Talk:The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (film)/Archive 1

Archive 1

2008 release date

I have not been able to locate any attributable sources that suggest that the film's release date will be in May 2008. Internet Movie Database and similar movie-profile websites do not qualify if it cannot be reflect somewhere in the mainstream media what the film's release date is. I have found that it will be released in 2008 in newspaper articles, but nothing has been mentioned of being released in May 2008. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 22:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Montreal shooting

I just added a short sentence about filming that is happening in Montreal in the Production section, however, I don't know how to make the reference. Could someone more competent do this for me? The news story is here: http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=9b1b174d-ccb7-4356-aadc-6d68c76b7197

I'll include it tonight. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Better link. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

What happened to Montreal

The article talks about filming in New Orleans and Los Angeles, yet quite much of the filming was done in Montreal. Looking at the trailer, virtually every outdoor scene is from Montreal yet it's not mentioned in the article. I guess this should be fixed. JdeJ (talk) 12:15, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Makeup

Just saw it, and am thinking that it's a shoo-in for the makeup Oscar. If there's info about that to be found, that's a key feature fo the movie, and it would be good to have a section on it. 66.142.57.70 (talk) 23:17, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Citations for use

• Marion Edwyn Harrison (2007-04-30). "Now It's Three Directors in the Family for Gena Rowlands". The National Ledger. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

Information about body doubles for the aging aspects of the film. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 04:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• Taraji P. Henson Is Brad Pitt's Mom —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
• Brad Pitt’s Artificial Aging In ‘Benjamin Button’ Will Amaze, Says Tilda Swinton —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:32, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• Nick Wingfield (2006-07-31). "Digital Replicas May Change Face of Films". The Wall Street Journal. chantessy 23:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• The Curious Case of Benjamin Button screenplay by Eric Roth
  Full script for clarification of plot details. –Fierce Beaver (talk) 19:08, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Visual effects

Bringing Benjamin Button to Life at VFXWorld. —Erik (talk • contrib) 21:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC) Yes, it mentioned about his father's death after I returns from WWII, in 1945. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.230.38.115 (talk) 20:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The story book.

"The children play together and listen to Daisy's grandmother read from a storybook." I've just seen the movie an hour ago. The story book is Just So Stories by Rudyard Kipling. My mother used to read those to us around 50 years ago. 71.241.228.118 (talk) 05:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

"drama"?

shouldn't there be some mention of the clearly fantastical/"magical realist" elements of the story? the simple description "drama" to me implies non-speculative fiction. --86.137.156.156 (talk) 15:23, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Reference to dementia

At the end of the film a man says about young Benjamin aged 12: "The doctors said if they didn’t know any better, he goes in and out of states of recognition, as if he had the beginnings of dementia..." (direct quote from the script). The reference to dementia seems unfortunate as Benjamin would, of course, have had the young mind of a child (and the attention span of one), not the old mind of an elderly person. If anything, he would have been born with dementia, and his mind would have cleared as he regressed to young age. Is this worth adding to the article? --Rhodian (talk) 23:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I added some info ab

His mind goes from that of a child to that of an old man, while his body ages backwards. 130.209.6.41 (talk) 13:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Page name

While this is obviously the most popular Benjamin Button article at the moment, should it not be moved to "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (film)" as it is not the original work with this title? 130.209.6.41 (talk) 13:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Not explicitly Katrina

I've removed all references to Hurricane Katrina and 2005 in the plot section, as neither is explictly mentioned in the film (here is the script). I assume the filmmakers designed the storm to evoke images of Katrina, but the only thing we know for sure is that it's a major hurricane approaching New Orleans, and it happens sometime after 2003 (the year Benjamin dies). –Fierce Beaver (talk) 19:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

It may not be in the script, but I know that at least once, there is a shot of a television news report playing in the hospital room and the word "Katrina" is clearly visible on-screen. Propaniac (talk) 21:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Have just watched the film and the news definately shows the word "katrina" when in reference to the storm. Not sure how other people feel but the references to Hurricane Katrina in the plot synopsis should be reinserted it's a nice metaphor of how Benjamin was born into chaos while Daisy died in it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.127.156 (talk) 23:25, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I'll have to take both your words for it then... those brief clips flew by so quickly I couldn't catch much other than the large red hurricane heading toward the coast. If anyone could dig up a screencap of it, I'd be interested to see it. I still think there is too much focus on the concrete detail of it being Katrina in the summary given how little focus was given in the movie to indicate it specifically being Katrina... seems to me a single named mention without all the date specifics would be more appropriate. –Fierce Beaver (talk) 22:00, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I kind of agree that it's not terribly relevant, but looking at the changes from when I reverted your change, I don't personally find the references to be excessive. I think the fact of its being Katrina is mainly important because, as the audience, we can recognize that it's not just a bad storm but in fact a chaotic and historically huge event, without that being spelled out within the film. Naming the specific date is a parallel to the specific date of Benjamin's birth and the historic events of that day. (I'm not that adamant, though, and if you take out some of the specific references, I won't edit them back.) Propaniac (talk) 04:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

