Talk:Sunset Boulevard (film)

message: I don't think the Norma Desmond page is of any interest. It is just another summary of the movie, with two or three additional quotes. 82.247.115.24 16:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge [[Norma Desmond]] into [[Sunset Boulevard (1950 film)]] ?

message: When editing the main article, care should be taken that the table of contents come up immediately, just after the first or second sentence.  If you add too much stuff to the first sentence, the table of contents gets pushed down lower and lower, till it is no longer in plain view.  Those who are new to the article should not have to scroll down to see the table of contents.
:Why do people make major comments like this and then not sign them?  It is Wikipedia policy that the section before the contents should be a reasonable summary of the whole article.  In this case, that has been done quite well.
:Londoneye 22:09, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing the Main Article

message: I've just added a lot of info to this article.  I saw this on Peer Review, and I think the subject has the potential to one day be a very good article.  I just wanted to point out that I know what I've done here is very rough, and needs to go thoroughly edited.  I also realise that critical comment on the film is required, and that some areas need to be covered in more depth.
Also I removed the photo of the DVD cover.  I was thinking it was inappropriate even though I'm the person who put it there, because it uses a photo that was never part of the film.  Therefore replaced it with a vintage movie poster, plus added several screenshots.  It looks a bit overdone with images now, but I think when the article is finished it will be more balanced. Rossrs 14:55, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits of Feb 1, 2005

message: I changed this from Sunset Boulevard (1950 movie) because having the date as part of the name was not necessary.  If there were other significant films with the same title, made in different years... then yes, but in this case it's not required. Rossrs 15:19, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Change of article name

message: There is going to be a 2006 film starring Glenn Close and Ewan McGregor, an adaptation of the 1990s Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, Sunset Boulevard. I haven't made an article for that, because I'm unsure of what the etiquette is with making articles for things that haven't happened yet. But perhaps in light of this, this article should become Sunset Boulevard (1950 film) at some point.
::I think that's a good idea when the time comes. Rossrs 13:18, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Retitling this article

message: Okay, I'd like to officially request a name change for this article.
I've created a page for the 2006 film under Sunset Boulevard (2006 film), so believe it is only proper that this page be changed to Sunset Boulevard (1950 film). Anyone for thoughts? Daydream believer2 17:53, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: totally agree with you. Rossrs 02:09, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Requesting Article Name Change

message: I'm discussing a Wikipedia project that is attempting to determine modern-day box office incomes. If Sunset Boulevard had been released in 2005, does anyone know what its box office would be? -64.231.70.46 20:43, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Box Office

message: I removed this section because it isn't sourced and uses weasel words like Some authorities, if someone finds a reference put it back in:
:"Nearly all references give the name of the film as Sunset Boulevard.  However, the opening sequence does not give a title.  Instead, it has a shot of the road Sunset Boulevard and zooms in on a street sign that says Sunset Blvd.  Thus some authorities argue that it is the latter that is the true name of the film."
To this unsigned contributor (silly not to sign it; you're in the edit history): OK, I've added an authority.  Happy? Londoneye 12:35, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you MechBrowman 15:02, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The name of the film

message: To the contributors for this article, well done, a worthy Featured Article. In light of that I'll briefly discuss a couple of changes here rather than paraphrase in an Edit Summary. Firstly, under Plot, not trying to be overly pedantic or make the story more of a mystery than it is but the narrator never refers to the corpse in the pool at the beginning as Joe Gillis, as was indicated with the prev. wording. His name (or to be more exact at this stage, the narrator's name) is first mentioned by the repossession agents in the initial flashback scene. Secondly, there's discrepancies re. Queen Kelly's release date. I always thought 1928 was correct, as stated in this article, but I now see it more often cited as 1929 (same as in its Wikipedia entry). If a contributor to this page has a source that towers over all others stating 1928, please change it back here but keep consistent with the Queen Kelly article. Cheers, Ian Rose 15:14, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot / Queen Kelly

