Talk:W.R.: Mysteries of the Organism

message: I created this page while watching the film. I hope I didn't miss much. 
I'm sure that there are POV statements, and points which could be fleshed out in more detail. I will hopefully get inspired to do more of this soon. Meantime, if you're interested in Reich, and Makavejev, please add to and improve this page. 
An An 06:15, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Page creation

message: I was surprised to find this statement.
"This film is pornographic in nature. However the sexually explicit scenes are not constructed to titilate or offend. They are simple depictions of human sexuality."
Aren't, " simple depictions of human sexuality," NOT poronography, sort of "by definiton?"  Carptrash 02:01, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Carptrash, I might take out this section. It seems superfluous on second reading. 
An An 02:53, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  a thought 

message: This film deals with the life and work of Wilhelm Reich, a sexologist. The film looks at his sexological practices (vegetotheraphy, the orgone accumulator) and the intersection between sexual inhibition and regressive political ideology (fascism) as descibed in Reich's work The Mass Psychology of Fascism. This film is sexological is nature. The intertwining of narrative and documentary styles does not detract from the sexological nature of the film. This film also features interviews with more recent sexologist, Betty Dodson. 
I feel that at this stage, the removal of the 'Category:Sexology' tag should (please) be preceded by discussion. Let's discuss!
An An 02:43, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Sexology 

message: Jim Buckley link leads to a football player. I think this is wrong. Jim Buckley was cofounder of Screw Magazine and also produced films with the company Screw Films. Probably not the same guy. ----PeterKristo 20:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jim Buckley?

message: Pointed out the obviously intentional similarities between the Russian Artist and V.I. Lenin 01:49, 27 Feb 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian Artist's Parallel's with Lenin

message: Added the Serbian title of the movie - the way it's listed on IMdB - will make it easier for people who search for the movie in the original title to find the wikipedia entry. 01:51, 27 Feb 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Serbian Title

message: Suddenly remembered the name of the song that Vladimir sings at the end of the movie. It's a great song by Bulat Okudzhava, a russian bard-singer. Highly recommended, by the way. :) 00:47, 03 Mar 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The SONG

message: :Image:Wrmysteriesoftheorganism.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 05:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Wrmysteriesoftheorganism.jpg

message: I have added these warning tags because the bulk of this article just appears to be one person's interpretation of the film stated as if it were fact, with absolutely no use of citations for where the interpretation comes from.  As it currently stands the article needs some serious rewriting to make it factual. Countermereology (talk) 14:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Original research, no citations