Talk:Revolver (2005 film)

Plot section needs rewrite

I haven't seen this movie, but I came here looking for a plot summary after watching a few clips on the recommendation of a friend. The plot section stops being a summary about half way through and starts analyzing character motivations and themes. The clips that I saw were only tangentially mentioned in the plot section and still have no idea how they fit into the film's narrative. The section should be rewritten to give a summary of what actually happens before any analysis takes place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.84.252.51 (talk) 15:23, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Versions/Cuts?

This is the only place I've seen the movie listed as 110 minutes. The original cut is listed most places as 115 minutes. The US Blu-ray is 104 minutes and the new Dutch Blu-ray is 112 minutes. It would be nice if someone could list the differences in the various cuts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trefork (talk • contribs) 14:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Picked up by Sony?

I seems as the movie is going to re-appear on the screen on decmeber 7th, 2007. Anyone who knows about this, could add it to the main article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.11.241.215 (talk) 18:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Sam Gold

What happens in the last third of the film? What's the relationship between Dorothy Macha and Jake Green, and Jake Green and Sam Gold?

It has been suggested that Sam Gold is the Devil, not a real character, he is played in Jake's mind and he eventually defeats him by going against his instincts and doing "good", i.e. donating money or apologising to Macha. The con and chess man are angels, Jakes guardian angels; they are definitely real in the movie, and perform miracles i.e. warning him several times to avoid getting killed, and possibly curing his blood problem. They help Jake face Sam Gold but that is nothing more than the devil inside him, and turn him towards the right path. I'm still trying to piece the parts together but I enjoy the rhythm and style so much that I'm willing to do the effort.Cgonzalezdelhoyo 06:15, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe your idea is plausible, however, I propose that Sam Gold is in fact somewhat symbolic of a collective consciousness, not unlike Richard Dawkins' idea of 'Memes', bits of information passed from one individual to another, except in this case Sam Gold would be symbolic of an established bartering system, a system humans have created which has evolved into money, which we equate with power, which leads to lust and greed for power, hence the poetic piece about greed being an angel. More evidence to show my proposal holds water is when Jake's brother phones him and tells him to "Get out of there", you're shown how the information is passed from one place to another. Both of our ideas can work, I believe Richie may have purposefully made the movie as flexible and dynamic to different peoples tastes and beliefs as possible. For instance, the blood disease idea came from two doctors. But, doctors would need to send off his blood to a lab for testing. All Avi and Zak need do is get in between the flow of information from the lab to whichever doctor. Avi and Zak later on in the movie say that giving the money to pay peoples debts hurts Gold, because there are no longer debts, which means Sam Gold no longer controls them. At the beginning of the movie when he gets rid of the three Eddys simply by "giving them enough rope to hang themselves", he is doing something similar, letting the three Eddys' greed destroy themselves. Just my two cents. I'd like to help clean this article up and I believe this is an awesome movie. Pity nobody else seems to think so. --Ultravio 14:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I would like to know when Zak and Avi tell that paying debts hurts gold or what exactly is said, could anybody tell me, because if that is true it would vitiate my comprehension.
So, in my comprehension Sam Gold is not a real character, he is made up by Avi and Zak, the two Loan-sharks. Avi and Zak are the only two gold would not tough and nobody sees Gold, there are only representers. Gold knows and controls everything just like they do ie. how they save his life, what happened Jake before he went to prison and so on. They make Jake that Sam Gold is he so that Jake thinks this voice he hears in his back of his head is Gold. What do you think about that? Stelter 13:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Horrible.

This article has no NPOV, failures in spelling and grammar. I'll start editing, however, a complete rewrite may be in order. FerventDove 09:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

"There are a few nice touches – when Avi takes Jakes money in the beginning it’s a 12 Dollar bill he holds up, that’s 12 not 10 or 20. The bag is labelled with the number 72 and the chips are 23. No need to point to the significance and games Richie is playing there."

...providing you happen to be into numerology, Kabbalah, or whatever Hollywood-ised fads Madonna is currently lending her name to. Very unencyclopedic. --81.158.222.67 20:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Definitely. The section on "Meanings and complex themes within the film" seems especially egregious. First person usage, horrible grammar, and clearly original research. It saddened me to see something this bad on Wikipedia. While I've only seen the film once and don't entirely understand it, I'm going to start working on cleanup and remove the obviously flawed segments in the article.Thepatriots 08:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I just deleted the whole section - truly awful, it's still there in the history for anyone who wants to try and do anything with it.

