Talk:A Streetcar Named Desire (1951 film)

message: In rereading the play, I don't really see the way Stella and Stanley interact in the last scene as suggesting a rape. Discussion? -- 00:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: i have just watched the film, and i read the plot on here as i went (i found the actors' voices to be very mumbly and i couldn't make out half of what they were saying =/ maybe it is just me, though, i feel i could have turned the volume up much further than i did, and still not hear them properly!). so yes, i saw the part where it said it ended in rape. i watched the film, did not see a rape. i then looked at the play plot, and even there it is not shown, just implied that rape happened. so how, in the film, can they say it was rape, when it certainly looked nothing like it? would it be too much to change the plot to just say he attacked her? and leave it up to the viewer to choose what they think happened. if other people like myself do not read the play, and only watch the film, would they be like me and always wonder where the rape was? i don't know... 82.43.64.177 (talk) 00:54, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarify

message: "It was believed that Tandy looked too much older than Marlon Brando to be cast as Blanche DuBois." Believed by whom? Someone who did trust Warners' makeup department?
No doubt, each had their partisans. Oscar Levant wrote (Oscar Levant, The Unimportance of Being Oscar, Pocket Books 1969 (reprint of G.P. Putnam 1968), p. 58. .) "The late Vivien Leigh also portrayed Blanche in the London company of Streetcar, and not to very good notices, either. Kenneth Tynan in particular thought she was completely miscast." (Levant himself goes on to say much nicer things about her performance.) - Jmabel | Talk 20:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Digging up old gossip

message: Someone should state that this was the first movie played in The Majestic. Next was Jim Carrey's movie, Sand Pirates of the Sahara. It states it on the front of the movie theater, where the movie name is listed. Babylon pride 16:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Majestic

message: The "Desire" line streetcar seen in the film (in the small bit actually filmed in New Orleans) is clearly Pearly Thomas car # 922. The one in the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum is #832. The current website of the Trolley Museum  makes no claim that it's the one from the film, so I have removed that from this article. See also  for more on New Orleans streetcars 832 and 922 (as well as #453, which was apparently used in some publicity promotional work involved in the film). All this is a bit of minutia as far as the film is concerned, but as an incorrect claim was in the article that needed correcting, here's the info for the record. -- Infrogmation 03:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The streetcar in "Streetcar"

message: This page really needs an overview of the plot/storyline. Most other film/theater/etc pages have them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.180.99.90 (talk) 10:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Overview of storyline?

message: When Stella takes refuge upstairs after Stanley punches her, her emotions are made clear as she is shown in close up, her face blank with desire.
I don't know about you, but when I'm feeling desire, my face isn't usually blank.
-- BlueRaja (talk) 20:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We'll keep that in mind the next time you appear in a movie. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 08:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't be snippy. David Spector (user/talk) 01:23, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

text: Absolutely. I have removed it. oknazevad (talk) 16:23, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Blank with Desire

message: :A Streetcar Named Desire (play) → :A Streetcar Named Desire —(Discuss) --Una Smith (talk) 05:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notice of requested move

message: The way the plot description is written is like a high personal film commentary. No one these days wants to read language like that and it's also pointless except to make a show, pardon the pun. Please make the language simple, I'd do it but I can't even understand hardly what the Hell is being described and have better things to do.Serpentdove (talk)
The plot description is too complicated and some parts of it make no sense whatsoever. "face was blank with desire" How can a face be blank with desire? I have only seen the movie once and when I read the summary of the plot here it was like I was reading the summary of a completely different movie. A clean up is badly needed. Jamie Kelly (talk) 02:41, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot Description problems

message: I was wondering about the veracity of the claim that John Garfield turned down the role of Stanley as stated in the "casting" section of this article - is there any source for this information? I seems unlikely for several reasons - firstly Brando created the role on Broadway to great acclaim and even though he was not yet a major film star would presumably have been first choice along with his fellow co-stars who made the transition from stage to screen (Vivian Leigh for Jessica Tandy notwithstanding). Secondly - John Garfield had plenty of other things on his mind in 1951 - namely his blacklisting following his refusal to name names in the HUAC trials which prevented him from appearing in any Hollywood studio productions, which very likely contributed to his tragic death from a heart attack the following year. Dombrewer (talk) 04:06, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about casting details 

