Talk:Touch of Evil

message: One of the links at the bottom of the page goes to epinions.com, and isn't really an "article" per se. Is this okay? Karatloz 12:33, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Link

message: This article is badly in need of a cleanup. It reads more as a review of the film or an essay on its subject matter than a POV report. For instance: "Marlene Dietrich as Tanya, a cigar-smoking Mexican gypsy brothel owner with huge beautiful eyes..." "Touch of Evil is rich and ripe with menace and atmosphere..." "Universal International acquiesced with bad grace..." and so on. PBP 04:55, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I improved the plot section, will work on a director's trademark, etc section later.Xijjix 18:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: I added information of the Touch of Evil restoration premiere at Cannes being cancelled because of litigation from Welles' daughter Beatrice. I was incredibly surprised that the information was not in the article, as it seems to be an important fact to me. If the one reference isn't enough, I can provide more. Green451 03:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I should also note that I have nothing personal against Beatrice Welles, it just seemed to me that this was a piece of information that should be in the article. Green451 01:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

text: yeaaa, you even hear someone say...'here comes the Coroner', and Joseph Cotten appears, big as life onscreen. 2602:304:CDAF:A3D0:BCBE:C467:8C2B:1080 (talk) 03:51, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Added information

message: :Image:Touchofevil.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 05:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Touchofevil.jpg

message: Welles stated in the 58 page memo that the film was no longer his version - it was the studio's cut, but as such he was willing to help them with it. Someone replace "director's cut" with "posthumous director's cleanup edit of studio version" if you want the truth of the matter.71.205.219.229 (talk) 00:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a Director's Cut

message: There's been plenty of online articles about the "venetian blind" matting of the picture, which basically cropped the full-frame image released on VHS, but I don't see any mention of the controversy or criticism here.71.205.219.229 (talk) 00:30, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean? This is standard practice with 1.85:1 widescreen films. The film is shot full-frame in-camera, but is composed for widescreen. The picture is then matted in the movie theatre (or the widescreen DVD). The VHS version actually contains more picture than the director intended the viewer to see, which can lead to boom mikes, lights, etc. being seen. See the 35 mm film article's section on widescreen for more information. Green451 (talk) 16:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Widescreen Matting Controversy

message: I feel that the summary in many cases is badly worded. Also the ending is missing a lot from the movie where Quinlan threatens to frame Vargas. It is alos missing his final lines to Pete, "Pete, thats the second bullet I stopped for you." Also something needs to be said about Tana's final speech. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.251.22 (talk) 01:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot Summary 

message: My memory is that at the end of the film, it is reported that the suspect has confessed, that Quinlan was probably right when he said that everyone he'd framed was in fact guilty.
Does that match what other people remember? It does make a difference to the film's implications.--GwydionM (talk) 13:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I just watched it last night (coincidentally), and at the end after Quinlan dies they say that the kid confessed to the bombing. That doesn't mean that Quinlan was right about everyone else though. Not at all. Steven Walling (talk) 20:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Framed suspect was guilty?

message: *In one part of the Movie Quinlan rambles on about how his wife had been strangled . Yet in the movie Quinlan strangles one of his own criminal associates. Does this imply that Quinlan himself killed his wife? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.126.88 (talk) 13:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Quinlan other killing?

message: *  ... plot synopsis, review, cast, production credits, awards
Reference available for citing in the article body. Erik (talk) 20:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Allmovie

message: I added citations for the two assertions flagged as needing them. Can the "article needs citations" notice be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alan.A.Mick (talk • contribs) 02:42, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I have done so. If anyone finds specific claims dubious they can tag them. μηδείς (talk) 03:32, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove "This article needs additional citations for verification."

message: EDIT REQUEST 
The "Differing versions" section now needs to be updated to include a "newly restorded version.
On April 11, 2014 the worldwide premiere of the newly restored 1958 Heston film Touch of Evil took place at the historic Chinese Theatre in Hollywood.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/charlton-heston-gets-a-postage-695505
Ammobox (talk) 00:44, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newly Restored Version of the Film 

message: I have watched TOUCH OF EVIL several times, in its latest version, and strongly question whether there is ever a suggestion that the Janet Leigh character, "Susan Vargas," is raped.  Molested, yes, and forced to submit to drug use.  But I don't think a rape would have been permitted in a Hollywood picture of this type in 1958.
I also think the figure of the older "Grandi" (Akim Tamiroff) belongs higher up in the article.
SuleymanSchwartzSuleymanSchwartz (talk) 10:35, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Janet Leigh Character Raped? 

message: Why is there no info on critical reception, either contemporary or modern, on such an "important" film? It really makes this whole article kinda pointless (sorta like Orson's fatuous epics). 2601:80:C102:27C5:6449:EEFD:2F78:8DA6 (talk) 01:09, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  No critical reception section? 

message: HOW can there be an article on "Touch of Evil" that does NOT mention the extended tracking shot that opens the film? This is an travesty! Gil gosseyn (talk) 12:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:SOFIXIT. DonIago (talk) 14:03, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

text: Added basic info on the opening crane shot. More could be said! --Jeremy Butler (talk) 13:57, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening tracking shot