User talk:Loeba/Archive7

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

Reviewing[edit]

I'm greatly in your debt for your review of Hugh Walpole, and I hope you will feel free to call in that debt any time you think my input at PR or FAC would be of use. Please don't hesitate. Tim riley (talk) 16:30, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't consider there to be any debt but if you're offering, great! I don't think I'll have anything review-ready for a while but I'll come knocking when I do. --Loeba (talk) 17:29, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good. Well mind you do! Tim riley (talk) 19:08, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nolan[edit]

Hi Loeba, Great additions to the article; loved the quote regarding his "leap of faith" jump from Following to Memento, and the rephrasing(s) made the article flow better. Two thumbs up. Grateful for the review and edits. When I reached out I was hoping to solicit some advice, I did not expect the magnitude of help and friendly respons I got. Above and beyond.

Happy new year! Sammyjankis88 (talk) 23:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright, we've all got to help each other out haven't we :) I'm mostly here to improve actor and director coverage, and he's an important figure so I'd like it to be a quality article. Like I said there's still some things I'd planing to do when I find the time, but I reckon you'll be able to nominate it for GA soon. I don't know about the sources though, you'll have to check that they are all acceptable (no blogs or anything) first. --Loeba (talk) 19:22, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Add: Oh, and the lead does still need work...maybe I'll have a go at it. --Loeba (talk) 19:41, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FAC[edit]

Hugh Walpole, fresh from peer review, is now at FAC. If you have time and inclination to look in, it will be esteemed a favour. – Tim riley (talk) 12:44, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Dallas Buyers Club may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • world-traveler-ron-woodroof-smuggles-drugs----and-hope----for-people-with-aids.ece Ron Woodroof] ([[Matthew McConaughey]]—an electrician and rodeo cowboy with [[homophobic]] views—is diagnosed with
  • com/artist/various-artists/release/dallas-buyers-club?h=02&partner=264 |title=Dallas Buyers Club (Music From An... (2013) | Various Artists | MP3 Downloads 7digital United States |

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:13, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PR request[edit]

Hi, since you're more oriented towards film-related biographies, can you take part in this PR as it might interest you. —Vensatry (Ping me) 16:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I may be able to chip in but I don't want to guarantee it - I've been off work for a couple of weeks but I'm back full time now, which is tiring, and I have several other wiki-commitments which will take up most of the time I spend here...but it's only a short article, so I'll try and take a look at some point. --Loeba (talk) 20:49, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 08 January 2014[edit]

Oscar[edit]

File:Laurel & Hardy dancing.gif The silent cinema award of excellence
For your fantastic work on Charlie Chaplin which has recently been promoted to featured article status. Your research, resilience, determination and commitment is to be both admired and applauded. Congratulations! CassiantoTalk 20:29, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oooh what a great barn star! Thanks so much for all the support you've given Cass. Woop! --Loeba (talk) 20:37, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!![edit]

There's another special one! Thank you so much, I'm chuffed :D --Loeba (talk) 21:18, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So amazing!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:21, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

French cinema[edit]

I've noticed our coverage of films by year of the 1930s and 1940s is particularly poor. I've just been going through adding the correct external links to banks of films in List of French films of 1939. I was wondering as a long term project if you'd be interested in helping me build the lists by year adding the top films from imdb and comparing with the cinema francais site. I just think that France probably had a lot of great movies from that period which ought to at least be listed on here. I'll complete adding the links for 1940-present tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:33, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very worthy project! I love classic French films. It also seems a bit daunting (even making stub articles always seems to take longer than I expect) but I'll try and help add some...I don't think they made all that many films in the early-mid '40s, the industry was greatly disturbed by the war and occupation. --Loeba (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that's true I hadn't thought of that. 1930s and late 40s and 1950s though I think would have lots of them. Some of the years only have a handful of films at present on here but if you look on the cinema francais website there's tons of films missing which are considered to be the year's top films. Have a browse here. It's fun I think seeing all those old film posters and by year. Surprisingly 1944 has quite a few films [1] but as you can see most didn't premiere until after the war. Fortunately on imdb you can copy the lists with the director and top billed cast which will help at least. I think that's going to be an area I'll working on stubbing this year, but having them red linked at least is a start!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:54, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Rules of the Game is a great one of course. I love the joke about something like "a sort of gaudy green that only the English could bear"!! For me classic French cinema just had more authenticity to it, it felt more like the camera was capturing them rather than them trying to capture the camera as in many Hollywood films, do you know what I mean? The actors had a lot of charm. I must try to see more from that period. Boudu Saved from Drowning is one I've been meaning to watch.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:28, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh god yeah that's one of my all-time favourites. Renoir was a genius. Boudu is a must-see for the wonderful Michel Simon, who also stars in one of my top ten films of all time, L'Atalante. If you haven't seen Children of Paradise make that a priority, which would also be in my top ten. An absolute masterpiece IMO. French films were definitely more authentic at that time, and weren't so limited by the censors. --Loeba (talk) 14:36, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
La Chienne is also one at the top of my list for watching! It's just the quality of the character interaction which is the strength I think which is beautiful to watch.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:38, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yep definitely see that, and its remake Scarlet Street which is one of the greatest noirs ever. One lesser known '30s film that I loved was La belle équipe.--Loeba (talk) 14:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I'm sure there's quite a lot of missing ones in those lists which are not well known but are really very good. I'll watch La Chienne later and will make a note to try to watch all the ones you mentioned if I can find the films with subtitles!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How many awesome crime thrillers came out in 1971? Get Carter, Play Misty for Me, Dirty Harry, Klute, The French Connection, The Anderson Tapes etc. I love the feel of films of that period, really atmospheric and in terms of content revolutionary. Most early 70s films I've watched have been edgier than in any other period, even Cabaret a musical had an edge!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:18, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And you haven't even mentioned my top three: A Clockwork Orange, 10 Rillington Place and Straw Dogs! Yeah the 70s was the best. I'd never heard of 10 Rillington but watched it on TV because it sounded interesting, and oh my god it's incredible. A completely unforgettable film, John Hurt gives one of the best performances I've ever seen and Attenborough is brilliant as well. The article really needs a "reception" section actually... --Loeba (talk) 19:53, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I don't think of Clockwork as a crime thriller, it's more a "juvenile delinquency" film but if you broaden it to crime film what an incredible year. I've not seen 10 Rillington or Straw Dogs but I'll make a note to watch those too!! Ha the quote " Released theatrically the same year as A Clockwork Orange, The French Connection, and Dirty Harry, the film sparked heated controversy over the perceived increase of violence in cinema". Seems others noticed too, but saw it negatively rather than positively..♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Straw Dogs certainly isn't for everyone (much like A Clockwork Orange) but I think it's pretty masterful. My favourite Peckinpah film. --Loeba (talk) 20:29, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just watched Straw Dogs!! Wow what an atmosphere, loved it!! The oppressive rural thing reminded me of Ryan's Daughter or The Wicker Man. Dustin Hoffman fending off intruders doesn't quite have the same effect as somebody macho like Clint Eastwood or somebody using his 44 Magnum but in a way that's what makes it better. I spotted some masterful devices in the film, the most striking one was contrasting the children's party to her rape flash backs. It is me though or did she enjoy the first guy who raped her? Just reading the article which discusses the ambiguity. My perception of it was that she was loving the first guy but hating the second one. The uncut version supposedly clarifies it but it definitely left me with that impression... ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:12, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing that you probably loved Rocco and His Brothers but I really don't get the hype over it. The Leopard too seemed overrated. It's good but I really can't see it as this great masterpiece. Too melodramatic in part and Delon at the end really overacts to the point it seems fake and annoying. I'd actually prefer it if it was dubbed in English rather than English subtitles, it makes it harder to read the text and watch for me.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The ending gets pretty overblown but I loved most of it. It has a great feel to it, I thought - very raw and realistic but also very cinematic. Do you always have trouble with subs or was it something particular about that film? Glad you loved Straw Dogs! Yes the rape scene is famously controversial. I remember thinking the editing was incredible in that whole sequence...and it wasn't even nominated for editing at the Oscars, which shows how wary Hollywood was of the film... --Loeba (talk) 16:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, generally I find it difficult to really watch and understand with the subtitles as you have to take in two things at once, and I find that if I get too engrossed in the visual and interaction (which I often like to do in good looking films and scenes) I miss some of the text and don't always take in everything that is said. I've had similar problems with some of the Renoir ones. I actually prefer the cheesy dubbing, even if it is of course more beautiful to have the original language. The latter half of Rocco got better and the contrast of his boxing success with the stabbing I thought was masterful, but the ending was overcooked and Delon came across as fake in the crying scene, you wouldn't react that quickly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm I don't have any trouble with subs. I just try to read them really quickly and make sure I can still take in the visuals. --Loeba (talk) 19:17, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not terribly difficult for me, but it definitely disrupts my relaxed viewing of the film having to constantly flicker back and forth between the text and the scene with my eyes rather than purely concentrating on the visual; it doesn't help with a large monitor and text right at the bottom!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:59, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