message: This is, indeed, a fine article. It's already quite long, but I'm surprised that there is not a section about popular culture references and parodies of the film and its characters. (For instance, Carol Burnett's several hysterical send-ups of Norma, with Harvey Korman as Max). Might be worth adding (I didn't want to start a new section without consensus as I would hesitate to mess with such a well-crafted article). Discuss? StanislavJ 01:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there is definitely a place for it, perhaps after the "Other films about Hollywood section" (I also think the last 3 short sections need to be absorbed into the article, but I'm not sure how to go about it).  When I was writing the main part of the article, I didn't come across anything about popular culture references, but I have to admit, I didn't think of it anyhow.  The Burnett send-ups are particularly noteworthy, and I would welcome discussion of them.  Wasn't Gloria Swanson an occasional guest on Carol Burnett's show?  I have some recollection that she was somewhat involved in the sendups, but I can't remember where I read that.  My only concern is that sooner later we'll get the inevitable "the name "Norma Desmond" was uttered without context by a supporting character in episode #12345 of Family Guy" ;-)  As long as it's sourced, and remains relevant, I think it would be good. Rossrs 13:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, many articles have a 'Pop culture references' (or 'Appearances in popular culture') section. I'd say it could go after the 'Musical version' section. Re. absorbing the last 3 sections, IMO the 'Musical version' section should remain but 'The Movie Musical' should be merged with it (wouldn't even bother with a subsection heading). 'The name of the film' I think isn't bad where it is, as a sort of footnote. I think it deserves its own section or subsection but putting it further up could disrupt the flow of the article. Cheers, Ian Rose 14:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pop Culture References?

message: It would seem to me that this article should more aptly be titled Sunset Blvd., with or without the "(1950 film)" qualifier.  Imdb (dubious as a source, I think, except for the names of films and to some extent the cast), lists it as Sunset Blvd. and, as the article notes, that is the only title given in the film.  The qualifier, I believe, is unnecessary, since the film in development of the musical will almost certainly be titled Sunset Boulevard (though, even that remains to be seen, as my original CD uses just the sign/logo as the title: "Sunset Blvd.", but my sheet music has both the full title and the logo....).  However, my DVD (of the original 1950 film) gives the title as Sunset Boulevard.
Any thoughts? 69.253.193.234 22:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it would have to be Sunset Blvd. (film) at least, since Sunset Blvd. redirects (correctly IMO) to Sunset Boulevard the road. However, because it's often referred to with its full title, I think the current naming of Sunset Boulevard (1950 film) may as well stay, at least till we know for certain how the new film's title is offically rendered. Cheers, Ian Rose 23:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The title of a movie isn't what it says on the DVD box. It's what it says on the screen, in the title sequence. This movie's title is "Sunset Blvd." 216.231.46.147 00:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support - as nominator Reginmund 19:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Image:SunsetBoulevardGloriaSwansonprofile.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 20:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SunsetBoulevardGloriaSwansonprofile.jpg

message: :Image:SunsetBoulevardMainCastMembers.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 20:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SunsetBoulevardMainCastMembers.jpg

message: :Image:SunsetBoulevardWilliamHolden.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 20:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SunsetBoulevardWilliamHolden.jpg

message: :Image:SunsetBoulevardfilmposter.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 20:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SunsetBoulevardfilmposter.jpg

message: We read: They parted responsibly if not completely amicably. What does "responsibly" mean here? -- Hoary (talk) 03:48, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Brackett and Wilder break up

message: The intro section used to include this line: "Norma Desmond, a faded movie star and femme fatale who entraps the unsuspecting Gillis into her fantasy world in which she dreams of making a triumphant return to the screen."  First, by the definition given in the linked-to Wikipedia article on "femme fatale," I don't think Desmond is one--"an alluring and seductive woman whose charms ensnare her lovers in bonds of irresistible desire"?  I don't think that accurately conveys the relationship between Desmond and Gillis, at least not as described in the plot summary.  Second, I don't know what "unsuspecting" means here; what doesn't he suspect?  Third, "entraps ... into" isn't good grammar, at least not by my usage.  Also, all of those phrasings together suggest that Gillis is a poor innocent victim of the conniving and evil Desmond, whereas my impression is that Gillis is using Desmond as much as she's using him. So I've tweaked that sentence. --Elysdir (talk) 21:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Femme fatale, unsuspecting

message: *review of Billy Wilder's Sunset Boulevard
*Senses of Cinema - Billy Wilder biography
*Gloria Swanson tribute site
*Reel Classics - William Holden biography
*Association of Moving Image Archivists (AMIA) National Film Registry Site
*Synopsis by Tim Dirks on Greatest Films
*Literature
*Mark Rappaport on the film
*Sunset Boulevard review in cosmopolis.ch
Erik (talk) 23:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: A cleanup page has been created for WP:FILMS' spotlight articles. One element that is being checked in ensuring the quality of the articles is the non-free images. Currently, one or more non-free images being used in this article are under discussion to determine if they should be removed from the article for not complying with non-free and fair use requirements. Please comment at the corresponding section within the image cleanup listing. Before contributing the discussion, please first read WP:FILMNFI concerning non-free images. Ideally the discussions pertaining to the spotlight articles will be concluded by the end of June, so please comment soon to ensure there is clear consensus. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion pertaining to non-free image(s) used in article

