lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Oliver Twist (2005 film)

message: :Image:Oliver Twist 2005 film.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Just a little info: Toby Crackit is Monks...
The article is incorrect, Monks is in the film, he just doesn't appear as Oliver's relative  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.99.102 (talk) 01:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Oliver Twist 2005 film.jpg
Talk:Death and the Maiden (play)

message: Actually, it looks a little bit strange to find the information about the 1994 movie/film on the article about the play, since probably hardly anybody knows the play, but a lot more people know the movie/film. On the other hand, there are other cases of movies/films where the movie/film is also more known than the play or book. In those cases, the information about the movies/films are also often found on the page of the book (see for example James Bond or American Psycho) and not on the page of the movies/films. But I still would like to ask the following question: Would it not be better to move the content of this page here to either Death and the Maiden (1994 movie) or Death and the Maiden (1994 film)? -- Citylover 13:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I'm concerned, a redirect from the movie to the play (which has been created recently) is the least desirable option, even for the time being. I'd prefer one longer article with a "Film adaptation" section after a discussion of the play (see Mildred Pierce as an example). Having separate pages for the book and the film often creates problems (see Absolute Beginners), <KF> 10:21, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Play or 1994 movie/film? 

message: I wonder if this synopsis (which is supposed to be about the play), was written purely from the movie adaptation... 
there is no evidence that the doctor paulina remembers 'leads' the group of captors (there is, however, debatable evidence that he was hired originally to make sure the captives did not die during torture sessions)
Dr. Miranda does not 'stop at her home looking for assistance after his car breaks down'; Miranda visits the house because he is invited over by Gerardo; they became aquaintainces after Gerardo helped Miranda with his car trouble (an past event only detailed by Gerardo, not the narrator)
Paulina does NOT 'convince her husband to take Miranda captive'! she does it herself, with a gun! this statement in the article contradicts one of the main features of the play, the previously subserviant woman strongly taking measures into her own hands.
The synopsis mentions nothing about the big question of whether Miranda is in fact the doctor the Paulina remembers. This is arguably the biggest theme of the whole play, yet the article seems to say that Miranda is definatly the torturer. (i know someone already said this but im sayin it again since its such a big thing)
give me some feedback on this, so i can comfortably change the article...
Samoen 12:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  synopsis is highly innacurate 

message: http://minadream.com/romanpolanski/DeathAndTheMaiden.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 146.115.121.153 (talk) 04:27, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  some pictures
Talk:Tess (1979 film)

message: Why is this described as a "romance"? Just because the main character is a pretty girl doesn't mean it's a romance. It's about a young girl who gets totally screwed over by men and society. It's not a bodice-ripper but a devastating social commentary. 
Tess is a teenager who is taken advantage of by an older man - today they would call it "date rape," not to mention statutory rape - bears the man's child, and is shunned and judged and called a whore from then on. Later she leaves town and gets married, and when her husband finds out about her past, he leaves her in disgust, even though he's not a virgin either. In the end she snaps, kills her seducer, and ends up getting hanged. It's about hypocrisy, lack of empathy, abuse of power, and class snobbery. Rosekelleher (talk) 03:28, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don’t see the word “love” in your account of the story. Didn’t Tess love her parents and siblings? Didn’t she love her baby? Above all, didn’t she love Angel? --Hors-la-loi (talk) 08:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Problem solved --Clifford Mill (talk) 13:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romance?
Talk:The Fearless Vampire Killers

message: The edits starting on December 1 are chock full of personal opinions (film was beautiful, American version was a misfire, animated sequence was lame).  Doesn't seem appropriate for wikipedia.  Shouldn't we remove all those?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.162.112.8 (talk) 04:53, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't disagree. Makes it look like a review.John Firth (talk) 15:48, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Personal Opinion?

message: I saw this on its opening run way back in the mists of pre-wiki time and I clearly remember its on-screen title, and poster title, and newspaper ad title as "The Fearless Vampire Killers (or, Pardon Me, But Your Teeth Are In My Neck).  Not sure about the punctuation but that was the release title; "Fearless Vampire Killers" was only listing-shorthand.  I also saw it in a tiny arthouse cinema in Koeln in fall 1975 and offended the German audience, who were taking it as a serious horror film.  I dunno, maybe laughing out loud is against the law in Nord Rhein-Westfalen...anyway the title I'm sure is incomplete here, I'll check IMDB and if it's not there ask what's up from them.Skookum1 (talk) 04:38, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: PS the article does say this was Sharon Tate's last film right?  Haven't looked yet, just "reminder to self" at this pointSkookum1 (talk) 04:38, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was NOT. She made Thirteen Chairs while a few months pregnant with Polanski's baby. It was released after she was murdered by the Manson Family.HammerFilmFan (talk) 19:23, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Full title?

