Talk:John Milius

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Please do not delete talk discussions without consensus approval of all parties. See Talk page guidelines.
Blanking pages in itself may be construed as vandalism.

Original discussion[edit]

attempted to remove the following controversial passages as they seem indicate distinct gun politics of milius and the writer. article draws too heavy on "red dawn" and overlooks other, more popular pieces such as "big wednesday" and "apocalypse now".

"This film is a favorite of the American right wing, especially gun control opponents and it includes veiled references to the evil of firearms registration in the script. (Milius is a member of the board of directors of the National Rifle Association, an avid gun collector and a strong opponent of gun control laws.)"

Milius is proud about his conservatism in liberal Hollywood; he also found himself very popular during the 1992 LA riots, when some of his liberal friends came calling, asking for access to his firearms collection to defend their homes.

these quotes are not only not neutral, but inaccurate. patrick swayze and charlie sheen's characters are the only ones whom have had prior gun training and may have owned guns prior to the incident, the other kids were shown to be trained by the above.

See revisions. Haven't actually watched the film since it was in the theaters.

"...composed of local high school students who are all...gun owners."
"They are all crack shots, having...owned guns as teenagers."

this quote is decidly based on biased opinion.

"The moral of the film is...own guns and defend America from invasion!"

This is tongue in cheek, just like the movie. If some Wikipedians can't handle that; tough.

  • That is absurd. Tongue-in-cheek does not under any circumstances belong in an encyclopaedia article on the basis that it is patently unencyclopaedic. It isn't so much that Wikipedians cannot handle it as that Wikipedians agree it is not appropriate. Furthermore, that entire paragraph is fairly irrelevant; if it is not only irrelevant but also PoV, I suggest it be deleted entirely. The paragraph is in such poor grammatical format as well (we do not use parantheses on entire paragraphs) that I am going to rewrite it now. Falcon June 28, 2005 05:27 (UTC)

removal of check pov[edit]

if there's no further objection to the edit....i'm removing the check pov template. i think a better image could be found but it's something he licenced so i guess unless someone else wants to did up a better one, then that the one that's going to stick. -Seasee 01:48, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

response to "If some Wikipedians can't handle that; tough"[edit]

individual articles are not the place to air personal opinions. whether meant in jest or not, it is official Wikipedia policy is that all articles should be written from a neutral point of view: without bias, representing all views fairly. According to Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales, NPOV is "absolute and non-negotiable". [1]

For guidance on making an article conform to the neutral point of view (NPOV), please see the Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial.

Seasee 07:35, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A third opinion re. PoV[edit]

The following statements, in my opinion, are PoV:

  • "This film is a favorite of the American right wing, especially gun control opponents and it includes veiled references to the evil of firearms registration in the script. (Milius is a member of the board of directors of the National Rifle Association, an avid gun collector and a strong opponent of gun control laws.)"
    • A sourced quote would be nice. These are weasel words in the first sentence unless they are attributed to somebody. The sentence in brackets should not be in brackets (grammar) and should be incorporated as a datum in another paragraph, perhaps about the director's political alignment. Using it to prove that his films are right-wing biased is unquestionably PoV.
  • "The moral of the film is...own guns and defend America from invasion!"
    • You cannot state that without an attributed quote. Additionally, it is most likely false and irrelevant, and not least of all unencyclopaedic. It should not appear out of attributed quotations in a relevant place.

In short, this article is PoV not necessarily because of an attempt to pust a particular viewpoint but because of some person's (I didn't look to see whose) insistance on filling the article up with unencyclopaedic and largely opinion-based nonsense. Due to that, I would almost consider a cleanup flag. Falcon June 28, 2005 05:59 (UTC)

  • The first one still remains. Please fix or dispute it before removing the NPOV flag. Falcon June 29, 2005 00:10 (UTC)

further thoughts[edit]

whether the film is or is not "a favorite of the american right wing...", it's a blanket sterotypical statement. it is just like saying "liberals are child murderers because abortion is murder (hillary clinton voted pro-choice so she's...)" or "some members of al-qaeda are of arabic descent as is john abizaid which makes him....". i'm sure there are "right wingers" out there that hate this movie and "liberals" who have guns and oppose gun control. I happen to know of both.

secondly, it sounds like all john milius does is sit around and talks about guns. how much he loves guns, how every one should have a gun and how you'll have to take his gun from his cold dead hands (which incidentally is how a gun proponent loses his gun in the film...how's that for a veiled reference on why everyone should own a gun?).

as someone who has met john milius and have spoken with him, i know him to be pretty moderate and well versed. this is an article about "john milius" and not "the secret message behind red dawn".

thus, the moral of this story is "sometimes gun control means use both hands" Seasee 29 June 2005 07:48 (UTC)

revision as of 29 June 2005 19:42[edit]

nice job! i'm satisfied with this edit if you are. thanks for your cooperation. Seasee 30 June 2005 21:37 (UTC)

  • I like it too. I would also like to state that I am very pleased that Wellreadone has decided to remove the PoV comment. I am, however, highly disappointed in his decision to blank the talkpage again after having been warned about doing so twice. Falcon July 2, 2005 05:22 (UTC)

Hunt for Red October?[edit]

i don't understand the statement that indicates milius had something to do with the writing or directing of Hunt for Red October. imdb doesn't list him has having anything to do with it, leading me to question the sourcing of this.

the article might be served by a reorganization of his film credits... group movies that he had a major involvement with (Red Dawn, Conan the Barbarian) together, and movies that he merely contributed to (Dirty Harry, Jaws, HfRO if he did in fact have a role), especially in an uncredited capacity, together too, noting his lesser involvement. this would do a lot for the clarity and quality of information in the article