You seem to have missed so much. I'm pretty sure "Katrina" was seen on TV at least twice, and spoken at least once. And dialog about the levees breaking in the ninth district. People around me reacted, the first time the hurricane was mentioned and a television was seen. -- AvatarMN (talk) 06:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I just watched it and Katrina appears several times on the TV screen in Daisy's hospital room. It's not just a fleeting view either, the camera lingers on it for a while.... 92.233.31.253 (talk) 23:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Controversey

I added some info about the Italian author who claimed that the film was partially based off of her short story "Il ritorno di Arthur all'innocenza" more than the actual short story. I'm amazed that she was even able to get someone to believe her, but I included it in the article. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Tokyogirl79

• You have also a similar story from one of the pilgrims of Hyperion. Hektor (talk) 21:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't she, the Italian author, be sued for copyright infringement of Fitzgerald? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.207.139.112 (talk) 04:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

• I don't think it's a copyright problem, because main Plots like counting back to zero in age are well known in literature.The real plot of the film is different from each and any novell but it#s tensefull and worth being told. So the script is a new born one...build upon more than one story.. --Danaide (talk) 16:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

1919 and WWI

In the article it says:

"Premise:

Button is born in 1919 - with the film itself beginning in World War I, traveling around the world and carrying on all the way through to the year 2000."

Do you people pay attention in school? Either the history is wrong, or the sentence is confusing and poorly written. WWI was OVER by 1919. So, this doesn't make sense. Does the film begin before he is born? They show WWI and then Button is born? Someone who knows the story please clarify the sentence of fix the history. Thanks. >>> 207.69.139.150 (talk) 07:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

The film probably starts in World War I, and Button is born afterwards. —Wildroot (talk) 20:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

He was born during the Armistice celebrations following the end of World War 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.190.133.139 (talk) 23:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

• A real problem of forward or backwards telling perspectives. There is first the look backwards from ouerdays of daisy going to die._ and there is the point of view, which tells he is born at the beginning of world war one. Between 1914 and 1916 out of the perspective of an auctorial narrator Benjamin himself. Who is telling the truth?--Danaide (talk) 16:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

"Did you know i've been hit by lightning 7 times! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.110.77 (talk) 02:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

That idiotic hollywood russians

Somehow everybody is blissful ignorant of the fact, that 1942 in Murmansk was not that calm and easy-going, as shown in the film. I mean: PQ-17 and everything:

During World War II, Murmansk was a link with the Western world for Russia, and a vast commerce with the Allies, in items important to the respective military efforts passed through it: primarily manufactured and raw materials goods into the Soviet Union. These supplies were brought to the city in the Arctic Convoys. A joint German and Finnish force launched an offensive against the city in 1941 as part of Operation Silver Fox. Murmansk suffered profound destruction, second only to Stalingrad of all the Soviet cities.[7][8] However, fierce Soviet resistance and unforgiving territory prevented the Germans from capturing the city and from cutting off the vital Karelian railway line. For the rest of the war, it served as a transit point for weapons and other supplies entering the Soviet Union from other Allied nations. This resistance was eventually recognized in 1985 by the Soviet Union with the formal designation of Murmansk as a Hero City on May 6, 1985.[9]

So idling and vodka-drinking russian navy officers in a peaceful harbor town of 1941-1942 just can't be true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.59.5.129 (talk) 13:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

"Apparent" ages

Just wondering from where the ages stated in the article are sourced. I removed ... "now looking like a 23-year-old man" ... because it appears to be an estimate. If the others are also guesses, they should be removed. - Dudesleeper / Talk 07:47, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Colour or line? critics grounding

CONTENT REMOVED BY -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email --Danaide (talk) 16:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:NOT WP:FORUM WP:SPAM. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 02:03, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

A pedestrian article

I just watched the film and thought it was Hollywood trying to do its own version of themes contained within The Prohpet (A 1923 collection of poetry by Khalil Gibran). Needless to say, this article, in many ways reflects the general lets downs in the film as its neither encyclopedic or interesting. This is probably because of a main failing behind WP which is the requirement for references from "published sources". Therefore if the writer of such published sources are neither articulate or perceptive, how can this article be?