message: Nearly this entire article was a copy & paste from these two sources: 
 
and as such needs a serious rewrite. Mikepellerintalk 06:56, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Copy & Paste
Talk:Cul-de-sac (1966 film)

message: I removed the Michael Klinger link as it linked to a sportsman born in 1980 not producer Michael Klinger.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aimulti (talk • contribs) 02:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Michael Klinger link
Talk:Two Men and a Wardrobe

message: To whoever keeps removing content from this article without explanation - please stop and explain your reason here first. The current plot synopsis is brief and the article would benefit from expansion, but the synopsis is at least accurate - as well as two links that describe the plot, the article contains a link where you can watch the actual film and confirm it for yourself if you don't believe it. -- Boing! said Zebedee 07:19, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blanking this article
Talk:Lotna

message: As a little boy in the 1960s, I was told that my uncle had been one of the cavalrymen who had attacked the German tanks.
I was told that in good faith.
That does not mean that I believe that it is a true story. Varlaam (talk) 17:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The cavalry attack 
Talk:The Circus Card Trick

message: I've proposed a policy on how to deal with magic descriptions here: Wikipedia:Proposed policy for magic methods.
This description is almost in agreement with the praxis used by publishers of magic technical litterature. What's lacking is that the creator of the effect (or in this case the routine) should be named directly beside the title of the effect, like this:
The Circus Card Trick by Clayton Rawson...etc.
And the date of publication should be added to the sources. After those two adjustments, it is in sync with the established format used by magic publishers, at least on a superficial level.
There's other objections though. I can not for my life believe that Clayton Rawson would be responsible for something this dry and boring. In my eyes, this must be a gross misrepresentation of a man who was famous for his weird sense of humour, his intriguing plots and his devious mind. Qualities both shown in his detective novels, but especially in his technical writings.
Agreed that the source here was for amateurs, and effect is built on a Public Domain method (within the field we only use the term "public domain" when the originator is unknown), but it is still unlikely that Rawson would have put his name on something like this.
It seems like the author of this article has stripped away everything that Mr. Rawson added to the basic premise, leaving just the original bare bones. And by that, he refutes the whole point of writing the article at all. Where is the point in describing an original piece by a famous creator, if you remove everything that made it original?
No respected publisher would touch a description like this, and Clayton Rawson himself would probably have been horrified by seeing his name in connection with this text.
As it stands, it's just a simple application to the "Key Card"-principle, and should be filed under "Key Card", and not under a separate title - unless the text is expanded with an account of what Rawson added to the effect --TStone 19:20, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison with industry standards
Talk:The Three Treasures

message: This article is extremely underdeveloped, under-sourced, and is missing most information on the the film. There is only one source cited in the entire article and the article consists mostly of a lead section. It needs to be rewritten entirely and split into sections with proper citations added to its information. Information on the film's plot, production, theatrical/home media releases, and reception needs to be added to the article as they are completely absent from the article, with each piece of information added to their own section. See Manual of Style/Film for more details on how to properly construct a film article.e All of these changes and additions need to occur in order for this article to meet Wikipiedia's guidelines and standards of a well developed and properly sourced article.--Paleface Jack (talk) 15:54, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite and Expansion
Talk:Seconds (1966 film)

message: Some who believe this film exhibits Rock Hudson's best acting. [no poster given]
:If it does, it's a terrible condemnation. Rock Hudson was not at all convincing in serious roles. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 18:04, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Rock Hudson's best acting?

message: What does it really have to do with the movie?  -- Komowkwa (talk) 02:50, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Brian Wilson and Seconds

message: I think IMDb is wrong here, she isn't the "Young Girl stomping on the grapes in the party scene". The first person to start stomping on the grapes is a nude blonde woman and she's the only one really focused on. There isn't a clear shot of her face, but from what I can tell it probably isn't Scala. I think Scala is in a later scene at a party briefly talking to Hudson's character. --67.214.20.93 (talk) 19:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tina Scala 

message: Remember, that unless modernity turns out to be a suicide pact, we're writing for more than contemporaneous generations! I wikified by adding these links in the description of the dIversion for the GC Station scene: 
: ... Playboy "bunny" to make-out ...
Not to deny, of course  -- what cleverer internal (if not external) parodies than this one have repeatedly demonstrated --, to wit that there is such a thing as a silly, or even obnoxiously pointless, wiki-link. --Jerzy•t 08:36, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The motivation for the Wiki feature set crucially includes the internal links
Talk:The Fixer (novel)

