Talk:Shortbus

Reviews

There are already many reivews linked the bottom of this article. There really is no need for this one (http://www.raymondvandewiel.nl/labels/Shortbus.html Critical Review of 'Shortbus'), as it is just a link to a person's personal blog.Sigil7 (talk) 14:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

User 86.133.247.58, you wanted me to explain myself on the talk page, then when I do, you remove my comments. Please do not delete comments from the talk page. Sigil7 (talk) 22:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Trailer

Does anyone have any information on the full theatrical trailer in either its censored or non-censored forms? I just returned from seeing The Illusionist, which had a censored version of the trailer (more than two minutes), which was prefaced by an introduction by John Cameron Mitchell. Afterward a website was presented where the _uncensored_ trailer could be seen (some variety of shortbusmovie.com), but alas I cannot find it! Does anyone know if this is extremely _new_ information (i.e. the website hasn't been put up yet) or _old_ information (i.e. the website has been already taken down)? Thanks Kurtto 15:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

That's the first I've heard of an "uncensored" trailer. Far as I know there's only the one version; if you see a brunette woman briefly having sex (no nudity) and Sook-Yin doing some naughty things on a park bench, then that's probably the "uncensored" trailer. I think you can find a link to it at IMDb or YouTube. If you mean there's an even more "uncensored" trailer, I haven't encountered it. 23skidoo 20:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

There is a _trailer_ for the movie, different from the _teaser_, in that it is more than two minutes in length and provides a glimpse into the plot of the film; I have yet to find this through neither IMDb nor YouTube. Kurtto 00:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. After your intial post I went hunting but so far the trailer has yet to appear online anywhere, just the teaser. It probably will soon enough. I'd keep watching sources like Youtube as someone's bound to post it eventually (or add a link in this article). 23skidoo 01:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

According to a recent comment on the YouTube posting of the teaser (presumably by JCM's brother, who has been uploading cameraphone videos of Shortbus promos), the website www.shortbusthemovie.com[1] will soon be up. Kurtto 15:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I dunno, that page looks awfully like a cybersquatter got there first. 23skidoo 17:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

The uncensored trailer has still yet to be put up on the website, however you can now see the censored one (as shown in theatres) via www.ifilm.com [2]. Awesomeness - so psyched Kurtto 23:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

If you want to see an uncensored version you can download some clips of any and all porns. They are available throughout the net or on many P2P programs, and present the same material as see in Shortbus.

What needs to be updated?

It's all nice to put on an "article needs updating" tag, but you have to identify on the talk page what needs to be updated. Also, the photo request tag is going to be difficult to follow through with as under current rules there are no fair use images possible for this film. 23skidoo 13:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The film has launched. The US distribution piece is missing. Who's distributing in the US? What are the box office results? The final sentence of the first paragraph is a fragment, and I'm not sure what it's trying to say. Cleduc 19:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't have the US distribution info but I'm sure someone will add this. I imagine DVD release information will probably become available soon, too. 23skidoo 00:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Perpas some things concerning the supposed controversy this movie has raised may be added; though I haven't seen much about it on the net which is probably exemplary of how smut is now acceptable in the mainstream.

I think someone should mention the bit with the Star Spangled Banner. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.194.55.132 (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Political message of the film

The film contains two major anti-stereotypes: there is no Jewish therapist ("Ruth"), but an Asian. And , Asian women are sexually not happy.This is not the case. The durex studies showed e.g. that South East Asian women are sexually the most sexually satisfied in the world, while Eastern European women were the least. "Shortbus" is the newest avantgarde piece of the "sexual revolution" . Never seen so many depressed androgynous people in one place. Even the Asian actress is a masculinized Europiform Sinid .From the evolutionary psychological perspective , one could state again that much promiscuity and carelessness together with not enough reproduction and high-investment parenting among White Americans will lead to leftist-induced further decline of the power of the Whites compared to the Jews and Chinese . Produced by a homosexual son of a gracile WASP army general.But what the father defended , is destroyed by the son now elegantly (of course , not all people can see that).But nevertheless ,this film is a great inspiration. Remember, remember the 5th of November...80.138.183.177 20:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