I've seen the movie about 8 times, tried to figure it out. Please read what I said under plot, if you don't mind. It is an opinion, but, I think that memetics play a role in the movie. --Ultravio 17:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Another thing, sorry to harp on the subject, is the name 'Sam Gold', the character? While looking at wikipedia I somehow came across the name Samuel Goldwyn. Which I think is quite an interesting coincidence. Like I said, take a look at the idea I mentioned about the establishment. Just a thought. Please criticise me if this is very unencyclopedic. --196.25.255.250 12:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

As a rule of thumb - we cannot suggest our own theories of what the film is about or what hidden meanings are there. All we can do is reference well-placed sources that do so. --Fredrick day 13:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

That sounds tricky in this case, the movie is quite new. The ideas are quite out of whack. Could you elaborate on what would be acceptable as a well placed source? --196.25.255.250 13:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Reliable sources --Fredrick day 13:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

So I couldn't point out how information moves in the movie by mentioning Memetics because no "reliable source" wrote a philosophical piece about the movie as yet? This isn't a disagreement with the policies which clearly need to be in place, I'm just verifying if I understand them correctly, request for information. --Ultravio 13:19, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh well, I give up. If anyone has any ideas on how we can move forward with 'the plot', let me know. There are no reliable sources, we could simply give a story run down (I'm assuming, hopefully correctly, hopefully, that the film is a reliable enough source), First scene Jake is being released from prison discussing what he has learnt in the last seven years about cons, opponents and victims. Second scene is Dorothy and Paul, Macha asking Paul "How deep did you bury that shareholder?", answer: "Deep". I still haven't figured out if the car in the background is the same car used by Zak later on when mr Green comes under fire from Sorder. Then we have a minor showdown across a table (poker?) where Jake green gets Mache to flip a chip for money. Jake wins and offers to make it double or quits. Some money exchanges hands. On the way to the lift Zak gives Jake Green a card (Take the elevator), after which he walks to the stairs and falls down the stairs (anybody have any ideas why he falls down?). Mache tells Paul to have Jake Green killed by Sorder. He emphasises doing it quickly and quietly. The next scene in the female doctor's rooms where Jake is told it is a miracle he didn't sustain injuries. After which Jake and his brother part ways and Jake comes under heavy fire shortly after arriving at his house. Sorder misses him three times while he is picking up a note which reads "Pick this up", the same type given to Jake by Zak. Zak saves Jake and they drive to what appears to be a chess club. Meanwhile Sorder is commenting on missing three times. Jake meets Avi, who informs him he has a rare blood disease and will die in three days. Jake's inner voice is heard discussing how he is being "grafted" by Zak and Avi. He goes for a second opinion with the female doctor and then a third, he threatens to shoot the male doctor for not telling him who paid him. The doctor doesn't appear to know what he is talking about. Sorder is confronted by Macha about missing three times. Sorder lies and says he had a bad feeling. Jake returns to Zak and Avi, only to be told the rules. They will protect him from Mache's "legions" on a few conditions. That he answers any questions that are asked and that he does as he is told. Zak tells hime that he will bleed him dry, meaning give away all Jake's money. Then Jake is told that his work starts immediately and that he will be driving. Avi informs Jake while in the car using a "monicker" that Zak and himself are "Loan sharks" and that people "Fear and Hate" loan sharks just like Jake will learn to fear them. Etc, Etc. Can we go this route or should I give up on Revolver's wikipedia page? --Ultravio 14:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that is a perfectly legitimate and the logical way to do a plot summary especially in a case like this where the movie could be interpreted so many ways. Summarizing what literally happens in the film seems like a good idea. We can always tackle the interpretation issue later.Thepatriots 09:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The Guy Ritchie commentary on the DVD is very informative, and it's the ultimate "reliable source" on the film. His concepts on left, right and center column energies are identical to those of Kabbalic mysticism. There's literally no variation from the actual traditions of Jewish mysticism. The idea that beauty and greed are painted as a "Destructive Angel" is a term that is literally lifted out of Kabbalic scripture. In fact, the reason that the studio almost didn't endorse the movie was because of all the Kabbalic references. He also explains precisely who/what Sam Gold is. Max314 22:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Cult Status

Why should we put user reviews from IMDB on here? Unless the reviewer is a proffessional critic or such, shouldn't we not allow it? For this reason, I'm deleting the relivant part... --Jazzwick 18:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Region 1 DVD Format

Somebody please help me out. When is Revolver going to be released for DVD in the United States? Do they even plan to export it? If not I might need to invest in a region 2 DVD player. If the movie is anything like Lock Stock or Snatch, it is a sin to have it unavailable here. Thanks! -- 166.66.119.174 20:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

WTF

The 'Themes' section currently draws connections between Kabbalistic concepts and three of the characters:

"Avi is a black man who is somewhat effeminate in his physical appearance, clothing and mannerisms. The 'left pillar' or 'left column' in Kabbalic traditions is often associated with 'the feminine' and with the colour black."

