# Talk:The Hudsucker Proxy

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.
Metz, Walter (2004). "The Ghost in the Post-Modern Cinematic Machine: Screwball Comedy, 1950s Corporate Capitalism, and The Hudsucker Proxy". Engaging Film Criticism: Film History and Contemporary American Cinema. Peter Lang Publishing. ISBN 0820474037.

I'm inclined to believe that on the article page under quotes there's a misinterpretation of the quote "Long live the Hud!" displayed. I believe that, in the context of the film, "Long live the Hud!" is more just the board members paying homage to their recently deceased employer as opposed to a reference to another film.
Thoughts?
I suspect the Coen brothers and Sam Raimi were paying tribute to veteran actor Paul Newman, even though he plays antagonist Sidney J. Mussberger, not Waring Hudsucker. Mussberger was alive to hear the board members, while Hudsucker was dead--having dived 44 (or 45, if you count the mezzanine) stories to his death.
Persons with access to the New York Times archives can refer to an editorial written by the actor Paul Newman and published on August 19, 2003: Paul Newman Is Still HUD.  Mr. Newman was chiding The Fox News Network for suing Al Franken, the political satirist, for using the phrase ''fair and balanced'' in the title of his book, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right. Newman was rephrasing the slogan, ''Paul Newman is HUD'', which was used to promote the 1963 film for which the actor was nominated for an Academy award.

the article does need citations and sources for its claims; the process of getting it made, especially the references to joel silver's contributions, may be true but also reads as POV. --  Denstat 15:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
I removed the bit about Roger Ebert not liking a Coen Brothers movie until Fargo. He gave 3+ stars to Blood Simple, Miller's Crossing, and Barton Fink. 68.8.110.219 16:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
18 inch thick cables?  More likely to be 1/8th, surely?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.108.104 (talk) 07:20, 18 April 2009 (UTC) 

I worked on the film as VFX coordinator, and I can tell you the following:
The cables were definitely not 18" thick.  If I had to guess I would say 3/32, but 1/8 is close enough.  Next time I see Chesney I will ask him
As far as I know, there was no agenda to salute Paul Newman through the "Hud" moniker.  I got Mr. Newman to sign a "Hud" lobby card for me, which caused a bit of a stir.  Nothing in the events that followed led me to suspect that the reference to "Hud" was anything more than a phonetic coincidence.
Roderic Duff was not a supervisor, he wasn't even a 2nd.    McAlister was in charge of VFX, and during the shoot he was supported by an all-star crew from ILM.   The practical crew was led by Peter Chesney, and his 2nd was Emmet Kane.   Janek Sirrs and Janet Yale were the CFC supervisor and producer, respectively.   I managed the project (with Kat Dillon during the shoot, and on my own in post) and was, with Dave Diliberto, one of the last people on the payroll.
{{helpme}} Let me know if the additions above are appropriate.  Thanks!

Please do not use {{helpme}} templates on pages other than user talk pages. Thanks, fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 13:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
76.172.123.254 (talk) 11:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd like someone to list these refereces, please. Very curious. I assume this means the actual WoF from antiquity, not the horribly banal game show. =P Druff 17:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 01:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm moving this section here because it contains unsourced, original research. --J.D. (talk) 14:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


### Recurring theme
Circles and cycles are a recurring theme in the film, including the three inventions in the film (the Hula Hoop, the Bendy Straw, and the Frisbee), as well as the clock itself. The film was filmed so that even though many days pass during the time of the story, the scenes comprise the hours from morning to night, as if taking place over the course of a day, from morning to night.

