Talk:Youth (2015 film)

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the French cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Italian cinema task force.

Switzerland Low‑importance

	Switzerland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Switzerland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Switzerland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwitzerlandWikipedia:WikiProject SwitzerlandTemplate:WikiProject SwitzerlandSwitzerland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Giovinezza not banned in Italy[edit]

The source [1] is inaccurate. Fascist songs are not banned in Italy, see e.g. [2]. It states: "Actually, no clear precedent exists whether it [singing Fascist songs in the school] is a criminal offence or not. In 2010 a 16-year-old student, according to the news, was at first convicted and then acquitted" (In verità non esiste giurisprudenza definitiva in merito a se questo possa costituire apologia del fascismo punita dal 1952 con la cosiddetta legge Scelba. Nel 2010 uno studente di 16 anni, secondo alcune cronache, per esempio era stato prima condannato a 3 anni e successivamente assolto) and "On January 28th a judge in Bolzano, as requested by prosecutor, acquitted two 50-year-old men which had broadcasted Faccetta nera [a racist Fascist song] by megaphone" (Il 28 gennaio scorso un giudice bolzanino, come chiesto dal pm, ha assolto due cinquantenni veneti dall'accusa di apologia del fascismo: i due erano stati segnalati per avere diffuso con un megafono "Faccetta Nera"). --Erinaceus (talk) 20:36, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Plot[edit]

Hi Loeba. It may be obvious to you, and to anyone who read my edit, that Brenda appears without makeup. (Kudos to Vanity Fair who wrote this up on December 7.) But I'm sorry to say that that was not true of any early review of the film. I wrote that sentence only after making great effort (I contacted Fox Searchlight, which is not easy, to verify this fact) because nobody in the press recognized her in the NY Times, Rolling Stone, RogerEbert.com, Telegraph, Variety, or The Guardian. For this reason it should stand. And if anyone needs to include any other "trippy" detail that the reviewers missed, please do. We have no limit on room here. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:35, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to the talk page. I'm not sure why you assume that none of those reviewers recognised Fonda? They simply don't mention the scene...which, to be honest, supports my point that it's not a crucial part of the film. I love that scene, it's a highlight, but it's not something that makes any difference to events, you know? And if you're including it just to help with identification, then again I think it's surely clear to a majority of viewers. The camera doesn't only flash at her: it lingers, then goes to Mick where it is obvious he knows her, then goes back to Brenda again...they stare at each other for a good 10 seconds, which is enough time for viewers to work it out. And I just really don't think it's our job to provide explanations in the plot summary - you never see things like that on here. It jars, as well, because at no point in the plot does it say "Fonda", until we randomly write "Fonda again, this time without make-up". Anyway, your last sentence made me think of a solution - we could include a bit that says something like "Interspersed throughout the film are surreal sequences, such as..." How's that? I would support that because this film really isn't about the plot, and the approach/atmosphere isn't quite communicated at the moment. --Loeba (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you can write it, please go ahead. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:32, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay done. I'm not sure it will last, but we'll see. --Loeba (talk) 11:14, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Loeba, great work. I agree with your choices, especially the Paloma Faith video. Thank you very much for your idea and for resolving this! -SusanLesch (talk) 16:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Youth (2015 film). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150418084150/http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/article/61306.html to http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/article/61306.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 06:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]