message: There are some fairly interesting differences between the actual case and The Fixer. One of the more significant is that the religious "expert" was a catholic priest in the Beilis case whereas The Fixer has him being Russian Orthodox; in reality, no Russian Orthodox priests were willing to lend support to the idea of ritual murder.--Jrm2007 05:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the priest in the book is a former catholic, so Malamud nods to fact somewhat.--Jrm2007 (talk) 01:25, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Catholic vs. Russian Orthodox
Talk:Reindeer Games

message: On location Shooting done in Vancouver BC, the cafeterias scenes were shot in John Oliver Secondary School's lunchroom, I know becuase we had to eat lunch in the halls for a week while they were transforming it back and forth Jedi canuck 23:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: people from the non-english speaking world don't get the reference to "Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer" I guess that is something that should be mentioned :) 
also a curious thing is that a character of the movie is called Rudy ;)
Regards 
Paranoid Android1208 (talk) 23:49, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:   Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer 
Talk:Hell in the Pacific

message: None but the brave does not have a similar premise to this film in my opinion. Groups of men can have truces in a war, and I think that has been done in movies before None but the Brave. I think that should be re-worded, or even removed. What's the citation of the relevance of None but the Brave to Hell in the Pacific.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.66.213 (talk) 02:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NOT

message: I removed this section as it is nothing but uncited opinion.  Links to reviews, quotes, etc., should be here instead.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 01:14, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Reception section
Talk:Selena Steele

message: Shouldn't there be some mention of her movie Curse of the Catwoman?
:Why is it notable? Dismas|(talk) 02:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It won two AVN awards in 1992, 'Best Editing - Video' & 'Best Video Feature'  -- although there may be questions as to the notability of these awards (they're not the Oscars, as you know) 137.183.232.24 (talk) 20:24, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Curse of the Catwoman''
Talk:The Tailor of Panama (film)

message: Shouldn't there be separate pages for the novel and the film? Aapold (talk) 14:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed there should be. I'm not the man to write it, but you are correct. =//= Johnny Squeaky 02:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Separation?

message: By mistress, do they mean wife?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.109.225 (talk) 21:15, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur. This should be checked and, if necessary, corrected. --Mortense (talk) 11:07, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: When he arrived at the embassy, the Ambassador said he was the one banished for an affair with the foreign minister's wife.  Osnard corrected him saying his affair was with the minister's mistress, not his wife. Aapold (talk) 00:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  I do not understand 

message: The current version (before I edit it) reads:  "Osnard is shot by Pendel while trying to flee to the airport."   That is a scene that occurs only in an alternate version available as a bonus feature on the DVD release.  In the theatrical release, as well as the standard version on DVD, Osnard makes it to the airport and gets away with the money (sans the bribe he paid to the ambassador, who helps him get to his plane). Aapold (talk) 00:06, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot 

message: There were many inaccuracies in the cast, especially on Catherine McCormack's character, which implied that she turned Osnard in.  She did not in fact do this, she instead accompanied Osnard on the plane as he made his getaway.
The entry for Pendel implies that he burned down his uncle bennie's tailor shop.  His uncle was never tailor at all.   Pendel did commit arson for his uncle, which he served time in jail for.   He learned the tailoring trade in prison.   When he arrived in Panama he made up a better history for himself, as the representative Braithwaite & Pendel, a prestigious Saville Row tailor shop.   He cast his uncle as his elder partner, Braithwaite.  Aapold (talk) 00:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast
Talk:The Little Rascals (film)

message: Has anyone given thought to a section regarding anachronisms and incongruities in the film, as compared to the original shorts?  For example, in the movie, the teacher is Miss Crabtree, but in the shorts, Miss Crabtree preceded the Spanky/Alfalfa/Darla era by several years. Nolefan32 (talk) 05:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Anachronisms and incongruities
Talk:Holiday in the Sun (film)

message: According to IMDB this was a horrible movie. Why should it be in Wikipedia? I don't get it. KarenAnn 00:38, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the point of including a bad movie in Wikipedia? 

