Talk:Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle/Archive 1

message: get it ;) Andman8 05:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Got it. Fixed it.  Mdsummermsw 18:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: importance High

message: I loathed this film for its hatred of whites. Every white is bad, while every black or Asian is good seems to be the message in this crap film. Not to mention its loathing of gays. The film is unfunny and offensive.
::* aw shutup. whites have been biased against blacks and asians for centuries. as for being anti-gay, hell kumar just so happened to be straight vis-a-vis the male nurse, so what's the problem? that was the funniest part of the movie.
I'm more upset about the womem in the movie. With the exception of harolds love interest, all the other women in the movie were portrayed as nymphomaniacs and their only purpose in the story were to be sex objects.
:"Harold and Kumar" makes fun of the kind of racism that non-whites have always gone through in America, and I see it really struck a personal nerve with the author of the first paragraph.  Hit a little too close to home?  Crying "anti-white racism" is a standard tactic of white-supremacist bigots nowadays, in response to people who call them out on their own racism towards non-whites.  David Duke in particular has pioneered this tactic.  By the way, there WERE sympathetic white characters in the film -- Rosenberg and Goldstein... oh, wait, they're Jewish.  And Jews don't count as real whites in the eyes of white supremacists.  
'Typical response from someone with no defense...change the topic. Instead of refuting my correct assertion that the movie is
racist against white people, you call me a white supremist and as a result I am filing a hate crimes complaint against you with 
Wikipedia.
'''
:However, I will concede that the charges of homophobia and sexism do have more merit -- but unfortunately that seems to be standard for the "dumb raunchy comedy" genre that this movie comes from.  Oh well, you can't have everything.
:what about the hippie at princeton, or the two battleshits girls? let alone rosenburg and goldstein. you're claims of anti-white racism are busted, and i'm one of the whitest guys you'll meet. is it simply the fact you can't handle a film without a white lead? Xcomradex 00:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claims of "anti-white racism" 

message: It says in the entry that the film was well received by critics. Hmm... Check out the BBC's review here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2005/02/22/harold_and_kumar_2005_review.shtml
: This is such an "American" film (i'll bet 90% of those outside the US did not even know what White Castle was), that i imagine the critics were pretty polarised between the US and elsewhere. A wide sample of US reviews are in general, relatively positive, 72% ("The likable leads and subversion of racial stereotypes elevate Harold and Kumar above the typical stoner comedy.") and 64%. Quite how we sample global response to a film, i don't know. Rockpocket (talk) 19:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fair enough. Rockpocket (talk) 19:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Well received by critics?

message: I removed the line "Harold & Kumar often approaches epiphanies about racial stereotypes and then ends up dodging them in exchange for cheap gags. This juxtaposition often ends up leaving more of an impression than could be left if the situations were approached seriously." as this appeared to be POV to me.  — Asbestos | Talk 16:28, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: POV?

message: I changed the opening line from released internationally as to released in some countries as because here in Australia, it's called Harold and Kumar go to White Castle even though we don't have White Castle's here :) Strangely enough, the same thing happened with "Encino Man"... released in the rest of the world as "California Man" as they didn't think non-Americans would know what Encino was.  For some reason here in Australia we got it as Encino Man too.  MrHate 03:30, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
In Canada they released the Movie as Haorld and Kumar go to white castle and there aren't any in Canada. Plus the movie was filmed here in the great white north. Canadian Colin, November 29th, 2005
:There aren't any in Canada, true, but there are in Detroit; meaning many Canadians will be familiar with it.  Likewise, when I was in college (at Bowling Green State University south of Detroit), I knew of Tim Horton's long before any locations opened in the United States. -- SwissCelt 19:01, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Harold and Kumar get the Munchies

message: Skull cap? Isn't it called Kippah?
:Or, more commonly a yarmulke, which is what I've changed it to. — Asbestos | Talk 20:46, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Skull Cap? 

