Talk:Romeo + Juliet

message: I don't recall the film expressly indicating that the two families had been replaced by two business powers...I saw no signs of a Montague Inc. or Capulet Corp. Or really anything to show they weren't just warring families like the original. Where did that description come from? 69.5.58.119 (talk) 07:08, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Business powers?

message: :I'm not sure the expression "MTV-like action" is very good - I can see what it means in the context (and the target audience that this imples for the film) ..but it isn't especially descriptive.  I'll amend if I can think of something better. (tho I suspect it deserves a somewhat longer description) - SpinnakerMagic 17:19 16 August 2005 (UTC + 1)
Yes, I don't even know what MTV-like action means at all! (Jamandell (d69) 18:32, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "MTV-like action?

message: The article mentions "mixed" critical reception and gives particular focus to a number of negative comments and reviews. I'd quite like to see some citation and context for this, since I remember the film being released to almost universal acclaim. I'm not saying there hasn't been any negative reaction (I note from a quick browse of IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes that Ebert in particular slammed it - but I could counter that by pointing to, say, Empire's review) - but it would be nice to see some evidence of the general critical context rather than simply some vague statements. Seb Patrick 10:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Critical reception

message: There's nothing in the movie that I see that states or implies that Verona Beach is a suburb of Los Angeles, or even that the setting is meant to be in the United States.  Does anyone have a citation for this assertion? Capmango (talk) 17:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a reliable source that says VB is a fictional city in Florida. Jim Michael (talk) 01:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Los Angeles? 

message: The article mentions that Candi Staton appears on the soundtrack, but I'm not so sure. I know a few volumes of the soundtrack exist, but not on the version I have. Istabo 21:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there are 2 or 3 soundtracks for this film. I know I own the regular soundtrack and the "second" soundtrack. I recall stocking three when I worked at Odyssey Records in 2000 in Las Vegas. Apple8800 (talk) 11:30, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Soundtrack

message: I just removed the trivia section. A lot of the points were completely unecessary, original research, or were lifted almost verbatim from IMDB. Information like who auditioned for the role is completely irrelevent. Many actors/actresses audition for many roles in many movies. What's so different about this case? The list of guns is even more irrelevent and not even really a point of trivia at all, just random unecessary information. As for everything else, it could all be found at IMDB. That's why it's linked to at the bottom of the article, so people can go there and see this information rather than cluttering up the article with unecessary and unencyclopedic trivia points. --132 01:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The information about actors that were considered for a role and ultimately rejected is not irrelevant, and it is not trivia for people who actually study filmmaking. Capmango 15:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed trivia section 

message: I am curently in the process of watching this movie, and I was dissapointed when I read a piece that spoiled the ending for me. I really think a spoiler warning should be added in here. 66.212.217.91 21:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Spoiler warnings are against Wikipedia guidelines.  Avoid anything that says plot summary or synopsis if you don't want spoilers.  Or just watch the whole movie before reading any of the article. Capmango 14:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But wouldn't everyone already know what happens at the end of Romeo and Juliet even if they hadn't watched the movie? :p
DarthSidious 12:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler alert warning 

message: In the differences section, it says that Prince's relationship to Mercutio and Paris were absent from the film.  I think this is right; the lines that establish that have been excised.  An anonymous editor removed the Mercutio part while leaving the Paris part.  I put it back, but if someone can point out the scene in the movie that establishes that Mercutio is related to Capt. Prince, then we can settle it here.  Capmango 15:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prince, Mercutio, and Paris 

message: Many viewers (including me) felt that one of the best cast members was Pete Postelthwaite, who gave us a very original and striking interpretation of Friar Lawrence. Why not mention him in the article? Tom129.93.17.229 (talk) 04:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's Postelthwaite? 

message: Should the movie's plot synopsis be added? Angie Y. (talk) 02:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot 

message: I think this article gets vandalized enough to qualify for page protection. I reckon semi-protection will do, what do you people think?--Chnt (talk) 16:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll watchlist the article and keep an eye on it to see if it warrants page protection.  From what I can tell, the only serious vandalism is from one IP. —Erik (talk • contrib) 17:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not even remotely. Crotchety Old Man (talk) 17:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Serious" was the keyword here. :)  I looked at the page history for edits in April, and it just doesn't seem like the article has been bombarded by anyone other than the one IP.  Typical vandalism, but nothing on the scale on some other articles, especially for just-released films.  In any case, if there is interest in page protection, WP:RFPP is the proper venue. —Erik (talk • contrib) 17:44, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for page protection 

message: Shouldn't the link be removed? Or should it be archived? MagnoliaSouth (talk) 03:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Using the Wayback Machine Petersam (talk) 08:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

text: Not that it can be put into the article, but the website was up for ten years, and then some. It was weird the older it became, like stepping into the past in a time machine. Anyways, the site is at Wayback Machine now. Just type in romeoandjuliet.com I think: http://web.archive.org/web/19961226220432/http://www.romeoandjuliet.com/ 70.180.188.238 (talk) 14:47, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official site is dead 

message: Has anyone noticed the last couple sentences of the summary? It looks like it was ripped from one of those Christian movie review web sites. I'm assuming this does not follow Wikipedia guidelines.71.117.233.209 (talk) 00:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strangely written summary 

message: Why is it under :Category:Dolce & Gabbana? No such reference anywhere else in the article. --Protnet (talk) 08:47, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dolce & Gabbana? 

message: The redirect Captain Prince has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Okmrman (talk) 03:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Captain Prince]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]