Talk:Inconceivable (2017 film)

Untitled[edit]

Weirdly written synopsis. This sentence has some sort of weird missing word or something, can't figure out what it's supposed to be. Haven't seen the movie. "Brian is furious with Angela and thinks she taking meds and losing her mind." "She taking meds". 142.254.1.152 (talk) 03:15, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen the film, either, but it's probably supposed to be "is taking meds and losing her mind". I don't know exactly what saying "is taking meds" is supposed to mean, but it seems to be implying that Brian thinks Angela is being paranoid. This is a stereotypical psychological thriller plot development. A crazy person shows up, disrupts a loving couple's home life, and either the husband or wife will inexplicably take the side of the crazy person over their spouse. If they didn't, the film would last all of 15 minutes. I'll see what I can do about the plot summary. Sometimes film reviews tell you enough about the plot that you don't have to watch it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:18, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 January 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved to the proposed titles at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 22:09, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

– Seems as though the 2017 film is the clear primary topic per the page view comparison of the disambiguation page Inconceivable and all pages listed on it. Steel1943 (talk) 19:35, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strongest possible oppose - this is pure WP:RECENTISM at play, and a usurpation of a common English word. The DAB can certainly be expanded and improved. -- Netoholic @ 20:49, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- (Nominator comment) There's nothing to expand at the DAB ... I've looked. Ironically, until last month, the topic that is currently at Inconceivable (TV series) was at Inconceivable, making that the de facto primary topic for almost 14 years until I boldly changed that setup. It's a bit astonishing that a show that did not even have a full season run managed to hold the ambiguous title for so long. So, I'm not too sure about that "...usurpation of a common English word..." concern. Steel1943 (talk) 20:59, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Netoholic: Well, dang. Call me a liar, I suppose. Looking good! Steel1943 (talk) 06:48, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: My first impression is that the 2017 film is simply too new to treat as the primary topic in the long run. Who's to say that it won't drop more? Last year, at the same time, it had 84,544 views (compared to 42,227). I'm hard-pressed to move away from the current approach. Curious to see what others think. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 20:50, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The film is less than two years old and doesn't seem to be of any particular significance. Page views can often be helpful in determining a primary topic, but sometimes they aren't and I think this is very much a case of the latter. PC78 (talk) 21:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for all the reasons above + as the article says "The film was panned by critics" and by the box office, a turkey. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:07, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @In ictu oculi: I don't think I've ever heard the box office called a turkey before. Steel1943 (talk) 02:03, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose if anything "Inconceivable!", a catch-phrase used by the character Vizzini (played by Wallace Shawn) in the film The Princess Bride should be primary as it is the most famous use of the word עם ישראל חי (talk) 18:21, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.