Talk:The Cure for Insomnia

Untitled

I would disagree with the statement that a DVD can hold only 5 hours of film. I know someone with the entirety of the Lord of the Rings (approx. 9 and one-third hours long in total) on one disc. Admittedly, the film quality could be better, but it is all there.

• yeah sure, but we're talking "DVD-Video" MPEG-2-Format. I can also rip video files from DVDs to XviD-AVI video files and put 5-6 hours of video onto one single layer DVD and you won't even see a quality change. 213.183.76.244 (talk) 17:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Not A Movie

Surely there must be certain standards something must adhere to be considered a movie. Setting up a tape and taping a plant grow for 100 hours should not be considered a movie, nor should something like this.

If you were to tape someone reading the bible really slowly, would you consider that a movie?

• Agreed. Maybe someone should say that to the Guiness Book of World Records, though! James.Denholm 11:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• so now you tell me what is a movie and tell me exactly at which point video footage the creator calls "movie" is not movie anymore?!?

would you call i.e. "Dead Man" a movie? :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.183.76.244 (talk) 20:14, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, no. This is not a movie. Anymore than the footage of a plant growing into a tree, or the many different things that contain footage that far surpasses this "movies" length, is a movie. So which is it moron? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.129.6.163 (talk) 08:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

This is absolutely a movie. The plant growing wouldn't be a movie, simply because it has no point, unless you're a botanist. But The Cure for Insomnia is supposed to be this long, that's why it's called The Cure for Insomnia, and besides it's an art/psychedelic film, which means that it can be anything and still be a film. Yes it's not a typical Hollywood movie, but then again a lot of Hollywood movies are crap. You may not count it as a movie, but that doesn’t mean it isn't one, it was edited, it's not like they just randomly slapped a bunch of crappy splices together. It tells a story, it was made for a reason, it premiered uncut, it follows the director/writers intentions, that makes it a film. I have a tape set that's a recording of the outdoors (rainstorms, spring in forest, lightning, waterfalls, the desert, and a lot of other things) set to classical music, guess what they're just as much movies as say Blades of Glory (unfortunately) and the film series The Bible, which covers the entire Bible, and is insidiously long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.118.203.46 (talk) 08:13, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

"Cure for Insomnia"?

But how could it possibly cure insomnia if you have to keep getting up to swap discs?

• The energy that it takes to swap disks wears you out over time. :) James.Denholm 11:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand how the statement about Andy Warhol's Empire is relevant to this article. --69.239.134.239 04:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

You could watch it seamlessly from your computer... -- Vdub49 04:20, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

How do we know the original reels are lost?

I googled the topic andnthe only source saying it's lost is this article. What is the source for this information? 84.3.80.23 (talk) 11:58, 27 November 2023 (UTC)