La Chienne is great!! The ending was awesome!! I wonder how it went down with the public at the time of release, slapping women, stabbing in a bed, him getting away scott free!!! Just imagining how it would have gone down in the US during that period!! Will try to watch more of your suggestions later in the week! 10 Rippington already looks quite frightening, although Attenborough doesn't strike me as scary! BTW if you paste google book urls into here you can draw them up quick and fully easily.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just seen 10 Rillington Place. A superb film. The first half for me, especially the abortion scene was actually one of the most "disturbing" moments I've seen in film, that abortion scene and the look of the room and all that made me feel physically sick, and that's extremely rare for me. I think it was because the look of the house, the claustrophic feel and the decor (it really looked the sort of house which would smell like dead people were hidden behind the walls) and the situation really felt genuine. I never thought Attenborough could create such a demeanour but he really did wonderfully. French Connection was very good but no way was Hackman's performance anywhere near as good! I'm not sure though how you could consider Repulsion more disturbing that Rillington though!! Ha just spotted that the black guy at the end is Rudolph Walker from Eastenders!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:19, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I knew nothing of the real story going in, so I was shocked when Hurt's character was blamed. So sad. As for finding Repulsion more disturbing - I don't know, I watched Repulsion at night whereas I watched Rillington during the day, and something about the ending of Repulsion - where the sister has to get home and discover everything - really got through to me and upset me. I remembered another "most disturbing" by the way - Heavenly Creatures, especially since it's a true story. That is so fucked up. --Loeba (talk) 07:45, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Me it was vice versa, I watched Repulsion in the afternoon and 10 Rillington Place in the dark! Repulsion for me is only a bit disturbing right at the end when the sister returns, Rillington on the other hand for me is quite disturbing in the first half of the film, up to the point that Hurt goes to Merthyr anyway. I think it was Judy's pretty, innocent face and trust in him, the crying baby, and the gruesome tools in the medi bag and gas tap and the way Attenborough approached it with the "take off your undergarments" and then her on the floor which deeply creeped me out. Pierrepoint (film) is one now on my list to see.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What did you think of Julianne Moore's The Kid's are All Right? Annette Bening plays a convincing lesbian doesn't she!! Have you seen Yol? Shaft was rather disappointing, and that's coming from somebody who is a big fan of 70s crime/action films. He was as cool as hell, the look of the film and the jazz funk music was great but I found the plot and scope of the film really quite bland and uninspiring. With a decent script it could have been an awesome film, but it was still pretty good regardless on weight of how cool it looks and some of the lines in the film, I just wish the plot wasn't so restricted and had something with a bit more bite. It has a 88% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and The Getaway 85%. The Getaway was 20 times better!! Straight Time has a 100% rating though and it's well-deserved.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:36, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I adore The Kids Are All Right. They're both utterly brilliant in it. No I haven't seen Yol (or Shaft - not really my sort of thing but maybe one day). --Loeba (talk) 17:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've just seen Broken Blossoms. Excellent, but quite sad.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:55, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen The Palm Beach Story? It's really funny, reminds me a bit of Some Like it Hot.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:33, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hell yeah that's one of my favourites! Preston Sturges made wonderful films and that one is #1 for me. --Loeba (talk) 18:24, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I love it when she's trying to climb up into the top bunk and stands on his glasses LOL!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:37, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to be the only person on the Internet who thought Night of the Living Dead was rather boring and sucked... Most of the film was him hammering nails into boards and an annoying ongoing silly news report on radio/TV. The only good part was when the truck blew up and they started feasting on them and when the daughter killed the mother!! It was watchable, but to say it's this great classic of cinema, one of the most overrated films I've ever seen put it that way.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:28, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I liked that one, but I thought Dawn of the Dead was rubbish. The zombies look like they just have white facepaint on! --Loeba (talk) 22:15, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh it's better than Dawn of the Dead, but one of the best horror films ever made? No way. There's a Thai horror film I saw while back which was excellent, I can't remember what it was though. Nang Nak that's it I think. On my near future list to see is The Asphalt Jungle, His Girl Friday, The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp, Coming Home, Amarcord, and Ashes and Diamonds. I saw Umberto D the other day, what a great film, less is more... ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:52, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Asphalt Jungle is one of my favourites of the '50s, masterful. I just watched The Wolf of Wall Street - I fucking loved it! (Obviously you have to swear when talking about that film, ha) Scorsese's best since Casino. --Loeba (talk) 20:25, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You do LOL!! Yeah I thought it was bad ass, wonderful, I didn't have high hopes as an Indian friend of mine said it wasn't very good (I suspect he saw the watered down version in India). It was sort of like Casino meets Glengarry meets Fight Club wasn't it. My favourite scene was the Lamborghini country club and phone call fight on those lemmons, one of the best scenes I've seen in any movie, it was just incredibly well staged. I can't think of many film directors though who would invent some of those graphic gang bang public sex scenes and still make it look like masterful rather than seedy directing!! It's just the sort of film you want to watch drunk with a bunch of mates! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:05, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, Asphalt was a great film! Took a while to get started but it got better and better!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:49, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, The Killing (film), amazingly well shot. It joins my list of greatest films of all time I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:37, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it's amazing. Tarantino pretty shamelessly ripped it off with Reservoir Dogs, right? I still love RD but I was a bit disappointed to discover how much was copied from The Killing once I'd seen it...although at least QT is honest about its influence, and RD is still pretty unique. --Loeba (talk) 18:56, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did he? LOL I had no idea, I can't see much resemblance at all except it was a caper gone wrong and they ended up killing each other! Reservoir Dogs is very good of course, just not brilliant. The character interaction is great, but the plot for me as Roger Ebert put it "went nowhere". Still, it's a hell of a debut film! Sorry to be so slow with the Nolan review, I usually prefer to operate quickly but I was a bit concerned with the prose and the sourcing in parts mainly. I see Sammy is making good progress I'll give it a read through again on the weekend. If you could give it a read and try to polish it up a bit (if you can of course) so it flows nicely it should be a clearer pass. I'm prepared to pass it of source with those bullets still in place as it isn't a requirement, just waiting mainly on the sources I identified and the flow of the lower sections..♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:16, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh the structure as well - the way both films start off after the caper and then flash back to how it went wrong. I absolutely love Tarantino's 90s films, all three of them. They're just so entertaining, and I've loved them since I was a teenager (his films were the first to really make me excited about cinema) so I'll always have nostalgia for them. He's got pretty "silly" in the 21st century though, the only one I've really enjoyed is Inglourious Basterds (which still has its silly moments). It's a shame. --Loeba (talk) 19:27, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think Pulp Fiction is his best. That's definitely among the best films of all time. Reservoir Dogs for me could have been too if it had had a stronger script. I know the way the unusual way the film was organized after the heist was largely the point of the film but it didn't quite work with me. I think Roger Ebert said something similar and I fully agreed with what he wrote, of late though I've disagreed with quite a few of his reviews. I rather like Buscemi in those sorts of films, I really think he has a face and demeanour which really works well. He's not your typical hard nut, a bit of a weasel, but he's slick and charismatic enough to make it work. I loved him in Fargo too. I think I'll watch Barton Fink tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:15, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Eeeee Barton Fink? So so so so so so so so much love for that film. Make sure you read the article here afterwards to get a full understanding of the depth and themes. If you like Buscemi have you watched any Boardwalk Empire? It's one of the few shows I actually follow, it's pretty brilliant. --Loeba (talk) 22:22, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Me too! It's one of the few TV shows which has grabbed my attention, but I can't profess to have watched lots of episodes. I think I've seen maybe half a dozen when its been on the TV. I find it very difficult to watch TV these days. The current Three Muskateers series is supposed to be very good. I actually watched the first 15 minutes of episode 1 when I turned it off. I somehow feel like I'm wasting my time watching series, do you know what I mean? There's so many many films to see it feels a shame to watch too much of one thing and cast of actors! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:23, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Darn, Barton won't load. Watching Fear and Desire instead, I'll try Barton again later in the week! Just seen Killer's Kiss too, both are only just over an hour each. I can definitely say now that he's my favourite director. Incredible. Only film of his I haven't seen now is Full Metal Jacket. The only one I wasn't too keen on was Spartacus.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:46, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I do know what you mean about TV shows, they take up a lot of time, but they can also be extremely satisfying to invest in. Game of Thrones is thoroughly worth watching - me and the BF finally started it last summer and ended up racing through, it's completely addictive! As for Kubrick, yeah I really do think he was the best ever...practically all of his films are masterpieces! And the perfect balance between style and substance: artistically brilliant but also thoroughly entertaining. The only one I haven't seen is Fear and Desire, but based on its poor reputation I've been in no rush to get to it... --Loeba (talk) 21:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That Fear and Desire is poor is absolute rubbish, don't listen to the critics. It's a great film I think, in fact part of it is a lot like One of Our Aircraft is missing. The girl in it they tie to a tree has the most gorgeous eyes I've ever seen. I'd guess green but its in black and white! Obviously it's not going to have much depth to it had just over an hour, but the character interaction in it and techniques is top notch. Obviously it's not his best but it's very good in its own right. Why it hasn't received much acclaim beats me. I love the look of Killer's Kiss, and the idea of having the climax to the film fighting in a manequin warehouse was pure Kubrick genius!! I've just watched The Actor's Revenge, that's an atmospheric film!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
After this discussion I finally watched Fear and Desire - hmm, SK was doing his best to experiment with some interesting techniques, which is commendable, but on the whole it felt pretty lifeless and amateurish to me. Amazing how much better he'd get for his next film! Killer's Kiss is genuinely good. I'm glad I can finally say I've completed Kubrick though, so thanks for encouraging me to that! --Loeba (talk) 10:46, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to disappoint you! Obviously it was far from his best but I thought it was good! It doesn't have much depth to it as I say, but I wouldn't consider the characters in it to be lifeless. There was something about the approach of the film and the ideas with techniques and scenes which appealed to me. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:16, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh don't apologise, if there's one thing I've learned from the my time on film forums it's that everyone receives films differently and there's no right or wrong. If you enjoyed it that's cool :) I'm sure there are films I like that you thought were rubbish, no worries about that either! It's so subjective, we can never know what may agree or disagree with someone and for what reason... --Loeba (talk) 12:18, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We generally seem to agree on most though! I've just put in a suggestion at WP:Films were some new parameters like Art director and casting which I think might help. There's so many people missing who have an important part in making films and I really think at least a few of the ones like Art director etc should be listed in infobox film. You might disagree, feel free to say anything there! BTW did you see Hylda Queally which I started the other day? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:11, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah you pointed that one out to me and I forgot to comment. Good work! --Loeba (talk) 14:43, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's so many people like her who work behind the scenes in Hollywood which should have articles on here. Some of these people are really the ones who make the industry tick but rarely get mainstream credit and fame. The downside of course is that there's a lot of notable people who probably don't have much coverage and enough to create articles for. It's bad enough with film editors and cinematographers, how many of them exactly have extensive biographical coverage in books and stuff. Even Jack Cardiff doesn't seem to have that much written about him biographically. I think I'm going to look into a few of my favourite films and find out who the art director was etc and start them if missing! Yup I've passed Nolan, much improved. Sammy might deserve most of the credit but you actually removed the huge quote which was my biggest concern! I've left some pointers to improve further anyway, but it's not close to FA quality yet.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:46, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I completely agree that it's some way off FA, but I'm pretty sure Sammy will be delighted with GA. Thanks again for doing the review! It's nice that we were able to get one done without it lingering at GAN for months as I think he's been working on it for ages and has already faced a couple of unsuccessful noms. That's great if you're going to expand coverage of behind-the-scenes people, you're right that they don't get enough credit. --Loeba (talk) 15:57, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See it's interesting trivia for us film buffs to know that John Hoesli was art director for 2001, African Queen and Santa Claus the Movie!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:42, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What did you think of Memento? I think it's a great film but I admittedly find it very difficult to really understand what is going on and I feel if I knew exactly it would seem even ingenious to me. I get that it's backwards but I really think it's the sort of film you need to watch a couple of times to really get.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Had you not seen it before? Oh I think it's amazing. I was kind of obsessed with it a few years ago, heh, watched it so many times. I still consider it a favourite. Loeba (talk) 13:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw bits of its on a plane back in 2001 or something yeah but not properly. Warmest congrats BTW on Chaplin hitting the main page!!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly recommend Philomena Loeba if you haven't seen it. Sigh I see Maximilian Schell another great actor has died... Dr. Blofeld 12:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you watch it in the cinema or find it online? I can't find a link anywhere (have been waiting for it to come online for ages...) Yeah Schell died the day before PSH - sad of course, but he lived a good full life. --Loeba (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 January 2014[edit]

