Talk:Scarface (1983 film)

message: When the movie came out, it had the record for the most swearing. So who owns the distinguishment of owning the record today? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaiser matias (talk • contribs) 05:15, 21 February 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Without a doubt, South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut. --b. Touch 12:42, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In the "trivia" section concerning Elvira, reference is made to someone named "Denise" without explaining who Denise is.
Bulbous 04:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Who is Denise?

message: I created List of songs influenced by the 1983 film Scarface, add them to that and not to this article. Buzda 03:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop adding hip-hop songs about the film 

message: This seems to be one of the more vandalised articles I have seen. Is protection in order? Bulbous 00:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protect? 

message: I'm removing the character inspiration section added the other day, someone recently added it filled completely with awful guesses at connections with little regard for historical fact.  None of the connections between the characters in the film and the historical people they are supposed to represent can be found online, and most are noticeably false for the simple fact that the real people hadn't become known about until after the film was in theaters, or are completely removed geographically.  The film came out in 1983, with Oliver Stone working on the screenplay from 1981-1982.  Chronological errors include Barry Seal becoming a police informant a year after Scarface came out, Richard Caride making headlines in 1985.  Robert Vesco wasn't even living in the U.S. when George Jung was in prison, he fled the U.S. in the early 70's and bounced around from Costa Rica to the Caribbean without returning.  No character in the movie is even remotely comparable to Spain's Franco (can't believe someone even suggested that), the el Gordo character is only referenced in the movie as a U.S. distributor (the character he is supposedly patterned after was a complely dissimilar person in Colombia), Guillermo Cano didn't do big stories on Escobar until the year the film was in theaters, Delorean wasn't a car salesman and his bust was months before the film came out (his publicized trial came about when the movie was finished).  Moe Kessler is a nonexistent person in the context mentioned, and "FRANK" as used by the British in a drug campaign is a reference to a knowledgeable friend speaking "frankly" (not sure how someone could even assume that an anti-drug campaign in Britain borrows its name for getting permission to do a coke deal.
Currently this artile says, using weak language, that the character may have been based on a wrestler from the 1970s. Sounds pretty ridiculous to me, I've never heard of anything like it and there's no citation there. Snowfire51 01:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character inspiration 

message: I just finished watching the two disc special edition. DePalma says that the film was well received by one notable critic, Vincent Canby of the New York Times. Someone had incorrectly noted that Roger Ebert was that critic, who actually does praise the film but probably retroactively. Check the DVD and DePalma says Vincent Canby. you can also check http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1018324-scarface/ 
--Substantiate 01:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical reception 

message: The Batman recreates the traditional villain based on Al Capone as based more on Tony Montana. This version is voiced by Dan Castellaneta. Who is based on what based on who based on what?? Clarify, please. -Gohst 05:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was added by a anon user some time ago , the user is probably never coming back to explain it and the edit per se seems awfully speculative, I suggest removing it since there are probably no reliable reference available. Though the edit appears to be related with the Ventriloquist, a comics character that has a dummy named Scarface.-凶 06:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It still doesn't make any sense as written, though. -Gohst 09:46, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What does this mean?

message: Influence on other works
The final bullet point suggesting that the number in Blink-182's name comes from the number of times Pacino said the word "fuck" is not mentioned on Blink-182's wiki page.  This is likely because the reference on the Scarface page is some site in Spanish that seems inappropriate to use as an encyclopedic reference.  Upon a google search, the most convincing reference I could find was this one: http://www.blink-182.org/facts.articles.html?show_article=6, claiming to be from a Rolling Stone article from 1998 on the band.  It says that Tom DeLonge claimed Scarface is where the number came from.  I would surmise, and I have heard this before, that there is no particular reason for the number in Blink-182's name.  So, if the Rolling Stone article is real, the Wikipedia article on Scarface should say that, in an interview with Rolling Stone, Tom DeLonge claimed that Blink-182 took the number in their name from the number of times Pacino says the word "fuck" in Scarface, though this claim is contradicted by the band members elsewhere.-Ahenobarbus 08:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In pop culture 

message: *Merge. These contain only plot summary, and completely lack secondary sources establishing notability independent from the film, the video game of the film notwithstanding. / edg ☺ ☭ 18:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree to the merge as long as only the relevant info is merged into the main article. --Nreive (talk) 09:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge, Rebenga is one of those characters that only appear to be killed, there is no way we can turn that into a encyclopedic article. - Caribbean~H.Q. 09:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge [[Alex Sosa]], [[Manny Ribera]], [[Frank Lopez]]

message: *Merge. Again, just a brief plot summary. Merge all and redirect to Scarface (1983 film). / edg ☺ ☭ 18:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree to the merge as long as only the relevant info is merged into the main article. --Nreive (talk) 09:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge, Rebenga is one of those characters that only appear to be killed, there is no way we can turn that into a encyclopedic article. - Caribbean~H.Q. 09:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Rebenga (Scarface)]]

