Talk:That Thing You Do!

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the That Thing You Do! article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Fictional bands

I was wondering why this article doesn't cover the most amazing fact about this movie - that all the bands/artists featured were in fact fictional, and that no such bands ever existed?

It is to Tom Hanks' credit that so many people today swear that they "grew up" listening to these songs, when in fact they didn't exist before 1996! :)

If it is intentional (to keep the mystery alive) then cool, else I'd think we should have a clear reference here that all songs in the movie are original and (along with the artists) didn't exist before this movie. Achitnis 08:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone else picked up on the Apollo names? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.211.103 (talk • contribs)

The article compares the Diane Danes character to the real singer Jackie DeShannon. Seems to me the character was based more on Dusty Springfield. 23:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)yumagah

Plot

That plot summary is toooo long!72.37.171.36 22:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ethan Embry's character is named T.B. Player in the end credits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matsellah (talk • contribs) 07:33, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article Clean-Up

This article needs a clean-up desperately. I'll help where I can, but here are some suggestions:

Plot - It needs to be shortened to a pertinent summary. Much of the information included can be broken up into different sections that would be more appropriate rather. As it is, it seems like the bulk of the information is irrelevant to the basic plot description. There is already a Beatles' References section so why not add on to a cultural reference section?
Trivia - The only section as long as the Plot section! It needs to be sorely cut down or integrated into the article into appropriate sections rather just floating as an unorganized laundry list of trivial references.
References - It seems the bulk of the information in the article in general right now are trivial facts without any reference. Facts included should be notable rather than trivial and verifiable rather than just hearsay. The following statement seems to be personal opinion, and is unsourced: "The ballad "My World Is Over" by Diane Dane seems inspired by the compositions of Burt Bacharach and Hal David; the vocal performance is reminiscent of Jackie DeShannon."

Tone - The tone of the article could be greatly improved if the information was broken down into more appropriate sections and rewritten with less "personality".

--76.214.199.83 (talk) 21:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've trimmed the plot summary, tightened up the writing, and addressed all of most of the issues above. The article seems okay now to me. I removed the tags. --Tony Sidaway 18:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is K. O. Bayley based on a real person? I have heard that he was a DJ in the Bay Area where Tom Hanks grew up and listened to on the radio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.199.149.236 (talk) 02:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:The Wonders imp.jpg

Image:The Wonders imp.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 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 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) 02:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Extended Edition DVD

I've removed the information about deleted material from the Extended Edition section, since no references could be provided.

S. Luke 09:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The extended version played on the Encore Love Cable Channel 12/28/2008, complete with extended version credits at the end. I wonder if we should rename the section Extended Edition, dropping the DVD, and include the fact that it has been aired. Can't think of an elegant way to write that up just now though. Seaphoto^Talk 04:17, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it helps (as a reference), or if Wikipedia standards needs something more accessable, but if the tricky part is just finding someone who has the extended cut DVD, I do. In fact, I am watching it right now.TeigeRyan (talk) 06:36, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles parody

This is absolutely ridiculous to erase from the opening paragraph. This movie, as I am connoseur of, is EXACTLY like the beatles, and it is essential for people to understand this! Don't be deleting my shit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.53.185 (talk • contribs) 00:04, December 25, 2008

Although I don't see much similarity between The Wonders and The Beatles since The Fab Four didn't exactly disappear into obscurity, our opinions don't count for much here. Feel free to add any material that can be substantiated by someone other than a WP editor, and then provide references.
Jim Dunning | talk 18:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you have against the beatles, or if you just enjoy the catchy theme song from the movie, but you deleted ALL BEATLES references that previous users had written about the movie. Excuse me, but that seems like self-supporting agenda. I think the proof is in the pudding, so to speak, of the movie's beatle parody.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.53.185 (talk) 23:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How I feel about the Beatles has nothing to do with it. All of those Beatles references appear to be personal observations of editors and are likely original research. I do have an "agenda", and it is the same as WP's: only statements supported by credible sources can be included. I don't recall any explicit references to the Beatles in the film itself, so the analyses in the Plot section was removed. Also, material in the Lead needs to be suitably supported in the article body. Also, check out the definition of "parody"; possible "homage" might be a better descriptor.
Jim Dunning | talk 02:31, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There ARE several explicit references to the Beatles in the film (which I watched three times today, January 16, 2009, don't bother asking why I watched three times). Two examples: (1) in the garage when brainstorming possible names for the group (2) when introduced on the TV variety show ("latest group to challenge the Beatles to　a haircombing contest".) In addition, the implicit references are myriad. However, I think the article is better without beating this aspect of the story into the ground. Mandudeguy (talk) 10:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Beatles

Why is there no mention of the Beatles in this ?

