Talk:Stand by Me (film)

message: almost this entire article is plagiarized.  that being said this article should be completely credited to the source given in the OR discussion section, deleted, or reworked. until then the themes are gone, to begin with. Kas0809 (talk) 00:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism

message: True or false: This page can go on Stand by Me (film) and Stand by Me can be made into a dis-ambiguation page. Any objections?? 66.32.110.184 23:40, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation

message: this section doesnt describe the plot at all.  it describes the four main characters.
you should be able to tell someone what the movie is about after reading the plot.  this doesnt even come close.
True. As someone who has only read the book and not seen the film, i will try to add a small but decent plot summary to the article until someone else can elaborate on it. ArdClose 16:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see WP:FILMPLOT for an understanding of the guidelines for writing plot summaries. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 14:03, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing in my edit goes counter to those guidelines that I can see, so I'd appreciate more info on your rationale since it was a blanket revert.  But I really shouldn't have to ask, should I?  I made simple edits that improved the flow and the accuracy, trying to address the "bad book report" criticism above, and not increasing word count at all.  And I'm still just left with Why Bother.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.226.2.140 (talk) 16:51, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said in my edit summary, it seemed to be an unnecessary rewrite with the addition of unnecessary details.  The fact that the changes were made with no edit summary only reinforced my belief that the edits were unhelpful and unnecessary.  After one has been here awhile, and seen as many pointless anonymous edits as I have, one becomes used to simply reverting on sight.  Having seen your messages here, I now understand that you were, and still are, attempting to be helpful.  So, my suggestion to you is to start a new discussion of the plot summary, stating what you think is missing, and how it could be better stated.  I will try to get other editors involved, as well, so that a better discussion can proceed. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 17:39, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot section

message: Removed a bullet that stated the film was shot and filmed in Castle Rock, Oregon. It's set in Castle Rock, Maine Tellkel 23:17, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Movie takes place in Oregon. WikiKingOfMishawaka (talk) 17:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Yep, the current text indeed does read "set in the fictional Castle Rock, Oregon" (emphasis mine). Katr67 (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The first lines of the film are in voiceover: "I was 12 going on 13 the first time I saw a dead human being. It happened in the summer of 1959-a long time ago, but only if you measure in terms of years. I was living in a small town in Oregon called Castle Rock. There were only twelve hundred and eighty-one people. But to me, it was the whole world."--Alf melmac 16:17, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Castle Rock

message: The scene in "Don't Be a Menace..." is a parody of a scene in Boyz N' The Hood --not this film.  I removed that uneducated assumption from trivia.
: In "Don't Be A Menace", going to the railroad tracks to see a dead body is in reference to "Stand By Me" RobertCMWV1974 21:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's referencing the scene in Boyz in tha Hood where Chris takes them to see a dead body that's near the train tracks.  Since Don't Be A Menace... relates to other "hood" movies it makes a hell of a lot more sense that it would parody BitH rather than Stand By Me.
--70.89.101.202 (talk) 19:34, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Don't be a Menace" 

message: This list is too long in my opinion. Overall, the film was pretty faithful to the story and this list is isn't particularly useful or informative. James 05:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Differences between book and movie 

message: I moved the thing about a character called Milo Pressman in the show 24, from the Trivia section to the Parodies and Referances section. Ace Fighter 03:15, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved around information 

message: "# In the episode of Family Guy where Peter's father is working in the toy factory, the action figure they're making says "*cough, cough,* you kids wanna see a dead body?""
There is no evidence to suggest this is a ref to Stand By Me. King and Reiner did not invent dead bodies, nor young boys' fascination with them. I'm removing it. Satchfan 08:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Could we add to the section, River Phoenix death in his 20's, just like his character 'Chris Chambers'? GoodDay 00:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: As this section has just been deleted, I think some of the points of Stand By Me in a song, cartoon series and music video could probably be reorganised into a Stand By Me in popular culture section. Anyone agree?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArdClose (talk • contribs) 19:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the stuff in the trivia section was essentially useless info, although a few tidbits were somewhat relevant.  I would be all for integrating them into the current structure somehow.  I will have to look at some other articles and Wiki guidelines and see how they handled it. Tool2Die4 (talk) 20:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: :Image:Stand by me poster.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 02:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Stand by me poster.jpg

message: I see the Themes section has recently been labelled OR for lack of sources. It should also be noted that the section corrisponds almost exactly to a review found at: 
http://pr-gb.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=32957&Itemid=9
One has been clearly copied word from word from the other. 
Can anyone actually find any sources for this section? ArdClose 20:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I slapped the tag on it; admittedly a bit of a tag-and-run but it smells too much like original work and I didn't have time to do any searching for the source.  As to the link you give, you'll note that it was posted on that site on 10-21-07. I'm thinking it's a copy from here (with intermediate uncredited steps if you look at the sourcing there). AUTiger » talk 01:56, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  OR Themes? 

