Talk:Roman Holiday

message: To reduce the number of images on this page a bit (it's threatening to become a gallery), is it possible to have the two Mouth of Truth images reformatted as a single animated gif? 23skidoo 18:22, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mouth of Truth images

message: I took out "According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a "Roman holiday" is "an occasion on which entertainment or profit is derived from injury or death; a scene of suffering considered as an object of amusement; a pitiable spectacle" (alluding to holidays devoted to gladiatorial spectacles)." since none of it seems to apply. Clarityfiend 21:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Roman Holiday

message: I was puzzled at first when I saw the Novels Wikiproject tag. Then I saw the itty-bitty section about Upton Sinclair's book. Since 99.999% of the article is about the film, I'm going to start up a novel article. Clarityfiend 21:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Split off unrelated novel

message: From the Ring Lardner Jr. page:
::"According to Hungarian writer Miklos Vamos—who visited Lardner several times before his death—Lardner won an Academy Award for a movie he wrote under a pseudonym. Lardner refused to tell which movie it was, saying that it would be unfair to reveal it because the writer who allowed Lardner, Jr. to use his name (as Lardner's pseudonym) was doing him a big favor at the time. It later was revealed the film was Roman Holiday and the writer was Ian McLellan Hunter, who with Lardner co-wrote the book for Bert Lahr's short-lived 1964 Broadway vehicle Foxy."
Is there any truth to this?  If so, should it be mentioned here?  128.103.14.62 01:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Screenplay Credit

message: :Image:Audrey Hepburn & Gregory Peck 4.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 22:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Audrey Hepburn & Gregory Peck 4.jpg

message: :Image:RomanHolidayHepburnPeck.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 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 07:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:RomanHolidayHepburnPeck.jpg

message: I heard that this is in public domain because of missing copyright indication, therefore screenshots are available on Commons. If copyrighted, screenshots ought to be uploaded to english local (not commons) with fair use indication, and in lower resolution (under QVGA). If till copyrighted and renewed, copyright indication on the package of video soft ought to be indicated that
:Copyright (C) 1953 Renewed (C) 1981 ...
220.3.134.144 00:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Public Domain?

message: I think it would be appropriate to include that "Roman holiday" is, based on the American Film Institute's 100 years movie ranking, the 4th best love story of all time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.188.13.130 (talk) 04:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: AFI 100 Years ranking

message: This peculiar section reads like some odd joke. Is it for real? If so, would someone explain to dopey me what it's trying to say? How does Wallis Simpson figure in to Roman Holiday? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 01:18, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The first half was lifted directly from Roman festivals, the rest is unsourced speculation, so both are history. Any comparison between Wallis Simpson and Princess Ann makes my skin crawl. D'oh! Simpson's counterpart would actually be the commoner Joe. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:19, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Title'' section: for real or a joke?

message: We spend almost as much time discussing who isn't playing Joe and Ann — Cary and Liz — as we do who is playing them — Greg and Audrey. Is an annotated cast list the appropriate place to mull over those who passed on the roles? Shouldn't the annotated cast list discuss the cast, and some "Background" or "Development" section discuss the others? Just wonderin'. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 02:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The [[Roman Holiday#Cast|Cast]] section

message: The company Joe works for is NOT the Daily American (also noted on that page), it is the 'American News Service' -- perhaps an allusion to the 'Daily' but not in fact -- Watch the film! Film studios do/did not generally use real names or companies, especially in those days, if for no other reason than liability issues.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.247.76 (talk) 07:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Saw the film last night. I have adjusted the text to reflect this. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 15:43, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  False attribution 

message: Kindly fill the apparent gap in my knowledge? – Arms & Hearts (talk) 18:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly. Firstly there were Princes of the Holy Roman Empire and their consorts; Imperial Princesses as in the Hapsburg court, which is another category; and yet another included Imperial Princesses who belonged to the Russian imperial court. Some might be monarchs in their own right, some inherited the title by descent but did not necessarily reign. Outside Europe it gets more complicated but I notice that there are a whole crop of local women rulers, designated princesses, in Nigeria.  Sweetpool50 (talk) 21:14, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Fascinating! Do you think it's likely, though, that someone reading this article would be likely to imagine Hepburn's character in this film to be one of those? It seems to me that most readers most of the time will interpret "princess" in the everyday sense of a female member of a royal family who isn't a queen, in which case concision takes priority and simply "princess" is sufficient. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:53, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

text: I owe you an apology, . I mistakenly thought you had added the 'royal' whereas you had deleted the word as having no sanction from the film. I've taken out the offending word. Sweetpool50 (talk) 23:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-royal princesses