There is some nonsense below about the Beatles not being relevant to this film. Please correct ASAP, thank you.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.192.51.162 (talk) 08:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles debate once and for all

I have added a section on The Beatles references with numerous pieces of evidence that can NOT be debated. I spent hours of original research to find unique and original references which are too similar to be purely coincidental. I hope this brings the debate to a close finally. Please feel free to add significant references which I may have missed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterD1361 (talk • contribs) 21:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While we appreciate the time you put into it, we explicitly do not accept original research. You'll have to source your contribution to reliable sources, or else remove it. Powers ^T 22:14, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to. How do you suggest I cite visual references (such as the ed sullivan show) or the name of the band? Thanks, -P —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterD1361 (talk • contribs) 22:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Those are primary sources. We should, generally, only be citing secondary sources, such as news articles, reviews, and compilations with analysis. Powers ^T 01:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard.com released the 10 songs that wouldn't be the same without the recently deceased George Martin. http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/6957260/10-beatles-songs-george-martin It is noted that Please, Please Me originally started out slow but became more upbeat just like That Thing You Do. There could be a connection there. 100.9.206.116 (talk) 23:36, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Viola

It is unaccptable that this page exists without a single reference to Mike Viola, who sang the lead part in the title song and others as well. He is the film's true voice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:D001:E400:81F3:1683:ED83:70F7 (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do any reliable sources writing about the movie make note of him? Schazjmd (talk) 18:42, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is unacceptable that you didn't notice the Mike Viola credit in the article at the time of your comment – a credit which still exsists today. Hoof Hearted (talk) 20:05, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning/origin of the phrase "that thing you do".

In the repressive states of the US, particularly the southern states, rock and roll was repressed as "dirty music". Even talking about it was repressed as not for polite company. Even the words "rock and roll" were repressed as dirty words. But when radio stations talked to musicians about their music they had to refer to it by some words or phrase. So "that thing you do" was a euphemism for rock and roll.

So there's the challenge for those of you who want to improve the article in compliance with wiki rules. Find references, recordings, documentation, interviews with radio station DJs, and musicians of the era, about something that isn't talked, or written about much because such public discussion of "dirty words" is repressed but which was pervasive in a broad swath of the US. 98.164.78.239 (talk) 10:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very much this! Many a song from the 50’s & early 60’s tried to make references to s-e-x , only obtusely. ( “60 Minute Man”, ”Louie Louie”, “Light My Fire”, etc.) Now-a-days … there’s nothing subtle. In the song, “That Thing You Do”, nowhere in the lyrics do they specify what “thing” is being done, it’s left to the listener, and that’s how you could get a song played on the radio and television. ( Without your song being relegated to word of mouth or jukeboxes.)

Point of reference to how naive people were meant to be kept, by the U.S. television standards, of the time; The Rolling Stones sang “Let’s Spend SOME TIME Together”, on The Ed Sullivan Show, as Ed Sullivan felt “Let’s Spend The Night Together” was way too suggestive! 75.106.32.81 (talk) 18:16, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Parallels … but, not exactly straight up parody.

I believe a big part of the joke, that everyone seems to be missing, is The Wonders are meant to represent a U.S. garage band, caught up in the hysteria caused by Beatlemania. They, like so many other bands of the era, tried to ride the Beatles wave to fame. Yes, there ARE similarities, but, they are not supposed to be The Beatles. They are supposed to be a one-hit band, whom almost make it big, but … don’t have The Beatles luck. ( To quote Mr.White, “It’s a common story.”). In some instances, they are meant to be imitating The Beatles to further their career … only, for example, rather than star in their own film, they are relegated to the background of a “beach film” - like a lot of other bands in the 50’s and 60’s. The Wonders don’t get booked on Ed Sullivan, they get booked on the lesser known Hollywood Showcase. And since The Beatles are name checked, at least twice in the film, this means BOTH bands exist in the same world, at the same time. ( Unlike, say, The Rutles, where in they ARE The Beatles of their universe.) Most of the in-joke references; their closeted manager, losing their original drummer before becoming famous, the play on words band name, etc. , are Beatle jokes … without being The Beatles. ( Just as “Spinal Tap” don’t specifically parody one band, they are composed of elements from many bands!). I think people just want Brownie points for spotting the jokes.

Also of note, all the other musical acts, are meant to be homages to various genres of music, without being a specific act. 75.106.32.81 (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]