For instance, I spent nearly three hours trying to suspend the belief that Button's entire life journey is based around the premise that only a small number of people know about his reverse-ageing condition. How did he get an ID? Or a passport renewal to travel the world? What about the people who saw him every day in New Orleans? The need to take the viewer on a meta-physical journey with an ever-younger Button forgoes the need to make a believable story. OK it's a fantasy film, but the "I can buy that" is what draws the audience in. This film's message was therefore more important than the plot. This could develop into a debate over style and substance? As the story arcs within the film could have been done in probably half the time and the cost if the need for lavish sets etc was not such an over-riding factor.

To me, there are many questions that should be contained in an article about a film like this one. The article, if it meant to be an encyclopedic entry, should not simply be a narrative on where it was filmed, who wrote the screenplay, how much it cost to make, what the critics thought, or what awards it won. Everything I just mentioned could appear in table form. A a real encyclopdic article would address the underlying principles of the film in a critical and analytical manner. However, as this whole WP project is based on sources, and if there are no sources to hand that make the same points, it cannot be said because of the catch-all trap of "no original research". It's a pity because this article on The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is about an interesting film with an interesting premise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.17.11 (talk) 00:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Theodore Roosevelt?

Is this correct? I can understand his place in the original story (which starts in 1860), but he's dead in the new timeframe (starting in 1919). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.192.88 (talk) 17:12, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

In the movie it makes sense —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jake0617 (talk • contribs)

• Yes, former president Theodore Roosevelt (who died a few months after the end of the war, and had been having health problems since before Armistice Day) seems a rather strange choice for the cameo dignitary at the unveiling of the clock. Possibly this is a nod that the timeframe of the film should not be considered identical to our own? Or simply throwing in the most familiar name of the era for the benifit of history ignorant audience members? Whatever the case, he is specifically refered to in the film by name. -- Infrogmation (talk) 22:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Well, I've now read this whole talk page and there's nothing yet about the clock's role at the end of the movie post credits! The articles about the Pirates movies and the Marvel movies, mention their post credits scenes. This movie also has a post credits scene! I know that in the local theater, that I'm usually the only one to sit through every movie's credits to see if there might be a scene at the end, so I'm not surprised if others here missed it. But the movie returns to the clock at the end of the credits. If I recall right, the clock stops ticking, ergo it "dies', at the same moment Benjamin does.Thus it is implied that there is a mystical link between the clock and Benjamin Button. Now, wasn't the clock famous for telling time backwards, or something like that? By the way, I came here looking for the name of the tugboat, but no name is given! Argh! Leo Star Dragon 1. 70.129.174.55 (talk) 03:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I've watched the film on Blu Ray, and I'm not sure what you're talking about...IIRC, as shown, Benjamin dies in flashback, then his true love dies (present-day), then we see water flooding a room where the clock has been stored, and it starts ticking. Then there's Benjamin's closing narrative, and that's all there is to it. No post-credits sequence. I believe the name of the tugboat is Chelsea, but that's not included in the article because it isn't particularly notable. In any case, an implication that the clock is linked to Benjamin would be original research and inappropriate for inclusion, but you're right that it ran backwards. Doniago (talk) 15:55, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

The Plot Needs Major Changes

First off, I realize that the Plot is long enough as it is, but as the saying goes, "Quality over quantity." We need to include many of the elements that were overlooked... All the deaths that he saw as a young child, the woman who taught him how to play the piano... I don't even think Quinnie's death is included in the plot, nor his father's.

This article's plot needs to be improved, regardless of length. After all, it was a long movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tenth Attack (talk • contribs) 05:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I would remove the "warning label" on the plot. I don't think it's too long. People come to wikipedia to get the details. Why would we remove them? So improve if you wish, but please don't shorten by leaving out content. Anyone else want to remove the "warning"?GreekParadise (talk) 20:53, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I've put the warning label back on. It's OK to have important arcs and smaller notable events, but if you want to know every single detail, you'll watch the film.

