Talk:Runaway (Kanye West song)

Split Request:

I requested that the section on the Runaway short film be split into it's own article. For one thing the movie by all accounts contains multiple songs from Kanye's album. (Ref) In other words although the movie bares the name of the latest single it is not merely a music video for it. I would also like to point out the there is precedent for this type of move as a similar article exists for Michael Jackson's Ghosts which is a similar concept. Deathawk (talk) 00:20, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I was just about to bring this up, and I agree, but not to that extent. This is still a music video, and though it is a lengthy one, we would not use an infobox like that. Yves (talk) 18:01, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

• Yes, it's not like Michael Jackson's Thriller, right? Pedro João [talk] 20:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's inspired by it, and is similar to Prince's music videos, as well. Details are not fully known since the video hasn't aired (less than three hours, though). There was a lengthy discussion for Lady Gaga's "Telephone" ft. Beyoncé for the split of the article, and the consensus was that the only music video with its own article is Thriller, as its legacy is undisputed. Yves (talk) 21:11, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

A split is definitely not necessary. It's short enough that it can be discussed here. Yves (talk) 01:55, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I am actually for the split. The Runaway clip includes several songs from West's album (if it can even be considered a music video, it's not one solely for this song), and the abridged video opens with a title card reading, "This is an excerpt from the film Runaway". It's marketed as a legitimate short film, similarly to Michael Jackson's Ghosts, which also has its own article. –Chase (talk / contribs) 02:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm that one has its own IMDb page, though, and this one doesn't. And Ghosts was screened at the Cannes Film Festival; this one was just to some media and journalists, I believe. Yves (talk) 03:04, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

IMDb allows titles to be submitted by users, if I'm correct. The "Telephone" music video has an IMDb page. Runaway not having one just means that a page hasn't been submitted. –Chase (talk / contribs) 03:32, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I think this is more like to Pink Floyd The Wall than anything else, considering it reportedly contains more than one song. The movie is a separate article from the album in that case.68.194.227.213 (talk) 03:37, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose for now. Not enough for an article, if the most notable here is for almost-being the longest music video ever created, many music videos'd have their own articles for being notables. The day that his music video become as notable as The Wall or MJ's Thriller or Ghosts, it can have its page. Having an IMDb page does not mean anything; IMDb is a wiki, and you, me or whoever can create a page for "Runaway". Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 06:19, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Agree- the video is 35minutes long!!! and their will be PLENTY of information to add! let's not be dumb here, and actually split this! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.160.180 (talk) 23:38, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Plenty of information? Telephone (song) has more information and has no its own article. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 21:01, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

AgreeI'd simply have to comment that the video is intended to be received on its own as a distinct artwork not necessarily dependent upon the eponymous song. And like the above writer pointed out the amount of information that must be covered concerning the film by itself warrants a separate article (directors, actors, cultural references, etc) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.140.105.0 (talk) 12:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

And where are the information about directors, actors and pseudocultural references? Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 21:01, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Agree, we've got to split it. It's going to be more important than the song itself, so it deserves it's own page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.165.163.244 (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

It's going to be more important than the song itself and your source is? so it deserves it's own page according to... Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 21:01, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

• Some editors here are failing to get the point. It is not a music video. It is a short film in its own right. (1, 2, 3, etc.) It has no connection to the song other than the title and a scene in which the song appears (several other songs by West are heard in the film as well). –Chase (talk / contribs) 02:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
• Support splitting it's a short film, not a music video. DC T•C 02:57, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

• Support. Per the rationale of the person above me. This isn't like "Telephone". "Telephone" is a music video, this is a short film. ►Scarce◄ 03:37, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
• Conditional support As the song has a short music video, this article must talk about it, you don't resolve it with a {{main}} only. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 03:57, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense. DC T•C 04:46, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

The "short music video" is an excerpt from the film. As the film article would surely discuss this scene, it's unnecessary to repeat info. –Chase (talk / contribs) 23:28, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

• The Runaway page certainly should discuss this scene as it is the proper music video for the song, just because the segment appears elsewhere does not mean we should forgo mentioning it on this page. --Deathawk (talk) 04:12, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

• So the consensus seems to be pretty unanimous, and I'd be ready to split this, but I actually have never done something like this beforehand, does anyone know how to do it? also any idea on what the new name should be? I was thinking either Runaway (Kanye West film) or Runaway (Short Film). --Deathawk (talk) 04:19, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Runaway (2010 film) DC T•C 04:23, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Pheonix

Why is "Phoenix" spelled "Pheonix" with a [sic]? ►Scarce◄ 13:20, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I honestly don't know, but that's what's sourced. Yves (talk) 23:43, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the mentions of the Phoenix aren't any type of a quotation so I'm going to correct it to "Phoenix" until some sensible reason says otherwise. ►Scarce◄ 00:29, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I also noticed "The" and "Pheonix" were capitalized ("The Pheonix"), I changed that as well. [1] [2] ►Scarce◄ 00:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Runaway Original

Hi im Jonathan Lustig

The Originalversion produced with Propellerhead Reason was created in June 2010. Its not lookable its a twice production ore my work the soundtrack reason. I have send it strictly at the same day to Kirsten Dunst on Facebook and Myspace. I don't know what the productions was after it. I have seen Kirsten Dunst one Time in Aarau I beliefe in 2011 in Summer, but we have not talk, so I loose the chance. I have see nothing and know nothing about it after the June 2010. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.138.5.180 (talk) 20:24, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

In short words: Kanye West you make a good job, fantastic. Kirsten Dunst you take the right joice, fantastic. Only what I loose is I have not become a hitcall, and I know nothing about all that things make you rich because im not rich. Its not lookable its a twice production ore my work the soundtrack reason. So im a bit angry about the situation. And im happy to know more about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.138.5.180 (talk) 20:36, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Not that understand me somebody wrong. Im a most time producer of Psycedelic Fullon Trance. Its not ever a easy work, to top any track and its not good enough. Its not a easy work to Mastered all this stuff. Its not easy work on Digitalprograms they are not 100% stabile ore Licensed online. So its very strong and it is work.

https://soundcloud.com/coldsphere — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.138.5.180 (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

means, according to law I have the right to a certain share of the profit as. unfortunately the did not arrive until now. The problem is, due to fear of loss of control over my system and in frightened by the exist of the original file on my system that the deal will not be done, I deleted it. This situation is exactly as it is. That this situation is used against me I find quite unfortunate. But this thing was in fact made ​​without prior agreement in writing by mutual trust. So I wait until now by a failed Meating the new date has not been denied my share. I hope that you will not cheat me. In this case I would have my work under pressure to buy buy buy in trade.

This is not funny for me.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.138.5.180 (talk) 00:59, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 

considered morally I am currently exposed the psychological torture. But I'm already used to me this situation, even if I can not get used to it really me. But I raise legally considered only right to share my. Because whether present here a case of psychological torture can not become fully understood. Because it was in my interest to do exactly this situation Visible. I'm already under the torture of Social Psychology by Smylie's my name. Again, it can not be directly addressed it, but it should not be discrediting, but it is discrediting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.138.5.180 (talk) 01:53, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

not that I want to upgrade it to high, but sobal it comes to my success are the smylies to compare with the umbrella corporation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.138.5.180 (talk) 02:12, 1 June 2013 (UTC)