Talk:The Langoliers

Plot summary

Are there differences between the short story and film.? Rich Farmbrough 11:38 1 April 2006 (UTC).

I just watched the movie. Doesn't appear to be many, if any differences between the movie and the book, at least if the plot summary is accurate.

The novella and the film are basically the same plot except that some of the characters are given a bit of a backstory and their thoughts are described at certain points. The plot summary as it stands is very good IMO, although a few interesting details are missing. --ChrisJMoor 14:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Langoliers

Should have at least a section describing the langolier (creature). 189.5.149.178 03:42, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

There is not really that much detail to give. The book describes them as spheres with 'malevolent faces' on or inside them - I cannot remember anything about teeth though. The film portrays them as spherical but opening into a mouth similar to the worms as portrayed in the Lynch film Dune but with 'chainsaw' teeth and no face. --ChrisJMoor 14:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

I think the whole plot summary could benefit from a complete rewrite. Lots42 15:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I have never read the book, but I have read some of Stephen King's other works. The Langoliers movie however was horrible, aside from a good performance by Bronson Pinchot the rest of the movie could have used better dialogue, better acting and better monsters. It seemed to me like a rush job with a few very cheesy love scenes tossed in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.126.100.82 (talk) 16:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

???? Am I missing something? You disliked the movie. I liked it. And? Neither opinion applies much to Wiki. Lots42 (talk) 00:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

References to other works

Apparently one should not point out that Stephen King's plot for this piece has elements similar to certain science fiction stories. Supposedly this counts as hinting that he steals ideas. Yeah, and he invented ghosts and accursed buildings too. Truth is, all authors know that there are no original ideas. Stephen King no more "stole" the concept of the past as a dead place which gets eaten/disassembled/etc than did Simak or Sturgeon or anyone else who has used it. So let's put back the nicely informative para which points out the similarities. Clock is running. Djdaedalus 20:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Point one: -You- can put it back. Nobody is stopping you. Point two: The section deleted is also irrelevant because lots of things resemble lots of other things. Why not go to the article for Lord of the Rings and mention how it resemble the 'Castle Roogna' fantasy novel by Piers Anthony because both involve seiges on fortresses by monsters? Third point: Sheesh! Fourth: possible libelous info on real info is SUPPOSED to be deleted right away, that's Wiki policy. Lots42 05:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Didn't want to start an undo war, old chap. In any case consultation is an even more basic Wikipolicy than non-libellosity. The concept embodied in the story is a little more off the beaten track than, say, your average siege (even with monsters). It's worth pointing out to the casual reader that they can discover more about it at other sources. Simak's contribution is particularly interesting, as he has several variations on the idea that the past is not just a previous version of the present. Anyone else care to add their opinion (exclamation points optional) ? Djdaedalus 19:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thought: If the concepts in Langoliers are so unique they only match a few other books, write an article about -that-. Then link to the article with something like 'Frozen past in fiction'. I'd gladly support that, I'm a sucker for time travel stories. And for the record, if you revert the info I deleted, I won't delete it a second time, my strenous objections are already detailed here. Lots42 04:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Re-wrote Plot Summary

The previous plot summary was too long and detailed. There was also a similar but separate plot summary on the page about the main book Four Past Midnight.

I have rewritten the FPM summary slightly to make it shorter and remove minor details, and put it on this page - I used a few of the existing details such as the list of characters. On the FPM page I have changed it to a very brief summary. Lessthanideal (talk) 12:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

It looks better overall, but it doesn't have as much coherence as the original. Short choppy sentence-paragraphs here. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 12:07, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

About that wall of text

Cool story, bro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.11.59 (talk) 00:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

"During a routine flight, an airliner passes through a time rift, and is forced to divert to a deserted airfield in Bangor, Maine. The passengers determine that they are trapped in the immediate past, which is in the process of being eaten by the Langoliers, creatures that consume history in order to make room for the present. After a series of adventures the passengers manage to refuel the airliner; they take off and travel through the time rift, landing in Los Angeles in the near future." There you go, there's your plot summary. Give me two more paragraphs and I could cram in most of the "series of adventures". Eleven paragraphs is silly. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 18:13, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

There's no need for insults. Lots42 (talk) 10:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I have to agree with Ashley. I just read the article and kept finding sentences that didn't make sense, sometimes because of invented phrases or misuse of words, apparently as attempted shortcuts, resulting in constructions which aren't quite part of the English language.

E.g. "... Craig snaps, hallucinating his angry, Type A personality father".

"Hallucinating" is an intransitive verb, but has been used as if it were a transitive verb. Such invention of usage "on the fly" seems to be very common amongst many USians, including businessmen/women, politicians and "celebrities" and really gives a very poor impression of the US education system. There is plenty of high quality writing and speaking in the US, but why is such low quality so widely accepted and ignored? It's almost as though there were two cultures intermingled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.99.241 (talk) 06:33, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

The main part of the article really does need a complete rewrite, and shortening. It just rambles on like a first rough draft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.99.241 (talk) 06:35, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

The survivors

In the book, the survivors know that their life is about to change, being the only people left from a flight that had recently vanished. But they go outside for some fresh air first. Are these concerns detailed in the movie? And or relevant to the article? Lots42 (talk) 10:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)