message: This article has had its infobox tag removed by a cleanup using AWB.
Any concerns please leave me a message at my talk page. RWardy 20:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "needs infobox" tag
Talk:Passport to Paris

message: This article has had its infobox tag removed by a cleanup using AWB.
Any concerns please leave me a message at my talk page. RWardy 18:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "needs infobox" tag 

message: I changed the cast descriptions from Spanish to English...I don't know why they would be in Spanish.  Klgh07 (talk) 07:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Cast
Talk:Cynthia Leonard

message: I'm a newcomer to Wikipedia and I entered this article, but I'm not sure how to add credits, links and attach a photo.  I can't seem to find what I need in the "helps."  Can somebody please leave a message for me?  Mississippi King
Didn't she run for mayor in 1888, not 1884?  I found an article about her campaign in the 6 nov. 1888 Brooklyn Daily Eagle, but have not come across evidence of an earlier run.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.27.245.67 (talk) 18:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Bowfinger

message: The casting subsection was added and expanded a while back to include the claim that the character Daisy was inspired by Anne Heche but the sources seem contradictory. The latter source quotes Steve Martin: "I wasn't thinking of Anne," Martin says. "Anne and I are still good friends. Only that last scene could be identified with her at all."
In any case, the note seem more about what Martin was thinking when he wrote the script, not what the film makers were thinking when they were casting the part. Maybe there are other sources that could clear this up? -- 109.79.73.154 (talk) 13:59, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casting 

message: The characters (Bowfinger, Jiff) aren't buddies, they don't go on adventures together, it's more of an ensemble cast with a strong lead from Martin and two great performances from Murphy.  Buddy movies there is a distinct couple and their repartee is what makes the dialog snap.  Lethal Weapon is a good example. Rarelycomments (talk) 20:03, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  I don't think this is really a "buddy comedy" as described.
Talk:Strange Brew

message: Do those hockey outfits actually exist?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darth Borehd (talk • contribs) 06:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hockey Outfits? 

message: I know that it's pointless applying logic to this film but I just can't help myself. Pam's birthday is 21-10-59 according to the videogame machine in the film. The brothers were charged with "kidnapping" her on 10 October 1983 according to their lawyer. So she is 24 (although she was being played by a 31 year old actress). -- Derek Ross | Talk 23:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pam's age

message: *Interview with Dave Thomas
-there is some good info about the making of the film.--J.D. (talk) 15:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles

message: This section is unsourced and needs to be converted to proper prose form. Until it can be properly cited, I'm storing this section here.--J.D. (talk) 18:56, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Pop culture references
Talk:The Stepford Wives (1975 film)

message: The first reference to robots is the statement "Desperate, Joanna stabs Bobbie with a kitchen knife trying to prove her humanity, but Bobbie doesn't bleed or suffer, instead going into a loop of odd mechanical behavior, thus confirming she is a robot." Confirming is the wrong word, since this is only hinted at before  - revealing would be a better word to use. I am not sure what "tryin to prove her humanity" means either, since at this joint Joanna is desparate to find her children.124.197.15.138 (talk) 08:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robots
Talk:Novocaine (film)

message: For such a great black comedy thriller ticket sales must have been much higher than 2 milliin in US.  Maybe sb didn't want to taxes so they show low turnover. 
Nowadays and even then many movies make 10 million dollars and more on the opening weekend. 
Found the movie absolutely  great.  Torbenlicht2015 (talk) 19:24, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doubt the boxoffice figures
Talk:Teacher Earl

message: As the one week required has passed since the copyright violation was put in place, and as the user who put it in place did not follow up on it, it is now being taken down, per the rules. If there is any complaints, please discuss them here. JQF 20:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have recently found that the info in question is originally from the "My Name Is Earl" section of NBC.com, thus is promotional matterial and thus usable free of copyright. JQF 20:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright
Talk:Shopgirl

message: Is the mention of the movie's rating in Rotten Tomatoes important? I'm not a frequent reader of movie articles in Wikipedia nor online movie reviews but I think the rating would change over time. It is also possible that there are other online sources for movie reviews which may or may not support the same rating Miaire 15:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Find Me Guilty

message: Much like the movie, the section called "actual events" takes the point of view of mobsters.
Also, all the trivia is what they tell you in the movie. has it been cross-referenced anywhere? --216.75.93.110 12:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV and sources 

message: This page in general is pretty stub-ish, and could use more info like its critical reception.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.255.201.91 (talk) 04:26, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Box Office Performance
Talk:The Molly Maguires (film)

message: I don't think the comment about historical accuracy belongs in the middle of the Plot. More importantly, although if I'm not mistaken, Davy lamps were handheld. According to this article from the Smithsonian, oil wick cap lamps were used from the 1850s until the 1920s.
JmA (talk) 02:36, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical accuracy