Main Page appearance: Charlie Chaplin[edit]

This is a note to let the main editors of Charlie Chaplin know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on February 2, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 2, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Charlie Chaplin as the Tramp

Charlie Chaplin (1889–1977) was a British comic actor, filmmaker, and composer who rose to fame in the silent era. Chaplin became a worldwide icon through his screen persona "the Tramp" and is considered one of the most important figures of the film industry. His first screen appearance came in February 1914, after which he produced the popular features The Kid (1921), The Gold Rush (1925), and The Circus (1928). Chaplin refused to move to sound films in the 1930s, instead producing City Lights (1931) and Modern Times (1936) without dialogue. He became increasingly political and his next film, The Great Dictator (1940), satirised Adolf Hitler. The 1940s was a decade marked with controversy for Chaplin, and his popularity declined rapidly. Accused of communist sympathies, he was forced to leave the United States. The Tramp was abandoned in his later films, which include Monsieur Verdoux (1947), Limelight (1952), and A King in New York (1957). Chaplin wrote, directed, produced, edited, starred in, and composed the music for most of his films. His work is characterised by slapstick combined with pathos, and continues to be held in high regard. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Christopher Nolan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blockbuster (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(A bit late) barnstar[edit]

The Teamwork Barnstar
I wish there was a barnstar of courage and dedication that I could award to you! You have been the real driving force in the Chaplin project. I'm sure that many Chaplin fans had thought of overhauling the article before (incl. myself) but had been discouraged knowing the gigantic effort it would take – therefore this barnstar is not only for the actual collaboration but also for inspiring others to believe that if we work together, everything is possible! TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 10:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]

Sorry for being a bit late on this – so happy that Chaplin is finally FA and that it will be featured on the main page! It feels weird though, not having to think of the article so much anymore. I'm already planning my next big project! I really want to rewrite Barbara Stanwyck's page, as I think it is unfair that Kate, Bette and Joan all have great articles but her page is such a mess ;) (there's only four paragraphs on her entire film career!!!!). At first I want to go through her entire filmography though – that's one of the film-related goals I've set myself for this year. Let me know how the Bristol slapstick festival went, isn't it this week? TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 10:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]