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Hnsampat (talk) 02:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of [[:Template:{{ucfirst:Scarface}}]] 

message: The song is from 1979 so it is certainly not a reference to this particular movie. I will remove this. --Buxbaum666 (talk) 10:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Specials' "Gangsters" 

message: Removed "Criticism" section: 
"The film received criticism from the Cuban community who objected to various aspects of the film.[citation needed] In order to avoid confrontations most of the film was shot in and around Los Angeles."
All this has already been stated in the "Production" section. Also fixed up some grammatical problems, namely it's/its and so on, and hyperlinked some names. Omgplz (talk) 08:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor cleanup effort 

message: This is all unsourced and in list form. It needs to cited, converted into prose and inserted back into the article in the appropriate section.--J.D. (talk) 20:17, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: In popular culture

message: I own one copy of the movie from 1984 on LaserDisc, but I've seen different editions on sale at used stores. There should be a mention of these other editions.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coffee4binky (talk • contribs) 09:33, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of various LaserDisc and VCD releases 

message: This is both a gratuitous section and has crappy source (the IMDb). 71.194.62.168 (talk) 22:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production 'trivia' 

message: Personally, I think it needs to be heavily edited. There's just too much detail making the article unnecessarily long. I just want to know if anyone else agrees before I start making any modifications.--The Scourge (talk) 01:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot section 

message: *  ... plot synopsis, review, cast, production credits, awards
Reference available for citing in the article body. Erik (talk) 19:57, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allmovie 

message: Any real problem with the IMDb rating being included in the 'Legacy' section? Someone added it, it was then deleted by someone who moaned about it changing through time but that's not uncommon and the secret is to update it regularly, like several hundred thousand other Wikis. The addition was described, erroneously, lazily and rudely as my 'real helpful' addition and I'm not sure where the negativity comes from; IMDb is a hugely popular and influential site - more so perhaps than Empire? I'm not fussed either way if it stays or goes but deletionism and a failure to discuss removal or facts is far more worrying. Perhaps we could arrive at a concensus here? --80.192.21.253 (talk) 23:34, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see other people defending your opinion, and it's more than one person who is "moaning" about the IMDb inclusion.  Yes, I agree IMDb is hugely popular and an influential site -- and I personally find it more so than Empire.  But, if you're really not fussed with the way you've been acting, I'd hate to see what you're like when you really are fussed.  But let's stick to the facts.  The ranking on IMDb is just a small factor of why this shouldn't be included.  The overriding factor is the notability issue--not with IMDb, but rather the opinions that went in to achieve its rating on the list.  The reception/legacy should include only those who are notable (critics, members of the academy), not just any random user who tally a vote on a very structurally flawed list.  This should be done to maintain notability, but also to avoid redundancies.  Perhaps if it was fighting for the #1 spot on the list, like The Godfather and The Shawshank Redemption do, it may be worth noting; but in this case, no.  Geeky Randy (talk) 18:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: So, we've reached a concensus then?  Geeky Randy (talk) 05:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  IMDb 

message: Surprised amongst the extensive details mentioned in the article the fact that Richard Belzer was the comic on stage when the shooting in the night club occurred was not amongst such mentioned details.--Jrm2007 (talk) 05:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Richard Belzer 

message: How come the article doesn't mention that the film is a remake of Scarface (1932 film)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.193.42.92 (talk) 19:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  A remake 

message: Hi everyone, I took the liberty of including information about the upcoming blu-ray release. Sorry for not detailing my sources. It's 3 AM and I'm tired...Jonay81687 (talk) 07:24, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blu-ray 

message: It's Al Pacino not Michael Jackson! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.21.38.31 (talk) 15:01, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pacino 

message: In the following sentence from the plot section, should it rather be "henchman, Alberto," or is it grammatically correct as it is? I changed it to the singular with the commas a few edits back; it was reverted, making me question my edit.
"Learning of the sting, Sosa offers Tony a quid pro quo: Sosa will use his government connections to keep Tony out of jail, but Tony must fly to New York City with Sosa's henchmen Alberto to help assassinate a Bolivian journalist intent on exposing Sosa during a speech to the United Nations."
Micromann (talk) 14:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Should be 'henchman', but not with any extra commas. I'll go fix it. GRAPPLE X 16:03, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Micromann (talk) 17:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

text: It's called an appositive and "Alberto" should be set off by commas, viz. "...Sosa's henchman, Alberto, ..."  I'm not bothering to fix it. 72.182.33.219 (talk) 14:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo? 