message: This article could use some referencing improvements. There are places that would be helped by having additions of cites, to satisfy verifiability for the reader. If not objected to by significant contributors to the article, I would be willing to identify some of these deficient locations in the article with  tags. However, it might be best to address in the form of WP:FAR, and give the article a more thorough overall review. -- Cirt (talk) 21:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is poorly organized and there appears to be a trivia section. Many places need citations but are not marked.  AlbertBowes (talk) 19:01, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the article could use improvement. There seems to be a decent amount of content, but it appears to have breezed through its FAC process without any real scrutiny. I'll list references as I did for Richard III (1955 film) to see how much has been used and how much has not. Erik (talk | contribs) 11:48, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: FA concerns

message: nominated Sunset Boulevard (film) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Brad (talk) 05:56, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article review for Sunset Boulevard (film) 

message: I'm really not a fan of this section. Unless it can be properly cited that SB was influential in all those other films being mentioned, I don't see why they are being mentioned at all. And even so, if this can be done, it would be more fitting under a "Legacy" section. I personally think it should be moved here until it is better referenced and has more direct relevance to the article. Thoughts? --Lobo512 (talk) 15:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with everything you've said there. When this was originally assessed as FA, I think it was felt that mention of artistic works was effectively "self-citing", simply by virtue of their existence. We are not so easy-going now and, as you say, there should be emphasis on their direct relevance to the subject, which certainly requires sourcing. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:37, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

text: I think it's well-intentioned but problematic. (What's particularly bizarre is the contrast between this section and the lack of any mention of Wilder's later film Fedora.) For now, I'd leave it in, and see whether people can indeed bring sources for claims of relationships between each of these films (or one or more waves that produced these films) and SB. After all, it's going to take some time to improve the rest of the article, and if this section doesn't improve by then, it may then be removed. ¶ If it does survive, I'd hate to see it retitled "Legacy": this would imply that the original is dead (whereas it has far more vitality than many much newer films), and in en:WP practice "Legacy" aggrandizes what might better be titled "Rip-offs and feeble imitations". -- Hoary (talk) 00:44, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh-heh -- indeed, nicely put... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:02, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Other films about Hollywood" section 

message: I expect to have access to a copy of Sam Staggs' Close-up on Sunset Boulevard in a few weeks. I do not expect to have access to any of the other books that are cited without page numbers. Does anyone else have any of these? -- Hoary (talk) 00:47, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing page numbers

message: (Or possibly something better.) 
We read that Janet Leigh appeared in an episode of Columbo as a NormaDesmondish figure. Unsourced, of course. I've asked about this at the talk pages for the Columbo and the Leigh article.
We read that there was a Burmese derivative, starring somebody or other. Unsourced, of course. I've asked about this on her article's talk page and on the talk page of (moribund?) WikiProject Burma. 
I was going to do this for one or two other bits of pop culture trivia (aka "legacy"), but it was past my bedtime and bed was more appealing. 
If there are no useful responses, I'll happily see this stuff excised. -- Hoary (talk) 01:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Rip-offs and feeble imitations

message: § Cast selection says
: It has been suggested the fact Clift was himself having an affair with a much older woman (the singer Libby Holman) was his real reason for withdrawing from the film
with a reference to 
:http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2001/04/10/sunset_boulevard_1950_review.shtml "Exploring Sunset Boulevard". BBC, March 13, 2003.
But the cited source is a short article (300 words), as much plot summary as review, which doesn't even mention Clift.
The article on Clift does mention his withdrawal and gives as the reason
:Clift was set to appear in Sunset Boulevard (1950), written specifically for him, but he dropped out at the last minute, as he felt that his character was too close to him in real life (like his character, he was good looking, and dating a much older, richer woman).
The reference is to a 448-page biography of Clift that is cited ten times in the article, never with a page number.
:Bosworth, Patricia (1978). Montgomery Clift: A Biography. Hal Leonard Corporation, 2007. N.B.: Also published in mass-market pbk. ed. (New York: Bantam Books, 1979, cop. 1978); originally published by Harcourt, 1978.  (H. Leonard), 0-553-12455-2 (Bantam).
So even though this assertion labeled as "fact" ("the fact that") may actually be a fact ("something that has really occurred or is actually the case") — Clift may actually have been having an affair with Holman — and even supposing that that was the reason for his dropping out, it's not verified in the references. Maybe it would be, if the Bosworth citations included page numbers. --Thnidu (talk) 16:55, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clift's withdrawal 