Yay, I'm glad you finally got online and saw! That's a really sweet message in the barnstar, thanks :) It is a bit weird that it's finally "finished" after all this time, but I'm sure there will still people people popping up on the talk page making queries (we still have the thing to add about him religion, for instance). That's great you're planning on sticking around and working on Stanwyck's article! She's definitely the biggest classic actress without a decent page. I've never quite loved her as much as a lot of people, but she was certainly talented and I do enjoy watching her. She was very fierce, which makes her fun! According to this I've seen 12 of her films, which isn't really enough. My favourite is definitely The Lady Eve. How many have you seen? Let me know if ever I can help in any way. You have a good memory with the slapstick festival, it's this friday! Can't wait! All the best, stay in touch --Loeba (talk) 16:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do you remember where Chaplin talks of his religious views? Because I recalled that Robinson had something about that but when I checked, I couldn't find any mention – maybe it's all in his bio? Thanks for offering to help on Stanwyck, though it will be a long time until I actually get to work on it. I want to get through her films first to see if I am committed enough to do it. I really want to, but I don't know much about her from before and know that rewriting the article would require buying loads of books (with Chaplin I mostly used library books). You've actually seen more of her films than I have! I have only seen Double Indemnity, Lady Eve, The Strange Love of Martha Ivers, Clash by Night, Lady of Burlesque and The Locked Door, but the first four films were enough for me to name her my favourite actress. I think it is incredible how she could convincingly act in such different genres (not many actors can do that!). Although one might argue that she always seems to play strong women and femme fatales (although I have to say that's also why I like her, as both a feminist and a fan of film noir), I also think that she was very versatile and more realistic than many of the other stars – partly because of her talent and partly, I think, because her face was such a 'blank canvas', she wasn't a great beauty but very ordinary-looking. I have to say though that Lady of Burlesque was a horrible film, and The Locked Door, with which I started this project yesterday, was pretty boring (but then again, it was only her second film role). I decided to skip her third film, Mexicali Rose, for now (it was a flop and the only version I can find online is really horrible quality) and started watching Capra's Ladies of Leisure. It seems like a pretty entertaining film and the first in which she is truly interesting and has that 'fierce' quality that you mention (it's definitely one of the reasons that I like her). I'm really not looking forward to watching all the Westerns that she did though – Westerns and scifi are the only genres that I have problems with. I'm also purposefully skipping most of her television work except maybe for brief clips, it seems pretty horrible! TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 18:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]
I looked at my Chaplin autobio, and very usefully it has an index at the back which includes "religion"! So I have found the page where he talks about it and will add something to the article after I've written this. You have to watch Baby Face (film) from Stanwyck - an absolute classic of pre-code. Hollywood didn't make anything so brazen for at least another 30 years! I used to strongly dislike westerns and sci-fi as well, I never thought I'd get into them, but in time I've come to genuinely enjoy them (I have more difficulty with sci fi, but I actually really like westerns now...not all of them obviously, those about "chasing the Indians" and whatever do nothing for me, but that's actually a low percentage of them...they tend to be far more character/interaction driven than I ever realised...and they have such beautiful scenery). The only western I've seen with Stanwyck is Forty Guns directed by the very talented Samuel Fuller, meaning it has an interesting, almost noirish quality to it. I liked it. The thing about working on her article is there won't be many books about her, making it pretty easy! I'd be surprised if there are more than about 4 dedicated biographies? And it's only necessary to do tons of research if you want FA anyway, you could feasibly get to GA using just one or two. I remember you were working on James Thierree in your sandbox, are you planning to publish what you've done? --Loeba (talk) 19:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly recommend Cattle Queen of Montana Loeba for the cinematography, it's a beautiful looking picture and Reagan is rather good in it. View here. Watch from 42:30 for instance. I don't think there's many women who really like old westerns. Speaking as a typical male fan of westerns generally, a lot of the 30s (especially) to early 60s westerns were really quite generic and quite forgettable actually, I've actually yawned through a few of them I've seen. You have to really appreciate the cinematography and western film formula to get anywhere with liking them, in Loeba's case I'd say it comes from an acquired love of cinema.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well I guess I've mostly stuck to the westerns with a good reputation, which is why I generally have a favourable attitude towards them! Whenever I come across the B-grade ones showing endlessly on TCM, I end up changing the channel within 5 minutes...So no, I can't say I'm a major fan of the genre (with screwball comedies and film noir, for instance, I will seek out even the less acclaimed ones, which I would never do for westerns) but there are some with genuinely great storylines and characters, and that are beautifully filmed (especially those from Mann, Ford and Wyler). A few of the classics bored me though, like The Searchers, Red River, Stagecoach...and I HATED She Wore a Yellow Ribbon. That's exactly the sort of western I have no interest in -- didn't I just say I like Ford?! Ha, maybe I don't like his westerns after all! No I've liked all the others I've seen (I'll just stay away from the Cavalry stuff) and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is marvellous. --Loeba (talk) 19:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, and you'd be right about a lot of those generic B westerns!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I read a really interesting essay about Ford a while ago and now kind of want to give Westerns another chance. I guess my problem with them has to do a lot with how the Native Americans are portrayed as 'savages' and how there's a complete silence on the Native American genocide. But then again, many other genres also have very racist portrayals of ethnic minorities so I guess I'm just a bit of a hypocrite! I definitely have to give them another chance now, Stanwyck's filmography includes at least 12 of them, even more if you include her television career. I guess her Republicanism and her belief that anyone could be successful in life have a lot to do with her attraction to Westerns? Thanks for the recommendations – I've still not decided whether I'm going to do this project chronologically or whether I'll start from the good and well-known films that I haven't seen and then move on to the other ones...
As for the Thierree article, I do have a draft ready but it's completely unfinished and actually pretty horrible. Maybe I will find time to complete it this spring? My problem is that there's not that much information available on him. Firstly there's the problem that his own webpage is horribly inaccurate in giving the dates for all his projects, and I'm also confused as to where exactly he studied acting. He has officially stated that "he completed his artistic training at the Piccolo Teatro of Milan, the Harvard Theater School, the National Conservatory of Dramatic Arts and the Acting International School", but first of all there's no other source to confirm that he studied in Milan or Paris and there is no Harvard Theater School that Google can find... Then there's the problem of giving an accurate impression of how his stage productions were received, as there is no RottenTomatoes or Metacritic or Allociné that would give you the averages... so the only thing to do would be to have about twenty individual footnotes for each show's reviews? So frustrating! On top of this, I've noticed that his name is actually Thierrée, not Thiérrée, so I would have to get that changed. TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 12:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]
I'm uncomfortable with the way Native Americans are portrayed in westerns as well, but like I said it's actually a pretty low percentage (of the good westerns anyway) that deal with them...95% of the time it's just "good cowboy" versus "bad cowboy", heh (the best ones have more complex characters than that, but you get my point). I took a sneaky look in your sandbox and I don't know what you're talking about, it looks really good! It's a bit of a shame to have it sitting there unpublished when the real article is so scarce, but it's up to you of course :) I meant to say about Stanwyck by the way, if you want to see her not playing a strong woman you want to check out Stella Dallas (1937 film), for which she was Oscar nominated. I also just remembered that my favourite of her's that I've seen is actually Ball of Fire which is so much fun! I love Gary Cooper in comedies, they're both hilarious in it. As for which way to approach her filmography, it would be interesting to do it chronologically, but I don't think I could hack that personally, I'd be too keen to get to the most interesting ones! Although the latter method does mean that you're left with a load of stinkers towards the end...that's what happened with me and Kate, ha, but I love watching her so much that even the shit films (of which there are many) were enjoyable :) You'd probably find the same with Babs. --Loeba (talk) 17:00, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Did it? What shit films were those? Rooster Cogburn and On Golden Pond were great films I thought.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh god, everything she did from Grace Quigley onwards, some of her early 30s work, Dragon Seed, The Iron Petticoat, A Madwoman of Chaillot...The only 2 I haven't seen are A Delicate Balance and Olly Olly Oxen Free, and the latter is by all accounts (including Kate's) terrible as well. But it's fine, I doubt any actor with more than say, 30 credits is free from at least something shit! --Loeba (talk) 17:28, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Only two after GQ were features though, the others were TV movies!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:54, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
True but I still count them as part of her filmography. I just realised I wasn't being clear - I was "left with a load of stinkers" because I watched all the ones that sounded good first and left the ones with poor reputations for the end (on the whole anyway, it obviously depended on what was available and when). I've tweaked that above sentence now. --Loeba (talk) 18:50, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder how much work City Lights would require to get up to FA... A themes section and some padding to some of the other sections I think mainly. Ha you think Stanwyck's article is bad, Libertad Lamarque, one of the most high profile actresses of Golden Age Latin cinema isn't even sourced... An FA in Spanish! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I think a themes section would definitely be a good idea! There should be a wealth of material on that as well. As for Lamarque, I think in general it's rare to find really great articles written about non-American/British film people :( Not that I can claim to be different, I mainly know about American cinema, despite not even being American. You often see people in classic film forums lamenting why star X isn't better known today – and I always wonder why these people don't contribute to WP, at least that way there's a chance that more people would learn about them given that WP is the first place that people go to for information these days... TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 12:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]
You'd like Broken Arrow Susie, it's sympathetic to the Indians and in my opinion the finest western of the 50s, I rank it even above Shane, Rio Bravo and the The Big Country. Most overrated western of the 50s is probably High Noon..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:45, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Have either of you seen Johnny Guitar? A noirish western, I thought it was great.♦ Dr. Blofeld

FYI: Google News Archive is closed[edit]

Hello, I just saw your AFD (Claudio Encarnacion Montero (2nd nomination)). FYI, Goggle has closed Google News Archive, see. Christian75 (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh sorry I didn't realise - I just followed the link given on the AfD guidelines. Thanks for letting me know. --Loeba (talk) 16:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Christopher Nolan[edit]

The article Christopher Nolan you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Christopher Nolan for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 12:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


The Signpost: 22 January 2014[edit]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Writer's Barnstar
For your excellent work on the Chaplin FA. Cheers! GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:26, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, thanks very much! You've done your fair share of excellent work yourself, big congrats. --Loeba (talk) 11:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ralph Richardson[edit]

