Talk:Hardware (film)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hardware.jpg

Image:Hardware.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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 23:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Current location of the Mark 13 robot from Hardware (1990)?

Is the MARK 13 prop robot in the hands of a private collector or on public display somewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.2.90.61 (talk) 17:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Trilogy of Terror

The plot and set are also incredibly similar to the third part of the Trilogy of Terror (1975), a horror thriller in which a woman brings a killer doll into her apartment, where it comes to life and chases her about with a knife. Is there any evidence to suggest Hardware (or the 2000AD story) were influenced by this? 118.208.179.24 (talk) 14:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

That is a rather vague similarity, and a plot shared by many many films ("Child's Play" for one). This probably has no relevance to the article, any similarity is probably just coincidental, but if you can find a reliable source that states otherwise we can consider it. magnius (talk) 14:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

No flesh shall be spared.

The bible quote no flesh shall be spared seems more like a sound bite version of the actual bible text Mark 13:20. Here's the King James version: And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.

Source, with more versions: [[1]]

195.35.160.133 (talk) 13:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC) Martin.

"Cyborg"

The article consistently referred to the machine as a 'cyborg', although it contained no organic parts. Consequently, I changed the term to 'robot'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.249.79.198 (talk) 11:23, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Soundtrack?

The soundtrack for this film is amazing? No mention of Motorhead, PIL or Ministry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apoceone666 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

what short story is Hardware based on, and who wrote it?

what short story is Hardware based on, and who wrote it?

seems an obvious question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18A:8100:9BDA:ECFD:AD13:4B81:64B8 (talk) 21:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Well the courts have ruled that this a film adaptation of the "2000ad" comic book story "Shok!". Kevin O'Neil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_O%27Neill_(comics) and Co. should be getting full writing credit. The introduction to this article should read "which was adapted for screenplay and directed" not "which was written and directed" RI Carling (talk) 21:04, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hardware (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/20140416181532/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/hardware.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/hardware.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140416205935/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/hardwarebluray.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/hardwarebluray.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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 10:13, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

"Potential sequel"

I've noticed this heading being added to some films lately. During an interview, a filmmaker expresses interest in making a sequel. There's no project lined up, and it's basically just wishful thinking at this point. However, some Wikipedian reads about this and adds it to the film's Wikipedia page. It's verifiable that a filmmaker wants to make a sequel, but is this really encyclopedic? In this case, news article from Screen Anarchy is 11 years old! If nothing has happened in that amount of time, is it worth mentioning here? I'm thinking that maybe this is one of those times when "verifiability does not guarantee inclusion". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:01, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Image

Please check if there is a rationale for the image being used in the article so it can have an explanation per sections at WP:NFCC. TheGreatestLuvofAll (talk) 01:23, 16 February 2024 (UTC)