This film is 166 minutes long. The plot is 3496 words. The Godfather Part II is 36 minutes longer, and it's plot section is 1224 words shorter. Ben-Hur (1959 film): 212 mins, 965 words. JaffaCakeLover (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted the ludicrous plot bloat. WP:FILMPLOT exists for a reason, and I can't think of a good reason why it shoudln't apply to this film. Doniago (talk) 04:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Critical reception

I can't help noticing that all the really negative reviews cited are British, whereas US critics are positive or neutral. If this is an accurate reflection of critical reality then it's a curious thing which the article could expand on. --Ef80 (talk) 23:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The clock in Benjamin Button article

I think the article on the film, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button left the clock out of their plot description. The clock is important to the story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.8.42.23 (talk) 16:04, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Forrest Gump

I wrote an entry which highlighted the many, many similarities between this film and Forrest Gump - the two films shared the same screenwriter and "Button" has more in common with "Gump" than F Scott Fitzgerald's short story. I felt it was important that wikipedia specifically draw attention to this. I provided three references, including one from "The Guardian" - one was a video but it actually showed clips where the similarities lied. Yet this entry was pulled. Would appreciate any other thoughts on this.Dutchy85 (talk) 01:51, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

You need third-party reliable sources that note the differences specifically; otherwise this would constitute original research. Additionally, many films have similarities, so a third-party source is needed to establish that the similarities garnered some sort of critical notice. A video showing clips would not constitute a source unless it was a reliable source that specifically analyzed the similarities between the films; a homemade YouTube video, for instance, wouldn't qualify. You say you provided three references; could you provide them here so that they can be reviewed? Doniago (talk) 13:49, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay I wasn't aware of that ruling about the video - it went viral and became popular so I thought that might be accepted as a source. But there are articles commenting on the similarities here: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1879802_1880893_1880887,00.html http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/faq#.2.1.9 http://www.avclub.com/articles/forrest-gump-vs-benjamin-button,22968/ http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/28356484/ns/today-entertainment/t/benjamin-button-forrest-gump-redux/#.T1fhslFpvw4 http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/jan/30/1 http://www.moviesmackdown.com/2008/12/curious-case-benjamin-button-vs-forrest-gump.html http://www.judiciaryreport.com/benjamin_button_is_forest_gump_part_2.htm http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=awardcentral&jump=contenders&id=screenplay_benjamin_button&reviewid=VE1117939098 http://www.dvdfuture.com/review.php?id=1209

And yes I agree many films have similarities but this verges on plagiarism and I believe is important to draw attention to in such a critically acclaimed work.Dutchy85 (talk) 22:42, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, we definitely should not use the word "plagiarism" unless it is explicitly mentioned in one of the sources, as that's a loaded term. In fact, if you're going to use that word you may want to directly quote the source. IMDb definitely isn't a reliable source for this; see WP:RS/IMDb for more information. That said, I'm no expert on sources, but I think if you include Time, The Guardian and The AV Club you're on solid ground; the rest I'm less familiar with.

Good research, and I think you may have something we can put into the article here! The first time I saw the film I found myself thinking, "This reminds me of Forrest Gump." I was rather amused to find out they shared a writer, though I appreciate both films on their own merits despite the similarities. Doniago (talk) 14:01, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

German or Japanese Submarine?

Hey, I was wondering what nation the submarine belongs to? The plot says it's German, but since Benjamin was in Murmansk before the submarine scene, wouldn't the submarine be Japanese, as Russia and Japan share the Pacific? Any thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamEtches (talk • contribs) 01:08, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Learn some geography/history lol, Murmansk is in north-eastern europe, nowhere near the pacific or japan. Definately german. Makes sense in the tug context - britain and the US ran arctic aid convoys to there. 77.44.110.94 (talk) 19:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, excuse me, princess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamEtches (talk • contribs) 18:08, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Genre definition

Removed "fantasy" from the genre listing. Since films such as "What Women Want" or "The Hot Chick" aren't classified as Fantasy, this shouldn't. It doesn't really fit as a fantasy thematically either. Going by what's in the wikipedia article for Fantasy. - December 23rd 2013

Fair enough to me. Editors who feel "fantasy" should be included are welcome to find a reliable source that describes the film thusly. DonIago (talk) 13:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090227024023/http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article5670115.ece to http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article5670115.ece
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090227024008/http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article5659117.ece to http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article5659117.ece

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:28, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081211142519/http://www.hollywoodreporter.com:80/hr/television/reviews/article_display.jsp? to http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/television/reviews/article_display.jsp?&rid=11986

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:10, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.nola.com/northshore/t-p/news/index.ssf?%2Fbase%2Fnews-5%2F116962313598400.xml&coll=1
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/television/reviews/article_display.jsp?&rid=11986
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090129143457/http://ascmag.com/news/News_Articles/News_200.php to http://www.ascmag.com/news/News_Articles/News_200.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)