I pressed the "thank" button just now, but I think your kindness in searching out the image of Richardson calls for a proper thank-you here, now delivered. The new image is tons better. (And I was slightly uneasy about the "free" status of the old one.) Do look in at the peer review if you have time and disposition. Quite understand if not, naturally. Good wishes. Tim riley (talk) 15:52, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim riley: Thanks for the thanks - it wasn't any trouble, I found the image within a minute and then just copy-n-pasted one of my previous descriptions and changed to the relevant renewal listings! These studio-era publicity stills never had their copyright renewed. I'm sure some more could be found - any stills from his pre-1963 Hollywood films will be PD (and nice crisp quality). Here's a far better image from Long Day's Journey, for instance, and you can see that it wasn't even issued with a copyright notice so is definitely PD (any American items issued without the copyright sign pre-1977 are PD). The graphics lab could clean it up (they've helped me out with the same sort of thing several times, they're brilliant). Interesting subject choice btw! Any chance of Gielgud being next, heh? He's just wonderful in Providence (1977 film). --Loeba (talk) 17:56, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem...Sir Tim has already intimated that to me in a private email. How can we have Richardson but no Gielgud? Then again, how can we have Richardson and Gielgud but no Olivier? ::I forgot to add my favourite Richardson flick: Anna Karenina. CassiantoTalk 18:06, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fascinating stuff, and jolly helpful – thank you, Loeba. Yes, Gielgud is next but one on my list. First of all, if and when I have Richardson safely delivered to FA, I have an operatic target for FAC, namely Falstaff, and then on to Sir John. Isn't Wikpedia fun to work in! Tim riley (talk) 18:10, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good stuff! Olivier would be a great one to work on but there would be a LOT of sources needing to be used and the article is already pretty developed, which in a way makes it harder...if you know what I mean? Tim, if you want to add that image do you think you can manage it yourself? I'm happy to upload it if you like. --Loeba (talk) 18:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly the longer the article the harder it is to refactor and improve. I tend to avoid such articles. I was watching Sleuth the other day though and in my opinion Sir Lawrence's performance was one of the best I've seen from a male actor in any film, quite brilliant.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unblushing acceptance of your kind offer. I know not of the graphics lab, and am playing the confused old codger card, which I get away with surprisingly often. Tim riley (talk) 18:39, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I have added the image and put in a clean-up request here. That'll be 10 points on the codger card ;) --Loeba (talk) 19:05, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paul Shearer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ITV (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Director, Budget, Box office columns in Filmography[edit]

Hello, would you be willing to move your comment to WT:FILM#Director, Budget, Box office columns in Filmography? The discussion was started in two places, but unfortunately, this splits up the discussion. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 20:50, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Erik: I can do, but surely the discussion is more relevant to WP:ACTOR? Perhaps the discussion at WP:FILM could be moved there? --Loeba (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Return of the Codger[edit]

No good deed goes unpunished, and I'm shamelessly soliciting another favour. I have Ralph Richardson up for peer review and if you have time and inclination to look in I'd be most grateful. I am a theatre bunny and not much of a filmgoer, so the view of a cineaste like you would be particularly helpful. Quite understand if you are too busy etc, naturally. Kind regards, Tim riley (talk) 21:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ha I love the section heading! No don't feel bad about this at all, the article is definitely my area of interest and I've been meaning to check in. I'll get to it this weekend. Best --Loeba (talk) 10:50, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderfully helpful suggestions. If I can further impose on your kindness I'd be glad if you'd run a swift eye over the article, if you can bear it, to see if you think I've covered your comments adequately. I most definitely owe you, so don't hesitate to call in the debt when you next have an article up for PR etc. Tim riley (talk) 16:33, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for the offer. I'm really slow at working on articles though, heh, and currently have two on the go at the same time, so I probably won't be calling on your services for a while. But always feel free to ask me to chip in at PR if you think I can be of use, it's no problem (unless I'm in the midst of low wiki-motivation, in which case I'll be completely honest!) --Loeba (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I hope it has nothing to do with the ramblings on the Chaplin talk page Loeba!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:16, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh it's okay I wasn't saying my motivation is low right now, but I felt a warning was apt as I never know when it can strike! I chose to ignore that Chaplin stuff after making my initial comment - it's not worth the annoyance. Thanks for chipping in though. --Loeba (talk) 19:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiwatcher (Light Show) especially isn't worth the "light" of day. Have you seen Amarcord? Wonderful film.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a very charming film although I can't say I found it as memorable as most of the other Fellini I've seen...but that's probably because the others have been ridiculously good! Tim, after watching a bit of the youtube link you gave at the PR page for No Man's Land, I've ended up watching this programme with John Gielgud - have you seen it? Really interesting, and he comes across as a very humble and likeable man. --Loeba (talk) 19:34, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting the hang of the subtitles you'll be pleased to know. Although with films like Cairo Station it's tougher as they dance about the pages as the camera moves. Watch it on youtube if you haven't seen it already. The screen seems to bend and wobble at times throughout, I thought initially it was bog standard cinematography, but I suspect it was filmed on a mobile phone in a cinema or something which accounts for it, I'm not sure.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's one I've been meaning to watch for a while, but the youtube version looks terrible! I really couldn't hack that, heh. --Loeba (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it's not good quality!! I saw Shoot the Piano Player recently too, that's awesome I think. I also saw Ashes and Diamonds which is very good, but I'm not sure what it was that made Scorsese think it was one of the 12 best films ever made! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:35, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 January 2014[edit]

Richardson FAC[edit]

After my most stimulating and comprehensive PR ever, I have Ralph Richardson up at FAC. If you have time and inclination to look in, it will be esteemed a favour. – Tim riley (talk) 21:45, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've said on the talk page, and say again here, how grateful I am for the time you've spent improving (and defending) the images chez Richardson. Your bonus Codger Card points continue to build up and I look forward to redeeming them when you next have a PR/GAN/FAC on the stocks. Tim riley (talk) 16:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ohh really now, it's no problem at all. I'm sure Ralph will be promoted this weekend, which is great news. --Loeba (talk) 19:16, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bless you! Look out for Sir John in about two weeks' time at PR. Tim riley (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh I'll look forward to it. You're so fast at writing articles! --Loeba (talk) 21:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Emma Thompson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page I Am Legend (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Philip Seymour Hoffman[edit]

