Talk:Wild Wild West

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Westerns: Film Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Westerns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Western genre on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WesternsWikipedia:WikiProject WesternsTemplate:WikiProject WesternsWesterns articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Film task force.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

2003 comments

This movie kinda sucked. The previews for it made it look really good, then I saw it and basically it sucked. The idea was good, the acting was good, the special effects were good, the costumes were good, the plot was even good, but the editing/choregraphy/"humor"/cheesiness really ruined it. I suppose the real problem is that it was intended for disney children which tends to ruin most movies. It woulda been good if the violence was more realistic. Peter Chamberlain

Since somebody is bound to ask about this handicapped comment I put in, i dont remember the details atm but I think the author of the original series was handicapped and people thought he should have been in the movie. but he wasnt. I dunno...

From the article: "The film was also criticized for having a handicapped wheelchair bound character played by a "star" (Branagh) who was not handicapped, when various persons associated with the film felt a handicapped individual was qualified for the role. The handicap was the absence of any body below the ribs."

Honestly, as someone who has not seen the movie I can't make head or tail of the above paragraph. IMHO Wikipedia articles should be targeted at those who do not already know the things they are going to read about, so could someone please specify/explain? -- KF 12:05 Apr 17, 2003 (UTC)

Basically the handicapped guy didnt get the role of the handicapped guy and some people though it was discriminatory. Peter Chamberlain

I'm sorry, but WHAT handicapped guy?? While, sadly, there are millions of handicapped people, surely there's no one whose body has been amputated "below the ribs"? Also, would the person "associated with the film" (whatever that means) have been an actor? --KF 12:35 Apr 17, 2003 (UTC)

I obviously don't know WHAT handicapped guy. I think it was the guy who wrote the scripts for the original TV show. The persons associated with the film would be the producers, directors, actors, and casting personnel. Peter Chamberlain

WikiWiki

Are you sure it starts 'wikiwiki'? I had always heard 'Wicked Wicked'. Mark Richards 21:19, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Yep it starts 'wiki-wiki' and it should also be obvious that Wild Wild West, is a substitution for World Wide Web (many of the teaser posters had a WWW logo).

Obvious? It's based on a TV show that had the name 25 years before the Web even existed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.88.67.230 (talk) 00:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Role of President Grant

Kevin Kline played President Grant, but as Artemis Gordon playing President Grant. I believe the President himself was actually played by Robert Conrad.

URL

This page has the BEST URL in the WORLD.

FACT --Sprinkles 20:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The President was not played by Robert Conrad

The real President in Wild Wild West was actually Kevin Kline as well!

Al Fecund 18:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summary

At over 1300 words, the plot summary had been tagged as overlong. I've replaced it with a briefer summary from an earlier revision (though it's still far too long). If you think the longer version had its merits, please consider reverting to that and trimming it to remove minor detail. --Tony Sidaway 10:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is still too long, can someone slim it down to half of what it is. Not only is it big, but its also written in a confused way of joining the events in the film. Make it straightforward. --78.86.159.199 (talk) 01:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Academy Award

This movie didn't win an Oscar. Edited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmcma2sy (talk • contribs) 03:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"After making a phenominal $499.7 million over its first 6 days, the box office numbers increased steam. At the end of its theatrical run in the United States, Wild Wild West made $1113 million domestically, well above its $170 million production budget. It made just over $2222 million worldwide."

WHAT??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.24.50.64 (talk) 19:22, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Smith

Given that two of the three Kevin Smith things can be attributed to the recent copy-write revelations about Superman. It isn't on-topic, but if you round down the important points, the guy simply wanted to make a movie with no copy-write - and with a spider enemy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.223.101.84 (talk) 19:39, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalised

The reception and awards sections have been vandalised. I don't have the information to rewrite them, and my grasp of the wiki interface is such that I will leave the rolling back to previous versions to someone who knows what they are doing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.1.74.177 (talk) 06:28, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Production source

American Humane Association Film & TV Unit - detailed review of the animal treatment in Wild Wild West 4Russeteer (talk) 23:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References to use

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.

Metz, Walter (2004). "'Blockbusters That Failed and the Critics Who Love Them': High Theory and Low Culture in The Postman, Deep Impact, and Wild, Wild West". Engaging Film Criticism: Film History and Contemporary American Cinema. Peter Lang Publishing. ISBN 0820474037. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erik (talk • contribs) 14:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bonin, Liane (June 23, 1999). "Keanu Reeves gets blamed for Wild Wild West's bad buzz". Entertainment Weekly.
Staff (July 9, 1999). "Navigating the Wild Wild West". Entertainment Weekly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wildroot (talk • contribs) 09:35, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Add them for what? We don't just add sources, we add sources to support what is in the article. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited a lot film articles and citations or references for use we put on talk pages are just articles that could add some more info if someone wants to use them. Wildroot (talk) 07:42, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Conrad, an Anglo-Saxon ??

Calling Robert Conrad an Anglo-Saxon (whatever an Anglo-Saxon is ?? ...but likely to avoid saying he's white, or something similar) is ridiculous. If the patently obvious MUST be stated, then do it directly without inaccurate bush beating (Maybe somethiong like; Jim West is white in the series ??). Conrad has few characteristics specific to the Anglo-Saxon people and apparently has Polish ancestry. In fact, calling someone with Polish heritage a (Germanic) Anglo-Saxon could be extremely offensive. Gloryroad (talk) 16:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to Caucasian. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:22, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get it.

How was this film a disappointment? It managed to buy back its budget. Dinoboyaz (talk) 02:44, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For the longest time, the rule of thumb was generally a film needed make three times it budget to be a success (lots of costs not included in its budget; advertising generally is not included in a film's budget, for example). Nowadays, with sales of DVDs, downloading, etc., it is probably more close to 2x its budget to be a success. Here is an article explaining the basics far better than my quick reply. https://io9.gizmodo.com/5747305/how-much-money-does-a-movie-need-to-make-to-be-profitable Sir Rhosis (talk) 04:23, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]