message: I found a couple of reviews that might be useful as references:
* New York Times
* Arizona Daily Star
And a couple of books on Google Books:
* Stephen King Encylopedia
* The Philosophy of Interpretation
* The Directors: Take Two
* Childhood Studies
Hope it helps. Somno (talk) 03:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible references

message: The article makes mention at one point to "the infamous scene with the leeches" (or some such wording), but never actually explains that. Given that the scene with the leeches is apparently a particularly memorable scene — Wil Wheaton has commented in several places that people always ask him about that scene — it would make sense for an encyclopedia entry to have at least one sentence describing it, preferably with refs to show that it's widely recognized as memorable. In case you can't tell, I'm not in a position to describe the scene, as I own the movie but have yet to watch it. Someone else, please step up?Lawikitejana (talk) 05:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: the article describes the scene, Gordie faints after finding one in his underpants. this seems imprecise and kind of... silly? or prudish? it's like saying privates, or special area, or saying down there while whispering and maybe discretely pointing to your genitals. gorgie's reaction makes it fairly certain that the leech is not located on his thigh or whatever the area between your pubic bone and belly button is called. the leech is on either his penis or testicles, so shouldn't the article say Gordie faints after finding one on his genitals.  ≈Sensorsweep (talk) 22:53, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, one of the characters is the movie states that the leech was affixed to his testicles. If editors wish to avoid prudish circumlocutions, that could be stated explicitly. fishhead64 (talk) 15:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leeches 

message: Hi, I recently built a legitimate website for this movie. It is a fansite, but it is loaded with useful information plus it was built with the help of a few Brownsville residents. I will keep it up-to-date with forums, etc. In my hopes of making this the best site dedicated to the site, I think having a link to Wikipedia would greatly help out people who are trying to get in-depth information on the film. Here is the link: 
http://standbymemovie.webs.com/
Thanks 74.234.209.125 (talk) 00:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fansites should not be used as external links per wikipedia's external links policy (see WP:ELNO). ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 00:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to legitimate website 

message: In the reception section there is a line without any support: Stephen King was very impressed with the finished result,[6] and indicated, on the special features of the 25th anniversary Blu-ray set, that this was the first successful translation to film of any of his works.
According to whom was this the first successful translation to film? One can find critical support for two earlier adaptations; Carrie, and The Shining. Also the reference to Stephen King being impressed leads to a video of film maker Rob Reiner talking about Spinal Tap and makes no reference at all to Stand by Me.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.119.67.158 (talk) 13:36, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't say that it was the first successful one, just that King considers it the first one. He doesn't like the film adaptation of the Shining, for example -Athaler (talk) 15:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception 

message: The plot section is for plot, and should not contain footnotes about what happened to the actors in real life. So while I agree with the editor who deleted a footnote about River Phoenix from the plot section, I also think it was added in good faith and that it should not be deleted and forgotten but that there should be some way to mention that information somewhere else in the article instead. (See above, back in August 2007 readers were also asking that the death of River Phoenix be mentioned in some way.)
Perhaps it could be mentioned in the Legacy section of the article? 
I expect that some reviewers who have reviewed the film after Phoenix died must have commented it. Knowing Phoenix died young adds a another layer of meaning and sadness to the story and changes it. -- 109.79.72.115 (talk) 23:03, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: River Phoenix

message: — Assignment last updated by Isabella.mitrow (talk) 15:23, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: American Cinema

message: The first line of the plot section is, "In 1985, writer Gordon "Gordie" Lachance reads a newspaper article about a fatal stabbing." Would it be appropriate to point out that the victim was Gordie's best friend? Or maybe to say at the end of the plot section, when it talks about Chris's death, to tie it back to the newspaper?
Aardvark92 (talk) 05:22, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: , in agreement. We should mention the stabbing victim was Gordie's childhood friend, Chris Chambers. This would explain better, the trigger for the plot. GoodDay (talk) 03:19, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Fatal stabbing