message: Your deletion of the artwork from the page is purely a subjective decision you apparently made unilaterally. This image resonated with me and I felt it did enhance the entry, more so than the "movie poster" which poorly represents this iconic film. Just because one individual "doesn’t like" an image, doesn’t justify its removal. I think what is called for is a broader consensus of opinion; however, I contend that the only valid reason for editing out any image is if it portrays objectionable content. I don't think this artwork can be categorized as such. Betempte (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The artwork is bad. Wikipedia is not an image gallery, and certainly not a place for you to display your personal artwork. And, no, it is not a policy that only "objectionable content" is to be removed; with that bizarre line of reasoning, everyone could post his/her personal artwork all over Wikipedia. You need a consensus here before restoring. For editors wishing to comment, the image is at :File:A Streetcar of Desire.jpg. Cresix (talk) 21:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

text: Everyone has the privilege of being an “art critic.” Betempte (talk) 21:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: But everyone does not have the privilege of displaying his art on Wikipedia. Again, wait for consensus. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 21:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: it doesn't take a consensus to decide that this picture has no place on wikipedia. to include it in the article you just need a reliable source to state that it is an image legitimately connected with the film. that's it. an editor's own artwork is just POV and original research, so it doesn't get in. Cottonshirtτ 18:48, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of image by user "Cresix"

message: I streamlined the plot section quite a bit. Hope we can remove the box re; not meeting encyclopedic standards.  Beadmatrix (talk) 08:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleaned up Plot section

message: I just watched the supplemental material. As I understand it, the Breen Office had no choice but to accept the rape as an integral part of the story. Instead of being shown directly, the mirror is smashed. This appeared in the release version, and was not restored in 1993. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 00:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: rape scene

message: I would like to replace the plot section completely with a more direct plot description.  Are there any comments or objections? Grinbriar (talk) 06:52, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: The Plot section could use some additional work

message: The introductory paragraph was worded a little awkwardly, so I made some changes.  I also notice now that the intro paragraphs gives details about the Academy Awards, which are all repeated later in the "Accolades" section.  This is probably due to more than one author  adding to different parts of the article without reading the whole thing.  The intro paragraph needs to be modified some more to take out these accolades which are cited again, later in the article.  Also, the original play and the 1951 movie are wrapped up together in the public sentiment, even including, in Wikipedia, which should be first on the disambiguation list. Therefore, I think there should be some discussion of the film adaptation of the play.  This is touched on  briefly in the section entitled "Releases."  So Perhaps this section could be modified.  Also sections that are very brief, or that are "divided" up into one section should be modified, added to, or cut and pasted to other sections.  Also, the play, and the movie together, but especially the movie brought Marlon Brando to prominence as a major movie star.  This should probably be mentioned somewhere.  Over the past few days, I have made some real changes to this article, without any comment from anybody.  So I assume I am on the right track and doing ok. I plan to study this a bit more, and then proceed to make the changes mentioned here. Grinbriar (talk) 19:45, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introductory paragraph, Academy Awards, Accolades, etc. 