@Dr Blofeld: Fuck can you believe it about Philip Seymour Hoffman? I'm so gutted about this, he was one of my favourite performers to watch...it's fucking tragic --Loeba (talk) 19:22, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah he was great. I must admit I saw a picture of him the other day and I did wonder if he was the depressive sort. He looked sort of like he was grinning and bearing it. Seems whatever he was suffering triggered a drug addiction which led to his demise. Only 46 too! Amazing though to think that Tom Cruise was older! He kinda looked 15 years older than Cruise in MI3! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I already knew that he used to be an addict and then had a relapse last year...it is strange though, he's certainly not your typical smackhead. I still can't believe it...I'm gonna watch Happiness (1998 film) tonight, one of his best roles that I've been meaning to rewatch for ages. --Loeba (talk) 21:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still yet to see Doubt, I'll see it tomorrow!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:27, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, talk page stalker here but had to comment, this makes me so frustrated! I know it is not right to think so, but my first thought was "why him?! why not someone like Lindsay Lohan or some other useless 'actor' who has never even attempted to fight their addiction(s)?!" I've not seen all of his films, but he was brilliant in every one I have seen, he was one of those rare Hollywood actors who you knew were always going to give a great performance. Not fair! TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 21:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]
Not fair at all. He was honestly one of my top top favourites, has been for years, and I'd go so far as to call him one of the most talented and versatile actors ever...How can there not be any more PSH performances? :( Such a loss. --Loeba (talk) 22:02, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'm going to have a Seymour Hoffman memorial week of film watching.. Just started Fernando Ghia, producer of The Mission and also Nostromo (television miniseries) which I also just started. I suspect it is similar to the Mission and probably very good.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, have you noticed how incredibly short/badly written Hoffman's page is? Would be great to rewrite it... TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 17:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]
Yes, I was actually thinking earlier in the week that I'd genuinely be interested in doing his article (it was one I'd considered ever before he died!) Another collaboration perhaps? But keep in mind, I've been making my way through the Emma Thompson article and it is pretty time consuming working on a recent actor, as you have to go wading through the reviews and interviews to find the most useful stuff, often meaning an hour of research to write just a couple of sentences! And then such articles often don't even come off that well because it's hard to make them flow and be interesting (and fully sourced) when you don't have a biography to work from...ah well, it's still satisfying when it's for an actor you really love. When I'm done with Emma I'd definitely be interested in PSH. @Dr. Blofeld:, how about you? It would definitely be easier if it was three of us! --Loeba (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, I'm definitely too busy at the moment as well! But some time in the future it would be nice to try and improve it. Perhaps not to FA-level as it is so much hard work, but even GA would be great. And if there were three of us working on it, we could probably first decide on a structure and then split it so each of us works on a section, and that way it would be less work. TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 18:06, 9 February 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]
Emailed. Ha you read my mind both of you, I had actually meant to begin expanding the Hoffman article a few days ago on Thursday or Friday but got sidetracked! Absolutely we should expand it and try to get it at least to GA. If anything it would a great long term goal to have it up to FA and TFA it on the anniversary of his death next year but I think we should strive for a GA for the time being. I'll be watching many of his 2000s films this week which I haven't seen, I've loved him in everything I've seen him in to date but most films I've seen him in he's been a supporting actor. I haven't seen Capote yet.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:21, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good! It will be fun to finally collaborate :) I've been watching some of his stuff this week (although I'd already seen most of his important films): one interesting one was Flawless (1999 film), with Robert De Niro, where he plays a drag queen. If you want to see him in lead roles, along with Capote you should definitely check out The Master (some say supporting, but he is pretty much joint lead with Phoenix), Synecdoche New York, The Savages, Before the Devil Knows You're Dead...he was just amazing. --Loeba (talk) 18:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen Flawless, not the others though. In looking through his filmo I've seen 11 of his films pre 2000 but only 6 post 2000, it overwhelms me how many post 2000 films I need to see!!! It doesn't help with having so many French, Italian and world cinema classics I've been ploughing through recently! Loeba can you find a link to The Hour of the Wolf online I've been meaning to watch that Bergman film for a long time but can't find it online.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh that's a brilliant film, one of my favourite Bergman's actually. Liv Ullman is one of the greatest actors ever. I found it here, split into 5 parts. There's a better quality version on youtube, but you'll have to download it and download english subs. --Loeba (talk) 19:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How about High Sierra , Wuthering Heights and Sullivan's Travels? Sullivan's and Wuthering in particular I've been looking for for yonks! They're the only two I haven't seen in the AFI top 100! I've found Sullivan's, watching now. Can you find the other two :-]♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can take a look for you tomorrow (going to bed now) but your best bet is usually just typing "watch X online". I just watched The Skin I Live In - WOW! That is quite a film. It's completely fucked up but I think it's the best I've seen from Almodovar.. --Loeba (talk) 22:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've found them now! Sweet dreams LOL! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:40, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good news, I've begun expanding the Hoffman article. I can't believe how undeveloped it was!! I've added an initial 90s section. A bit too many quotes at present for my liking but it's a very good start and is now headed in the right direction. I'm going to stop now and familiarize myself more with his post 2000s leading roles and watch as many films of his as I can this week so I'm better equipped to continue writing it! Might be next week that I continue with it..♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow you've done so much already! It amazes me how fast you work lol. Fantatsic job, it looks 20 times better. I'm exhausted today (you know how I said I was going to bed? Well I ended up watching a whole other film! Not ideal when you have to be up early and spend the whole day working with children..) but will try and add to it at some point this week. --Loeba (talk) 16:08, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Yeah it at least now looks half decent in showing a glimmer of light into his actual work and ability, even if post 2000 is still poor covered. Haha I did that the other night, I ended up watching Snakes on a Plane on TV! If you or Susie do have time to edit it this week, a good place to continue is the chapter in the Pomerance's book here. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:24, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, probably won't have time this week, but what you have done already looks great! Also, love the subtitle of that chapter, 'Jesus of Uncool' :D TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 21:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]

Ha started List of books on films. Let me know if either of you can think of any, simply paste google book urls into here!. If I can find a series of books on a given film (like Citizen Kane) I might consider putting in a request for a grant for them from WMUK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:34, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Loeba just saw you've mentioned Happiness, great film isn't it!! It wasn't Hoffman's cum on the wall scene which was the creepiest, the creepiest for me was the guy telling his son he enjoyed raping and their discussions about wanking!! The dog licking the balcony at the end was just gross LOL!!! Just imagining how such a film might have been received 50 years earlier!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Any chance you can find a "copyright not renewed" free image of Bernard Lee?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:36, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like he mostly worked in British films, which makes it harder...basically any American publicity still released before 1964 is likely to be PD. What were his American films? Sorry for not doing anything on PSH yet, I did intend to yesterday but for some reason I find it difficult making additions to well-developed articles! I took a look and stalled very quickly...I've got 9 days off work now so hopefully I'll get some stuff done (although this weekend is quite busy). Seeing Elevator to the Gallows at the BFI tonight, I've never seen it before! Probably not the most romantic film for Valentines but whatever haha, I'm excited. --Loeba (talk) 17:16, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah seems most were British films. Saw Capote last night. His voice and demeanour was just incredible, I was actually buzzing after watching his performance his acting was so brilliant. I don't know what Truman Capote was like as a man but the inspired way he played him I'd say he was probably absolutely spot on. The devil film from 2007 coming next. To date I've seen almost every film with the exception of 2 or 3 of his up to 2006. 2007-2013 to go... His performances in Love Liza and Owning Mahowney were both superb. Can you find me Wuthering Heights and High Sierra after all, they don't work on the vz website (Wuthering turned out to be a fairly recent TV film not the 1939 movie!).♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:18, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well you could always be watching something sweetly romantic like Texas Chainsaw or Repulsion :-] ♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:03, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This version of High Sierra works for me; for Wuthering Heights, go here and use the StageVu link (WP won't let me link to it directly). I wasn't crazy about either film but you might think differently. Lift to the Scaffold was great! I'm amazed that a 1958 film can feel so "nouvelle vague"...It was definitely one of the very first in that movement. --Loeba (talk) 13:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know if you like music at all but my favourite flamenco guitarists [2] (the greatest guitar performance I've ever seen, Moorish atmosphere!!), [3], [4], [5]. There's something about flamenco which really affects me and makes me feel passionate! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:20, 15 February 2014 (UTC) Yep you were right about High Sierra, a very mediocre film which amazes me why it was in the 1001 book! Thanks for the link anyway!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:52, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer Lawrence best supporting at the BAFTAs. They can't not give it to her LOL. Emma Thompson should have won. I can't believe McConaughey and Leto weren't even nominated! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:39, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I'm sure there's some technical reason why they aren't nominated - probably that DBC was released too late in the UK or something. I can't believe they would have been left out if they were eligible. I was happy we got to see Emma present an award at least! --Loeba (talk) 23:36, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's something I guess. At least she got nominated LOL. WOW, I've just seen Doubt. Brilliant film. Viola Davis should have "easily" won Best Supporting Actress for that performance, incredible. Roger Ebert agreed with me too! I personally thought the quality of the acting from Streep, Hoffman, Adams and Viola Davis combined made it a truly great film, it was so believable and realistic. You probably don't agree but I actually now rank it among the greatest films I've ever seen. It's not in my top 10 of course but it's certainly top 50 material for me based on pure combined acting talent.