message: I can see mentioning the "Grand Theft Auto: Vice City" hotel bathroom because it is laid out like the incident in the Scarface film. But the rest of that paragraph seems to be speculation. Did the creators of the game say they were inserting references...? Lots42 (talk) 10:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grand Theft Auto 

message: i see this article has no Production section, can someone pls add it? along with details on making of the film? also, I'd also like this article to mention it has inspired the popular GTA games. NO, don't ask me for source. u can find easily through Google. anyone has a reply, pls notify me on my talkpage. Kailash29792 (talk) 18:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production 

message: I just reverted the addition of other actor's names from the infobox.  It is clear from the poster that Pacino is the star, in fact, no other actor's names even appear on the version of the poster we are using for the article.  I would like to establish consensus here for Pacino's name being the only one listed in the infobox. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 17:02, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This is fine by me, every poster only bills Pacino, anything else is playing favorites and just deciding who was in a starring role. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:41, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with this, as although Pacino is the "star", it is pretty standard on Wikipedia movie pages to include the main supporting players in that section. So no, it should NOT be only Pacino listed. That reeks of "fanboy-editing". I also disagree with whoever deleted the reference to Armitage Trail and his original novel, considering he originally wrote the overall plot of the film. This entire article needs to be rewritten from a more objective point of view and not dominated by "fanboys". Colliric (talk) 23:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Calling people you don't know fanboys for reasoning you don't know based on edits you don't like doesn't make you above everyone. The starring section guideline was decided to use the billing block on posters. Pacino is the only person listed on any available poster. The film is only mentioned as being based on or a remake of the 1932 film which it deviates from heavily, there is no reason to put the Armitage Trail anywhere and I would love you to explain how NOT mentioning it constitutes fanboyism. As far as I can see, the credits mention the Armitage Trail nowhere. DWB (talk) / Comment on Dredd's FA nom! 23:19, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Starring section guidelines also state that if it is not available(or, by interpretation, sufficient), which in many cases it isn't, , that the Credits Roll(presumably the opening one) is also to be used in the "Starring" section. It can be argued that is CERTAINLY the case here, given that there was only one Star billed on the poster... as an alternative and opposite(where the main Star didn't get Top Billing on the poster) example, Christopher Reeves wouldn't be said to be starring in "Superman: The Movie" if we went by the film poster alone! It would say "Starring Marlon Brando and Gene Hackman" only, and them Maybe Reeves who was listed as a "Supporting Player" in the poster's fine print! So, while I won't do it myself(because I tend to try and avoid "edit wars"), if someone else puts the expanded cast info for the film back in, there's a strong argument that it should stay, as the guidelines specifically say "If unavailable(which can be interpreted as "insufficient" also), use the top-billed actors from the screen credits." As To my other point, I will have to review the credits myself. So I'll leave that for now. Ok it was probably a bit extreme calling some editors "fanboys" so I apologize, but naturally this article, being about a cult movie, is going to be edited by the "enthusiastic fans" of the film. After all I am a fan of it myself! Colliric (talk) 05:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pacino is the star 

message: This article has no information on the film's theatrical release and box office.--Paleface Jack (talk) 15:25, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Theatrical Release 

message: I'd have to do some digging, but anyone know which came first? This story about the movie's X rating http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/2013/07/17/movie-legends-revealed-the-strange-tale-of-how-scarface-beat-the-x-rating/ from 2013 or what has currently been written into the encyclopedia article? If you visit that page and go to the paragraph next to the photo of Angel getting blood on his face from being chainsawed you'll see much of the rating section is very similar. What's in the article is very well written and I don't think it should be deleted if it came before that website. If it was copy and pasted from that website with a few words and structure changes I don't think it should remain as is. I definitely consider it plagiarized. I'm leaning towards the latter.
Construct21 (talk) 10:01, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible plagiarism in the Rating section 

message: This movie is not from 1983, it's from late 1982. I know because I'm old enough to have seen it, as a kid, at a drive-in, and the movie that came out soon after it was Android, with Klaus Kinski. I know because the weirdness of Android felt distinctly awkward to me as a kid. The only problem with this is that there's no reference for that date, since, I can only assume that every other website is getting their information about the date back from this article. I think that for now it's difficult to provide a reference for what I know about this film, but I'll just leave this edit here in case by some miracle someone happens upon some evidence that would confirm what I feel is true. Lighthead þ 06:27, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You must be mistaken because everything points to 1983. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 21:10, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

text: It wasn't even finished filming until mid 1983. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:27, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  1982 not 1983 

message: I found facts online that state that Scarface also premiered at avenue of the stars in Los Angeles so can we put that premiere at the release part too? Chckl9999 (talk) 02:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can we add the la premiere to the release part of the article? 

message: It is an epic scene. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCv9gYgWzUs Speakfor (talk) 22:57, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  He was snorting cocaine before killing Manny 

message: I feel this film does everything to qualify itself for the american epic film list. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_epic_films 2600:100D:B08B:CA3F:B101:2F11:22A:A62E (talk) 01:23, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  is Scarface an American Epic Film? 

message: Alina Ventura as Gabriela, Sosa's wife. Horse rider. Added scene for long TV version, released in United States on TNT in 1995. Additional scene 4. 
She was a model originally from Cuba. A lot of people on the forum talking about her and searching for her name. She went after to France where she is still modeling today. 185.104.136.54 (talk) 13:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alina Ventura as Gabriela, Sosa's wife.