message: Pollenatedweasal has made a number of edits to the text which I have inserted, without explanation.  I think that overall, these edits do not improve the page.  In almost every case, the grammar of the edits is not as good as the grammar being superceded.  There are also several cases in which interpretations are made that do not belong in this kind of article.  Also, some slang words or phrases have been added.  Also, some plot events have been changed to be less accurate. And some old cliches have been added back.  I will give this a few weeks for comment, and then I will see if it might be prudent to edit the page some more or just leave it as it is.
I have some specific criticisms listed below:
The pregnant Stella asks Stanley not to tell Blanche that she is pregnant, for fear she will get overexcited.
Poorly written and not necessary.
While Stella goes out to the store, Stanley accosts Blanche about the circumstances surrounding the loss of Belle Reve. 
Unnecessary interpretation.
When Blanche tries to snatch them back, the letters fall to the floor.
It did not happen this way; the letters fell from her hands when Stanley grabbed them.
Soon after, Stanley hosts a poker night with his friends in his and Stella's apartment.
Stanley is just a cut above an ape-man; he doesn’t “host” parties.  
When Blanche turns on the radio against Stanley's bidding, Stanley explodes in a drunken rage, striking Stella after she comes to her sister's defense. Stanley's friends go home while Blanche and Stella flee to the upstairs neighbor, Eunice. 
Too much detail. 
When his anger subsides, Stanley weeps, and cries out for Stella to come back. Stella descends the stairs and Stanley carries her off to bed to have sex. 
“…carries her off to bed for sex … “ This is not an encyclopedic tone; better to say, “carries her off to bed….
In the morning, Blanche wakes Stella up and accuses Stanley of being subhuman and animalistic. 
She does not mention that he is “animalistic,” which is also not  a very good word.
Blanche’s visit extends as she is unable to find another place to stay. 
An explanation not given in the plot; there is no effort to find another place to stay, nor to move out. 
He despises her obsession with seeming respectable and pure, while she continues to feel threatened by his vulgarity. 
Awkward grammar. 
He tells Stella what he finds; that Blanche has a reputation for mental instability, sexual promiscuity and homosexuality that got her fired from her teaching job in Auriol and run out of town. 
This does not follow the story line.  Blanche does not have a history of homosexuality.
She admits to her anxieties and explains her coping mechanisms, pleading for forgiveness. 
Poorly written; “coping mechanism” is not a real thing. 
Angry and humiliated, Mitch spitefully rejects her after sharing a confused kiss. 
Wrong interpretation.  Mitch is not spiteful towards Blanche; he is genuinely hurt. Also, “sharing a confused kiss” is a poor choice of words, and does not describe the scene. 
Blanche chases him out, threatening to scream for help and frame him for assaulting her if he does not leave.
Blanche screamed to make Mitch leave.  All the rest is made up.
He taunts her with further displays of his own brutishness and vulgarity, while she keeps making attempts to maintain her respectable façade. 
These are standard old “Streetcar Named Desire” cliches.
Stanley becomes frustrated with her stubbornness and assaults Blanche. It is implied that he rapes her.
This is not what happens; this is analysis and interpretation.
Retired completely to her own corner of the house, not willing to face Stanley, Blanche is emotionally fragile, having fits whenever confronted with something that does not fit into her view of herself. 
They are in a 2 room flat, not a house.  Blanche is in the bathroom, washing her hair, not in her own corner of the house.  Blanche is not having “fits.”  “Fit” in this context is an inappropriate slang word.
Stella and Eunice have told Blanche that a rich admirer of hers is coming to take her on a cruise. 
Stella has told Blanche that she is going on a vacation in the country.  The “rich admirer and the cruise are Blanche’s own ideas. 
Instead, they have arranged for her to be committed into a mental institution. 
She is “going” to a mental institution.  Nothing is ever said about arrangements, or tricking her, only that she is "going."  So why not just say that? 
She has told Stella about Stanley's assault, and the rumour has spread through Stanley's social circle, though nobody elects to do anything about it. Stella is more conflicted than ever about her relationship with Stanley.
There is an interpretation, not in the movie plot. 
An older doctor and an older nurse come to the door. How old are they? Does it matter? 
Mitch, present at the poker game, launches himself at Stanley, but is restrained and breaks down into tears. Mitch breaks down in tears first; then Blance collapses in confusion.
Grinbriar (talk) 16:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms of Pollenatedweasal's edits 