Avi is played by André Benjamin, aka André 3000 from the band Outkast. Characterizing him as 'effeminate' is stretching it a bit far. He is about as 'effeminate' as Jeremy Irons or Ralph Fiennes, i.e. not very. He just isn't playing a threatening 'gangsta' figure. Surely there is room for black actors outside of thugs and gangsters? Isn't there? 76.115.57.47 (talk) 15:22, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Labeling a brown-skinned actor "black" in the absolutist terms which Qabalistic charting employs is a Procrustean misfit of an action, clearly interpretive (and stretching) rather than definitive. Too much of this article lays out interpretation as if it were definitive explanation, an action which goes against the very spirit of artistic creation and production. While Mr. Ritchie's remarks about the allegorical template he sees in the film (a joint production of all who participated in it) are certainly valid, this article seems to treat them as if they are privileged among interpretations. They are not. (And I agree with the poster above with regard to Mr. Benjamin's supposed "effeminate" qualities -- I find them stylish, but that's all. Rtelkin (talk) 12:43, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Credits

What is the relevance/meaning of the credits (or lack thereof)? I think this should be included in the article. Reahad 03:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 07:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Revolver 200.gif

Image:Revolver 200.gif 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 21:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Revolver aviandzach 300.gif

Image:Revolver aviandzach 300.gif 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 21:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Revolver chess 300.gif

Image:Revolver chess 300.gif 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 21:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Revolver jake 300.gif

Image:Revolver jake 300.gif 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 21:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Revolver jakechess 300.gif

Image:Revolver jakechess 300.gif 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 21:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Revolver macha 300.gif

Image:Revolver macha 300.gif 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 21:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Revolver sorter 300.gif

Image:Revolver sorter 300.gif 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 21:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 01:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Different versions of the plot

Hi, all. Check out this edit. Which version of the plot do we want in the article? The version that was in the theatrical release? The version that's on the US DVD? I'm open to discussion. -- Swerdnaneb 20:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Quotes in the Film

Is there anyone who has found the source material for "the road to suicide" which relays the last 2 quotes of the movie? I cannot find it anywhere and therefore was thinking that this "quote" might be a con and related to the destruction of jacob green's ego or rather the suicide of his ego... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hashman420 (talk • contribs) 01:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The book is fictional. The phrase appears in various books and a 1977 speech, but the book in the film only exists to provide the quotes we see on the screen. (Much like the book 'The Philosophy of Time Travel' in Donnie Darko, a film that has a lot in common with Revolver.)76.115.57.47 (talk) 14:47, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Also, I didn't find the book, "the mathematics of quantum mechanics" by Christopher S. Bank... althought there are many books on the subject!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noix07 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Misleading part in plot

"Jake also steps off the proverbial chess board by making a conscious effort to reverse everything that his nature (ego) tells him to do" The Ego is not his "nature" its the construction, the con. He is trying to go against everything his ego tells him so that he can access his nature or true self. That's how I read it and the above description doesn't make any sense, so I'll change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.31.18 (talk) 05:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Plot giving undue weight

I think the plot should be rewritten to feature less text about the beginning of the film and more about the latter part, after Mr Green is recruited by Zach and Avi, where things of consequence actually happen. The first part of the movie is not only the shorter one, but also merely the introduction to the movie and the concepts that characters later delve into. I don't see why it should be given 3/4 of the plot section. 78.0.220.42 (talk) 19:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Because that's the only bit that makes sense. The second half of the film is self-indulgent bull crap. 81.132.173.151 (talk) 12:21, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Revolver (2005 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071219204327/http://schedule.samuelgoldwynfilms.com/films/revolver/?lohs320=Revolver+SamuelGoldwynFilmsRevolverShowtimes to http://schedule.samuelgoldwynfilms.com/films/revolver/?lohs320=Revolver+SamuelGoldwynFilmsRevolverShowtimes
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://uk.rottentomatoes.com/click/movie-10004826/reviews.php?critic=columns&sortby=default&page=2&rid=1484160

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) 15:06, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't know what's worse: the Article or the Talk

That is all... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:603:217F:5360:0:0:0:F1DF (talk) 06:56, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

About the number 12

If you search the number 12 and its significance in Judaism it is a heavenly number; a positive time as well as involving the 12 months in a year passing. Seeing as how time was also of much importance in the film the number settles in as equal to the rest of the Kabballah themes and suggestions. 32.219.235.166 (talk) 05:10, 27 November 2023 (UTC)