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 13:40, 30 December 2015 (EST) | |||
:::::: That would be good. The main page can keep the year, but the season pages can do away with it if it is just the one series. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 13:51, 30 December 2015 (EST) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:51, 30 December 2015
Need some help
At the end of the first episode you see a gun deal taking place and I can't identify the weapon handled, you don't get a great look at it, but I was hoping someone could help me out.
--RedRobinAlpha (talk) 12:53, 10 April 2015 (GMT)
- Never mind you see them again, better, in a later episode. --RedRobinAlpha (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2015 (GMT)
As those two pictures don't show the gun well, perhaps you might wanna leave them off the main page, if not have them deleted, so you have a couple spaces for newer good images. Also you might wanna redo your handgun thumbnails on the main page, generally those are best set at or around 300px. StanTheMan (talk) 12:47, 10 April 2015 (EDT)
Movie realism
The first action scene, Daredevil, with his super hearing, detects Turk racking the slide of his S&W 5946. While the bad guy may follow the concealed carry philosophy of carrying an unchambered gun, I thought it was very convenient that he unnecessarily re-racked his slide to alert Daredevil again.
Turk was at shot 7 at that point, and I thought this gun was a 5946, a 9mm with at least 10 rounds, not a .45 1911 with only 7. Mostly, even an untrained shooter will fire away until empty, not rerack the slide.
Also, I noticed the suppressed MP7's in the Stick episode had rather loud reports.
Sanjuro (talk) 15:15, 12 April 2015 (EDT)
- In regards to the S&W in the first action scene, it's possible he only had a partially loaded magazine, or did a mid mag reload as you don't really see him for a few seconds until he racks the slide, mid mag reload would be the smart play as the weapon was knocked away from him, always better to be safe than sorry. But yeah, chances are it was just so they could have Murdock hone in on the sound (Although they could have just had the weapon scrape the floor or something). The MP7's weren't really that loud considering they where in a fairly enclosed area, and most of the sound heard came from the bolt cycling and brass hitting the floor. --RedRobinAlpha (talk) 21:32, 13 April 2015 (GMT)
AK-47
Can somebody make a screenshot of the guard with an AK-47 at the beginning of episode 4? FARID (talk) 13:30, 13 April 2015 (EDT)
Re-name
Given the series will be continuing past 2015, might be better to rename this this as "Daredevil (TV Series)" rather than "Daredevil (2015)". I'd do it myself, but that's a rather big sweeping edit and I'd rather not foul it up. StanTheMan (talk) 13:34, 29 December 2015 (EST)
- I never liked that. If we're going by IMDb standard, and we're certain not obligated to do so, that's how IMDb does it. It just looks neater. --Funkychinaman (talk) 13:43, 29 December 2015 (EST)
- Well, having a series with a particular year in the title when it isn't limited to airing in just that year seems just a bit goofy and misleading I think. Unless it's a case of need, such as Mission Impossible where the years are listed for differentiation due to there being the same title repeated on both different and exact forms of media (in that case, two seperate full-run episodic TV shows, as well as a film), again I just think having the year listed is kinda silly in that regard. That said, I think TV shows should be noted as 'series' in the title if the title is repeated between film and series, as I think just years works better for films (It could be listed like the X-Files revival miniseries page - ex 2015 Series, etc). But I agree that's certainly not as 'neat'. All-told, just making some thoughts - It's not a huge deal, and whatever happens I don't make the final call on these things of course. In that case I'm glad I brought it up first. StanTheMan (talk) 01:31, 30 December 2015 (EST)
- Rules of the site state that we follow the naming conventions of IMDb, which has this series listed as Daredevil (2015). --RedRobinAlpha (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2015 (GMT)
- I always interpreted that as a means to distinguish between variations, like The Godfather, Part II or The Godfather Part 2. The title is certainly not Daredevil 2015, like Godzilla 1985 or Airport 1975. But as I said, I just think it looks neater. In the off chance there is a conflict, like with Resident Evil, we can further. --Funkychinaman (talk) 13:38, 30 December 2015 (EST)
- And I don't think it's necessary to name the seasons Daredevil (2015) - Season 1. As far as I know, there's only one live action Daredevil series. The "Season 1" should be enough to distinguish it. --Funkychinaman (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2015 (EST)
- That would be good. The main page can keep the year, but the season pages can do away with it if it is just the one series. StanTheMan (talk) 13:51, 30 December 2015 (EST)
- And I don't think it's necessary to name the seasons Daredevil (2015) - Season 1. As far as I know, there's only one live action Daredevil series. The "Season 1" should be enough to distinguish it. --Funkychinaman (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2015 (EST)
- I always interpreted that as a means to distinguish between variations, like The Godfather, Part II or The Godfather Part 2. The title is certainly not Daredevil 2015, like Godzilla 1985 or Airport 1975. But as I said, I just think it looks neater. In the off chance there is a conflict, like with Resident Evil, we can further. --Funkychinaman (talk) 13:38, 30 December 2015 (EST)
- Rules of the site state that we follow the naming conventions of IMDb, which has this series listed as Daredevil (2015). --RedRobinAlpha (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2015 (GMT)
- Well, having a series with a particular year in the title when it isn't limited to airing in just that year seems just a bit goofy and misleading I think. Unless it's a case of need, such as Mission Impossible where the years are listed for differentiation due to there being the same title repeated on both different and exact forms of media (in that case, two seperate full-run episodic TV shows, as well as a film), again I just think having the year listed is kinda silly in that regard. That said, I think TV shows should be noted as 'series' in the title if the title is repeated between film and series, as I think just years works better for films (It could be listed like the X-Files revival miniseries page - ex 2015 Series, etc). But I agree that's certainly not as 'neat'. All-told, just making some thoughts - It's not a huge deal, and whatever happens I don't make the final call on these things of course. In that case I'm glad I brought it up first. StanTheMan (talk) 01:31, 30 December 2015 (EST)