message: Pollenatedweasal changes or reverts my edits without discussion.  Several of Pollenatedweasal's edits to my contributions did not add to the articla content, but were just rewording my original edit in a more awkward style.  So far, I have not tried to fix these problems because I have not been sure what to do. To help in the discussion with Pollenatedweasal, if that person were ever to look at this talk page, I have lifted some Wikipedia editing criteria that was left on my own talk page, when I first got a Wikipedia account, and I wonder if Pollenatedweasal would have any thoughts on this:
"Don't be afraid to edit – anyone can edit almost every page, and we are encouraged to be bold! Find something that can be improved and make it better—for example, spelling, grammar, rewriting for readability, adding content, or removing non-constructive edits.
Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time. Their principles and spirit matter more than their literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making an exception. Be bold but not reckless in updating articles, and do not agonize about making mistakes. Every past version of a page is saved, so any mistakes can be easily corrected.
There are no necessary terms to which you have to agree when doing major edits, but the recommendations above have become best practice. If you do it your own way, the likelihood of your edits being reedited may be higher."
At some point, after waiting for comments on this talk page, I would like to make additional edits to the Streetcar Named Desire article.  What is most off-putting to me about Streetcar Named Desire discusssions, in general and the cliches about Blanche being a "faded southern belle" and Stanley being the "brutish animal."  Maybe it could just be described as a good movie, without re-hashing all the standard cliches.  Grinbriar (talk) 19:44, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some comments for Pollenatedweasal 

message: The cast as listed in the article is incomplete, and there is one wrong listing, I think it might be for the baby, shown breifly at the end of the movie.  However, I have never seen any reference to the baby, so I will take it out.  Grinbriar (talk) 19:47, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The cast is incomplete 

message: "Elysian Fields is referenced in the 2011 video game L.A. Noire. It is a housing development for returning WWII veterans in 1947 Los Angeles. Poorly constructed from substandard materials, it is intended to be burned down as part of an insurance scheme by the builders"
'Elysian Fields' is referenced in the journey to Stanley and Stella's house, but it is not the original use of the term 'Elysian Fields'; [thus] L.A. Noire and the names of the things on the way to Blanche's destination are both referencing the same topic (the afterlife), but since the article doesn't mention the street named Elysian Fields, and the L.A. Noire reference seems to be making a bad joke about the afterlife of soldiers, at a complex in L.A., I'm pretty sure that this should be removed. It almost looks like (after reading the article in its current standing) it was meant for another page. 199.168.151.156 (talk) 13:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  in Popular culture mistake 

message: The usage and primary topic of A Streetcar Named Desire is under discussion, see talk:A Streetcar Named Desire (play) -- 70.51.45.100 (talk) 06:18, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: "A Streetcar Named Desire"

message: I was intrigued by this point under "Comparison to source material": "At the end of the play, Stella, distraught at Blanche's fate, mutely allows Stanley to console her. In the film, this is changed to Stella blaming Stanley for Blanche's fate, and resolving to leave him." This is accurate, but I wanted more information about why this change might have been made, so I looked up the citation, which is to Tennessee Williams' Memoirs. Having now scoured Williams' Memoirs in vain for any reference to the film production of Streetcar, I am skeptical that this citation actually provides more detail about the point cited. My edition of Memoirs was published in 1975, and the citation is to an edition published in 1977, so it's possible that Williams added information about this, if he updated his memoirs between 1975 and 1977. But that seems unlikely to me. In any event, the citation as it stands doesn't include a page number, so is not very useful anyway, and is not in fact necessary to support the point being cited (which is obvious from a comparison between the film and the play). I suggest removing the citation. Harrisoncotis (talk) 17:30, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  citation to Williams' Memoirs 

message: What scenes and why were they censored?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.218.18.193 (talk) 09:37, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Several scenes were shot but cut after filming..

message: It is absurd to claim this movie is anything like a "first" for shirtless men in hollywood. You might recall a series of movies about someone called Tarzan.  There was never any reluctance to show shirtless men in movies. 170.40.160.189 (talk) 14:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shirtless first?