Moved unsourced Trivia here until it can be cited and placed in other sections throughout the article. --J.D. (talk) 14:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

After  The Hudsucker Proxy's failure at the box office, the Coens went on to make Fargo on a relatively low budget. Fargo, however, proved to be a huge success, winning two Academy Awards. Fargo's heroine, Marge Gunderson, shares the same last name as the Hudsucker Industries' elevator operator, Clarence "Buzz"  Gunderson.
Almost every leading character in the film is seen smoking at least once.
The Coens decided on casting Charles Durning as Waring Hudsucker because they thought it would be funnier for a heavier man to fall from a building than a slimmer man.
A scene in the Sam Raimi directed 2002 film Spider-Man in which Norman Osborn (Willem Dafoe) addresses his board members is shot in an almost identical fashion to a similar scene in The Hudsucker Proxy and even reuses the same dialogue from the film: "Costs are down, revenues are up, and our stock has never been higher." Also, various music cues from Hudsucker can be heard in Spider-Man 3 (2007).
The main title's theme can be heard in the film Ice Age: The Meltdown when the character Scrat goes to acorn heaven.
In Raising Arizona (1987), another Coen brothers film, Nicolas Cage's character is seen waiting in line for his paycheck at a factory. The patch on his work shirt says "Hudsucker Industries".
The hula-hoop and the frisbee are both products from the company Wham-O.

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Hudsucker Proxy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
I shall be reviewing this page against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:22, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Quick fail criteria assessment

The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.

The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.

The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.

The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

No problems found when checking against quick fail criteria. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:38, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


### Checking against GA criteria
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): 
Release: The studio suggested re-shoots, but the Coens, who held final cut privilege, obliged because they were very nervous working with their biggest budget to date and were eager for mainstream success. but.... they obliged?, surely a typo here?   Otherwise all OK Y
b (MoS): 
Confroms sufficiently
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): 
Well referenced, all on-line links are live. I assume good faith for print sources. Ref #11 [1] directed to the wrong article, but I fixed it with this [2].
b (citations to reliable sources): 
all sources RS
c (OR): 

It is broad in its scope.
a (major aspects): 

b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): 

b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Just one minor point in the prose, I didn't want to change it as I don't have access to the source. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
OK all fixed now, congratulations this is now being listed as a good artcile. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:41, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Alright, fixed. Thanks for the review. Wildroot (talk) 22:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't this movie released by Cinema Club (Columbia TriStar) on UK VHS? Can anyone confirm this? Wimpyguy (talk) 15:50, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

One of the classical pieces used in the soundtrack seems to be missing. It plays during the "laughing montage" when Norville is appointed president of Hudsucker Industries. It sounds like a march, but I'm unable to identify the title. 80.13.90.124 (talk) 11:10, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

As we know, before they were an 'established duo' (a feat that took them 20 years to achieve, apparently), Joel got director credit, and Ethan got producer credit, even though it was public knowledge they both did both. The infobox for every Coen Bros film - with the exception of this one - features both brothers as director and producer, with the uncredited party mentioned as such. Except this one. In attempting to edit the infobox, one sees this...
-- Do NOT add Ethan. He's uncredited, and uncredited people aren't included in the infobox --
I don't know who put this there, but if it's true, how does whoever added it explain why EVERY other Coen Bros film lists both brothers, and hundreds - possibly thousands - of other films do likewise if the uncredited party made a significant or noteworthy contribution.
I decided not to edit this article simply because I don't know WikiPedia rules regarding such matters.203.221.113.60 (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Hudsucker Proxy. 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/20111111084727/http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/09/1631372/hollywood-comes-to-downtown-raleigh.html to http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/09/1631372/hollywood-comes-to-downtown-raleigh.html
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: 5 June 2024).

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) 06:44, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

There has been a case of edit warring with User:86.132.168.137. I would like all users to calm down and stop reverting this IP's edits as it is breaking the three revert rule. I have reported this IP on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Pkbwcgs (talk) 13:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

I did some copyedits and kept getting tripped up about the line re. Buzz chasing Norville. Ultimately, I don't think why he chased him needs further explanation, so I removed it. The dependent clause + passive voice were awkward. Maybe something like : Mussburger re-hired him, and he convinced Buzz that Norville stole his flexi-straw idea if there's a real need to iron out the details. Still clunky. Anyway. Just explaining the flat-out removal. --EEMIV (talk) 14:27, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

”Upon its release in March 1994, The Hudsucker Proxy received mixed reviews from critics and bombed at the box office, but has since gained a cult following.”
As proof of its cult status is a reference to a review in one random blog… Poksim (talk) 08:37, 13 July 2025 (UTC)