Milius rewrote a lot of Sean Connery's dialogue at his request, and probably other elements of the story as well to make it more connerycentric. IMDB is lame anyway. Jedpressgrove 21:15, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Movies and Guns in the article[edit]

The paragraph starting with "Zen Anarchist" seems to be out of place. I'm thinking it could be moved to the end, but if it is, it seems to me it would need to be re-written to some extent. I have no interest in doing so, so anyone who wants to can move that. It just seems odd to me that it suddenly turns from an article about his movies to a one-line paragraph about guns then slips back into the movie talk again. I think seperating the two topics (movies and gun involvement) would make for a better article. Gohst 03:32, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Mentor" to George Lucas?[edit]

They're the same age, were fellow USC students together and Lucas arguably achieved a successful filmmaker career before Milius did. Removing "mentor" term. --Oakshade 18:11, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Apocalypse Now credit...[edit]

Is very misleading, his version was very different in tone to Coppola's version. I wasn't surprised to find a hoard of POV concerns in the discussion page.

I agree. This whole article has a tone that tries to make Milius's accomplishments greater than they are. If they really are that impressive please cite sources and reword sentences that have the form of misleading, e.g. "Milius wrote, co-wrote and/or directed popular and critically acclaimed films such as..." It would be similar to me saying, "I have run a marathon, half marathon, or slept on the couch every Saturday for the past three years." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.56.207.23 (talk) 05:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The quote by Milius on writing the screenplay for Apocalypse Now can't be true. "There was no book". Come on, seriously ... ? Amandashusse (talk) 12:50, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnicity[edit]

Is he or isn't he Jewish? Milius is a Lithuanian surname; shouldn't he be in the Lithuanian American list as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.97.27.254 (talk) 09:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional Representations[edit]

Currently includes the following:

"The character Walter Sobchak (played by John Goodman) in The Big Lebowski is loosely based on certain interests and mannerisms of Milius; however, the character's dialogue is right from the Milius playbook."

This is substandard on various counts.

If the information claimed is taken at face value, why "however"? The word suggests some sort of contradiction or reversed expectation between the two clauses of the sentences, when in fact the second clause merely reinforces the first.

More importantly, however, the information cannot be taken at face value. Some citation, first- or at least second-hand, from the Coen brothers is needed, or else who knows if the character is based on Milius or not? Certainly, dialogue "right from the Milius playbook" is pure opinion, and suggests the possibility that this is the only reason to connect Sobchak with Milius.

I wouldn't be surprised if Sobchak is a Milius joke reference, but we can't just assert such a thing, or base such a claim on a fancied similarity of dialogue. We need confirmation from the Coens or perhaps word-for-word dialogue matches from Milius films. Otherwise, the passage should be removed. 209.181.57.144 (talk) 06:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, this is a poorly written description. The Coens have said, on record, that Sobchak is a compilation of four real people, one of whom is Milius. Take from that what you will.... DFS (talk) 06:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The citation for this is the IMDb biog/trivia page for Milius, which isn't a valid source, so I've removed it until a proper citation can be given. 79.69.192.178 (talk) 13:31, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Big Lebowski[edit]

This was removed from the article for not being well sourced:

He was the inspiration for the characters Walter Sobchak in The Big Lebowski and John Milner in American Graffiti. ref http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0587518/bio /ref ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:27, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Milius a convert to Judaism[edit]

I removed the following brief sentence:

He was raised Jewish.[1]

In the linked interview, he stated that he was Jewish, but not that he was raised Jewish. I believe he converted to Judaism later, much like the "Walter" character in The Big Lebowski which is based on him. When the Jewhoo website was up, it stated this. But it hasn't been operating for a few years and I can't easily find an alternate source.

--Aardvark114 (talk) 04:19, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected the comment accordingly (my first edit was done before reading your post). Be that as it may, the interview I'm using as a reference leaves little room for discussion as to what his religious allegiance is... at least since the interview was done. Walter Sobchak0 (talk) 09:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Milius didn't convert to anything. He's Jewish by birth. Both of his parents were Jewish. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 10:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ by Ken P. "An Interview with John Milius - Movies Feature at IGN". Uk.movies.ign.com. Retrieved 2010-05-22.

Writer/co-writer for "1941"?[edit]

The Career section lists 1941 as one of the films Milius wrote or co-wrote. However, the film's page only mentions Milius directed the movie's teaser trailer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fustigate314159 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Worst Page on Wikipedia?[edit]

I don't know enough about the technical end of business to fix it, but this page is the worst I've ever seen. It isn't even displaying correctly. Can someone deal with the weird quotation formatting? - YTH — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.67.13.223 (talk) 13:35, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There much worse articles on WP. But the article does have a number of problems: Much too hagiographical tone, lots of unsourced material, to much info about 'talks' for movies that never got made, single sentence paragraphs. I'm starting to fix them all. Ashmoo (talk) 11:19, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on John Milius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cancer[edit]

Why doesn't the article mention that he has pancreatic cancer? (217.42.104.20 (talk) 18:24, 25 March 2016 (UTC))[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Milius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Big Jim??[edit]

What is this supposed to mean?: "He was also the inspiration for the character of Big Jim in the enormously successful American Graffiti (1973).[5]" Big Jim Pierce was a real person who created two cars (including the deuce coupe) for the film American Graffiti, so how could Milius be an 'inspiration' for a 'character' who isn't actually in the movie, but is in fact a real person who worked for the production?

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Milius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:28, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No photograph?[edit]

Somebody needs to find a picture of him for this article. The Final Edict (talk) 14:52, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Milius&oldid=1199692939"