message: I added a 'Music' subsection to the "Impact" heading to provide a listing for the 1976 song "Sunset Boulevard" by the English rock group City Boy on their debut album. Gil gosseyn (talk) 02:12, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Music' subheading in "Impact" section. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Sunset Boulevard (film). 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/20120112110016/http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/DisplayMain.jsp?curTime=1122101262237 to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/DisplayMain.jsp?curTime=1122101262237
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051122040259/http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/robertharris/harris111502.html to http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/robertharris/harris111502.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111121133809/http://www.playbill.com/news/article/103190-DIVA-TALK-Chatting-with-Four-Time-Tony-Winner-Angela-Lansbury to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/103190-DIVA-TALK-Chatting-with-Four-Time-Tony-Winner-Angela-Lansbury
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:02, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Certain cameo appearances, including Buster Keaton, have been credited as 'Bridge Player' in the article. However, in the credits of the film, they're credited as 'Themselves', so perhaps this should be changed in the article to reflect the credits in the film?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathanfletcher22 (talk • contribs) 12:00, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The cast list in the article is slightly odd: the role should either consistently follow "as" or consistently be in parentheses. And what's the role? As Keaton plays himself playing bridge, it's fair to say either that he plays himself or that he's a bridge player. Is there some other problem? -- Hoary (talk) 12:49, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change cameo appearances credits? 

message: The popular culture section has no references. Its difficult to find any credible sources for pop culture.  I'll use IMDB as a starting point for references and any interviews I can find where the creators of a show/medium have explicitly stating they were inspired by Sunset Boulevard. Any better ideas on finding credible references?
Mariajonesqm (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've shortened the paragraph.Mariajonesqm (talk) 22:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

text: The trouble is, IMDB is a junk source. (Writers for IMDB can depend on Wikipedia, PR shills, their own hazy memories, etc.) An article on a movie should have a link to its entry at IMDB, but shouldn't use IMDB as a reference. I tend just to splatter unreferenced "popular culture" claims with "" flags (adjusting the month to align with reality, of course), and let others who are a lot more interested in this stuff than I am supply the citations. If the warning flags are there for over a year, remove the claim. If you're actually interested enough in a "popular culture" claim to want to investigate, it then you might do something like the following. I'll take  (to me, a supremely uninteresting claim) as an example. Choose an uninterrupted string of text from elsewhere in the article. My first choice was . Check that this has been unaltered for some time. This particular string has been unaltered since 2015, so I can use it. (If it had been altered, I'd have made a new choice.) Now go to Google and make the most of its quotes and "minus" function, looking for Sunset Boulevard, the PopCult product that ripped it off, sorry, paid homage to it, something about the "homage", but minus the irrelevant string. So for example . Note the "minus" (actually, hyphen) right in front of the unwanted irrelevant string. This will of course look for what you want, but helpfully exclude most of the utterly unhelpful (and dreary) commercial scrapes of this Wikipedia article itself. -- Hoary (talk) 06:14, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the incite Hoary- I wasn't too sure if IMBD was reliable in the first place. I'll delete the citation. Mariajonesqm (talk) 13:17, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular Culture section 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:24, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I changed the sentence that had said, "DeMille receives her affectionately and treats her with great respect, tactfully evading her questions about her script, about which he knows nothing." In fact, when DeMille's assistant tells him that Norma is coming to see him, DeMille says, "It must be about that awful script of hers. What can I tell her? What can I say?" --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:29, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  DeMille 

message: How does this film qualify as a ‘black comedy’?  Yes, it satires parts of Hollywood’s movie machine, but aside from a line here or there, there is nothing that makes this black comedy. ClevelandExPat (talk) 01:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Reliable sources have called it a black comedy. That said, a film can be classified in several different genres. Per WP:FILMLEAD, we should have in the opening sentence the genre or sub-genre that is predominant in reliable sources. Let the sources speak for themselves. We as editors only summarize what they say. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 03:07, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A “Black Comedy