Talk:McCabe & Mrs. Miller

message: Should there not also be a redirect for "Mccabe and mrs miller" in addition to "Mccabe & mrs miller"?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.208.218 (talk) 23:19, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: The main page article mentions that the snow storm was genuine, however the falling snow during the cat-and-mouse scenes was clearly a post-production effect. 
There are two giveaways: the snow always falls in the same direction between scenes, and the snow follows the camera as it pans around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.239.233 (talk • contribs) on 2006-06-20
:I put a "citation needed" on this point in the article. The DVD review by Glenn Erickson comments on the "optically-enhanced snow" and I agree that most of the snow falling in the final sequences of the film looks like it is probably an effect. Maybe this can be clarified in the article? Perhaps the snow that is on the ground is mostly genuine, but I think that the the falling snow is mostly fake. --Mathew5000 08:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Snow Storm Visual Effects

message: The article currently states that Zsigmond was ineligible for the Cinematography Oscar because he wasn't a member of the union. I have never heard of that rule before and it is not mentioned in Wikipedia's article Academy Award for Best Cinematography. I have put a query about it at Talk:Academy Award for Best Cinematography. --Mathew5000 08:56, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: eligibility for Cinematography Oscar

message: I've now listened to the commentary by Altman and Foster and it does sound like they remember the shoot in a great amount of detail. However, we need to keep in mind that they recorded the commentary 30 years afterward. It is problematic for Wikipedia to report everything they say as fact without cautioning, in each instance, that the source of the information is not contemporaneous. --Mathew5000 12:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DVD commentary track

message: I'd like to suggest "Prominent American film critic" rather than "Roger Ebert, the United States' leading pundit and number one film critic."  The first is a more reliable assertion rather than the quite vague "leading pundit" and the subjective/unproven "number one film critic." 24.5.199.225 01:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the number one film critic is rather subjective->should be changed. The "leading pundit" refers to rankings by Forbes magazine, and it is cited in Roger Ebert. The methodology included how much sample valued his opinions, took his suggestions, and how they viewed him. It is valid market research-as valid as all statistics really.
Tamer 01:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Roger Ebert

message: :Image:Mccabe and mrs miller.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.
BetacommandBot (talk) 18:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Mccabe and mrs miller.jpg

message: I have heard that this is the first film given an R rating, but that the rating had virtually no effect.  I saw the film on an Army base when it came out. 
If that is so, some note should be made of that. 
--bob bolin  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.16.17 (talk) 22:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: What about the R ratingt?

message: Although the article describes McCabe as finishing off his adversary with an Derringer, in fact he uses a Montenegrin revolver which is about as grossly different from a Derringer as a handgun can be. This rather seems to turn on its head the idea of the gun confirming him as the gunfighter of the legend.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qbarp (talk • contribs) 13:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Final denouement

message: The article says  -- "The film was originally called The Presbyterian Church Wager, after a bet placed among the church's few attendees about whether McCabe would survive his refusal of the offer to sell his property".  Where? When? I watched the film last night (Leonard Cohen fan) and there was absolutely no mention of a bet. And don't forget, there was no actual church before the movie was filmed.Moriori (talk) 06:32, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: What!!!!???

message: Should read Spears, not Speers Jameswiki2022 (talk) 01:46, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnote 32