And what does this have to do with improving the article about the movie? Please remember that this talk page is here to discuss the article about the movie and not the movie itself. Oh, and do please keep in mind WP:NOR. --StuffOfInterest 20:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Unattributed claims tag

Could the editor who posted the unattributed claims tag please follow its directions and indicate here what comments are felt to be unattributed? There are a couple of statements in the intro that probably apply, but you're supposed to indicate on the talk page exactly what isn't attributed so this can be more easily rectified. Thanks. 23skidoo 13:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the tag. Without an indication of which parts of article are felt to be unattributed claims or constitute original research, the tag isn't really useful. Eldestone 09:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Photos

I've added some photos. They are press release movie stills and I consider them fair use. Eldestone 09:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The right Paul Dawson?

The link Paul Dawson is to a Canadian lacrosse player. Is this right??? Eldestone 08:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

It is definitely not the correct Paul Dawson. I've updated this page to use the same "Paul Dawson (actor)" link as found on PJ DeBoy's page, but unfortunately actual content for Paul Dawson the actor doesn't seem to be available here yet. There's possibly enough info on IMDB http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0367027/ and Paul's MySpace page http://www.myspace.com/pauldawsonnyc to work up a stub. 09:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.220.225.157 (talk)

November Rain

Is it me or an acoustic version of November Rain is performed just before Justin Bond sing "In the end" ?--185 lbs 23:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ItalianSBposter.jpg

Image:ItalianSBposter.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 12:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Shortbusposter.jpg

Image:Shortbusposter.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 20:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SmallItalSB.jpg

Image:SmallItalSB.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 17:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Statue of Liberty art

What does this have to do with the article?? It seems to be just floating there 74.229.215.99 (talk) 05:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I removed it, but it was replaced with the caption "John Bair animation", which isn't very helpful. The text of the article mentions his work on the "cityscape" but I still don't understand what the image is demonstrating. Powers ^T 03:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

The opening credits start with close-ups of this model of the Statue of Liberty, then pan-and-zoom thru the cityscape. A still of the cityscape might be informative, since those sequences appear at various times during the film as a scene-setting technique, but this specific image (which isn't at all representative of the look of the cityscape) isn't particularly relevant. - JasonAQuest (talk) 04:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Even the image itself is unexplained: what do "new version" and "old version" mean, for example? Powers ^T 15:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Was there a ban on children (underage 18) seeing this

This movie went way beyond the R status. If it was R, children underage 17 could have seen it with a parent or guardian. Since this was unrated and way beyond the R status did they ban children from seeing it. I know if it was on the internet there would be a statement saying no one under 18 shall view the content. I did not see this mention in this article, does anyone have any sources for it having or not having a ban on children from seeing it.--98.172.115.234 (talk) 22:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I'm in Australia, and while I didn't see it at the cinema, I can advise that the DVD (101 mins) is rated "R 18+ restricted", and advises "High level sex, Actual sexual activity", so I don't think it was censored in any way. Personally, I would probably have reservations about allowing my children to watch it, but to be completely honest, I would worry a lot more about violent video games and degrading types of pornography than this. Then again, I'm an old tree-hugger from way back. :P ★★Violet Fae (talk)★★ 03:02, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Confusion in plot summary

I've not seen this film yet so maybe it does make sense when watching, but either way this should need explaining: are Alex and Caleb the same? And Jamie and Eric? Both of them are said to be used in the same way (i.e., Alex is described as James's stalker, and then so is Caleb; Jamie is described as James's boyfriend and Eric is said to be in an relationship with James as well) and furthermore Alex & Caleb are said to be played by the same actor. Whether the characters use a pseudonym in the film or not, I think it should be addressed to clear up confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.197.190.70 (talk) 12:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree - unless "Eric" is another character in the film, names used throughout for each character should be consistent. Esprix (talk) 16:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't recall there being a character named "Alex", and there is no reference in the IMDb credits. In regards to the stalker, his name is definitely Caleb. User:Violet Fae 17 September 2011 —Preceding undated comment added 17:26, 16 September 2011 (UTC).