I liked The Savages and Jack Goes Boating but honestly for some reason Synecdoche didn't appeal to me that much. It was a good, but I have a hard job seeing it as the best film of the decade sort of material. Perhaps it's one of those films I really need to see again to really fully get and becoming more emotionally involved in. I didn't like 2001 Space or Citizen Kane on first viewing and I now consider them brilliant masterpieces, I think you have to watch such films a few times to fully appreciate, maybe Synecdoche is one of those. Last two Bogart films I've seen High Sierra and Angels with Dirty Faces I didn't rate, Angels was sort of like a mix between Boys Town and Going my Way! Still it was a lot better than High Sierra, the worst Bogart movie I've seen.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:41, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to remove any material in the condensing can you add it if relevant to reception section of the film article? Also watch the formatting of the dates. I prefer 18 February 2014 rather than February 18, 2014, or it's at least what I'm more accustomed to. Either will do but they have to be consistent of course!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:18, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah but surely we should go with the American date structure, which is M/D/Y? Sorry I hope you don't mid what I'm doing - I do find it a bit heavy on the quotations...if there's anything you really liked though, feel free to add it back! Or yes, we can start preserving stuff in a sandbox for a reception section? We could probably pull start it off already: the beginning of the "2000–04" section would all be great there, and lots of stuff from the obituaries... --Loeba (talk) 13:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I wonder if we could find a better quote for the box in "1996–99"? The current one is nice but it's also largely about that critic's love for the film in general, with a mention of PSH only at the end. What do you think? --Loeba (talk) 13:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm British though hehe, so are you!! I used to write it that way until I found most people I was working with seemed to not use the comma.. Yeah I agree the quote should be removed from the box. Maybe though it's worth mentioning that he spoke of the tenderness that Hoffman had playing the male nurse in the prose? I liked the way he said that, given that most of Hoffman's roles are far from "caring" hehe. When I said move to reception I meant of the actual film article. Flawless didn't have any reception at all.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:42, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that's what you mean - yeah that's definitely a good idea. I've added that it was "an atypically virtuous role" (rephrasing the source which says "a rare saintly role") - personally I think we're communicating that it was a nicely tender role, but I have no objection if you want to keep the quote in the prose. Now we just need to find something fitting for a quote box, since it would be good to have one...a direct quote from PSH would be ideal (and avoids accusations of "POV pushing", which I have seen before when articles give a positive comment from a critic!) --Loeba (talk) 13:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, to find a quote from him from the late 90s would be great. Yeah Nehrams and I did that with Clint Eastwood, most of Clint's films production sections, especially pre 1990 come from the main article!! Of course though in adding some of the quotes to reception sections in films in which he had more minor roles it'll have to be balanced off with general reviews and reviews of the main actors too!! Only three more of Hoffman's films to see now, Ides coming next.. Hoffman's worst film I've seen to date remains Moneyball, and he barely appeared in it, little more than a cameo really.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and trim the number of quotes/paraphrase some, although as I say it would be good to add them to the relative film articles so nothing is lost. Especially on the ones which don't even have a reception section yet! Nothing too drastic though, I think a lot of the films covered do have some interesting angles, especially from Pomerance. I needed to add a lot of quotes and try to cover as much as possible in the expansion as I find the articles tend to be better once they're trimmed down and partly paraphrased etc then.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I understand that approach. I'll try to keep the essence of everything you've done, which really is great, but just condense it a bit. I completely understand you not wanting anything to be lost though so I will transfer stuff to the film articles - for some reason I hadn't even thought of that! For the moment though I've started expanding the Early life section.. --Loeba (talk) 15:18, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, amazing. You did exactly what I was planning on doing in compiling that Reception section. Excellent work!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well I was about to start going through the 2000-04 section, but the stuff you'd added there was obviously good for a reception section so I though 'I might as well just move it now and add some other stuff!' The article is coming together very nicely, I must say. It's a shame it couldn't have been like this when there were hundreds of thousands of people going to the article, but never mind! I'll pick up where I left off now... --Loeba (talk) 19:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Emailed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:22, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! As for using email, it's not that I don't trust you or anything but I'm not really into making internet relationships personal, and email feels much more personal (even if I didn't give my real name)...I used to enjoy chatting to internet people when I was younger but now I find it a little weird...no offence or anything, it's just me being weird :) Stopping on PSH for tonight... --Loeba (talk) 22:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

LOL OK. If course nobody on wikipedia uses email for other purposes like canvassing etc.. :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:25, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well even if it's not for personal stuff, this place already takes up too much of my life, I'd rather not be hearing about it through email as well haha. By the way, this is just a small point but do you not find it difficult to edit an article when there isn't a gap between images, paragraphs and quote boxes? I leave a space between everything, I think it makes it so much clearer! --Loeba (talk) 12:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like images between sentence within paragraph but I don't notice the lack of a gap between paragraphs although of course I'd prefer it if you left a gap inside the editing page for them all.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have you see A Late Quartet? Very good. Hoffman's best lay ever.. Not at all mismatched :-]♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:03, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet! I gained a new favourite last night though: Vera Drake. I thought it was outstanding, and Imelda Staunton...wow. Just incredible, incredbile acting. --Loeba (talk) 21:17, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, made a note to watch that later in the week! I watched The Barefoot Contessa today. Philip and Liraz are quite cute together [6], she almost looks and sounds like Penelope at first glance!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:39, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 50 and 87 are broken, I think you removed a Guzman source and quote earlier on, might want to figure and fix it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:21, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sorry, I was [lazily] waiting for the bot to come in and "rescue" them since it did it pretty quickly last time! I'll sort it now though. --Loeba (talk) 12:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Loeba/Archive7&oldid=1151014434"