message: Explaining my rather bold edit: I was copyediting the plot section, and thought a small segment explaining the characters would make things clearer. Well, by the time that had been done, the plot section itself was looking mighty redundant. I think that Harold & Kumar, being such a picaresque movie, benefits more from a treatment of characters rather than an inevitably "And then"-ish plot summary. However, that's just my opinion.  RMoloney 00:12, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Characters rather than plot 

message: The article never actually uses the word "marijuana", but rather just "weed", with various links: weed (unpipied, obviously an incorrect link) weed piped to "marijuana", and weed piped to "cannabis (drug).  We should probably settle on one.  Since "weed" is a slang term, it should probably be "marijana" on first reference too.  Whaddya think? --Jfruh 20:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  marijuana terms 

message: I have verified the existence of a White Castle in New Brunswick, which has been reported on Google Local and some other websites (Google it, you'll find out.) It is a couple of doors away from the Coach USA/Suburban Transit bus depot/garage on Somerset St. 204.52.215.107 02:07, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also one in legdewood, nj.--Dangerous-Boy 20:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  White Castle in New Brunswick, NJ 

message: Harold's dad has an accent.  Doesn't this mean Harold is first generation?
:I think you mean Kumar.--Dangerous-Boy 20:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but it indicates where a person was raised.  It's true, Kumar's father could have been born in the US and then raised overseas, but it's much more unlikely than his being an immigrant. BillMcGonigle 00:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Vs. Second Generation 

message: Whats the name of Freakshows wife in Real Life, not in the movie.
:here ya go, ya big ol' perve :p riana 16:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the name of Freakshows wfie? 

message: He enjoys listening to Phish and writing poetry of questionable merit. He overcharges Kumar for weed, claiming he is a "business hippie."
I'm not going to delete this, but this doesn't sound like it belongs here.  I have no idea where the person who wrote this got this from.  Listening to Phish and writing bad poetry are two major stereotypes of hippies, but not once in the film is it ever indicated that Bradley Thomas listens to Phish or writes poetry.  Bradley Thomas is really a very minor character and the film doesn't go into depth on him at all.   Did I miss something?
It is implied that Bradley listens Phish because after Kumar mentions Phish and Poetry, Bradley says "My poetry is not lame," implying that he is guilty of atleast the poetry.  It is up to the audience to assume the rest, whether to support the stereotype or deny it.
: That's actually Kumar's description of BT the BH. I didn't add it, and it should be reworded. !BabuBhatt 00:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of Bradley Thomas, the "business hippie" 

message: It says here that the opening is filmed at IBM office building in Markham ON. Actually, its filmed in a building in Toronto, just meters away from the border to Markham
: Yeah the building is the Steelestech Building at Victoria Park and Steeles. --Yllianos 17:39, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location 

message: Let's try it this way: the content of this article and the movie may or may not be factual and/or racist and/or whatever else. The point is a whole buttload of stuff in this article is OR. Most of this talk page is arguing facts. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. Is it verifiable from a source? Most of the content is not. Mdsummermsw 19:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research 

message: For the love of all that is right and good in the world, Kumar does NOT lick Harold, the cheetah does. If you think otherwise, I invite you to plunk down another 5 bucks to rent this trash a second time to verify that. In this movie where very little makes sense, Kumar did not decide that the best way to wake up his friend is to lick him.  Mdsummermsw 14:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kumar licks Harold on the cheek, because he'd been out for half an hour and he thought 'something gay' might wake him up.  You can send me that $5 instead. BillMcGonigle 00:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licking 

message: Is Kumar's shirt really so important as to warrant a whole section about the logo? It seems incredibly irrelevant and out of place. L4ck 0f 54n17y 04:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Meekrab

message: At the end of the film Harold is in White Castle and sees his two co-workers that (earlier) coerced him to do their work.  Turns out they spent their time with whores.  Anyway, Harold tells them off and says something that makes the girls leave the two co-workers.  I don't know the details, but I do know it is missing from the page.  Can somebody add? 32.97.110.142 17:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Telling off Harold's coworkers 

message: Just after the jeep is stolen from the Punks one says to another "Dude that was so not extreme" to which he replies "I know, Extreme Sport Punk #1" This is obviously there to reference the generally lazy naming of bit "speaking role" players in films (especially in teen comedies). Could this be integrated into the article somehow? Possibly in the stereotyping section. Or possibly renaming the section to "Themes" with "Stereotyping and Racism" and "Self-reflexive Satire" as subsections? Just some suggestions. --Offput 01:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "I know, Extreme Sports Punk #1" 

message: Does anyone have information as to why White Castle was chosen for the film as opposed to other chains? Was it an endorsement deal, etc.? Ham Pastrami 06:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why White Castle?