Talk:Manderlay

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

Fair use rationale for Image:Manderlay movie poster.jpg[edit]

Image:Manderlay movie poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

controversy[edit]

There is no mention here of the scene of Bryce making love to black guy , a role planned for Nicole Kidman as highly erotic to spice up this film ...in keeping with the role played by many white girls coming south to "help"/ aid blacks in the poor south by jumping the males...to make them feel free. But mainly just exploit them for sex.

This scene being esp controversial with Bryce being Ron Howard's dau this scene with nudity and its subject content ... seem to cause a distracting buzz from otherwise deeper themes meant to be a review and repulsion of any slavery ideas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.216.70.46 (talk) 22:58, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

As in the former film, I think the scene's there to show how Grace is taken advantage of due to her naivity. Thos is sort of a European "art house" movie, so nudity isn't that big a deal as in American mainstream movies. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 22:43, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The film is set. Not shot! in the 1930s. Kidman probably wasn't even considered for the part because the minimalist staging would be philosophically incompatible with keeping tabs on aging actors between films given the timeline. --184.21.215.174 (talk) 05:54, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Of course Kidman was considered, the script was even tailor-made for her. It didn't work out because due to a scheduling conflict. Check out the audio commentary of the DVD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.4.81.69 (talk) 15:49, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Manderlay. 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) 01:40, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Manderlay. 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) 18:54, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP editor's self-published perspective[edit]

The sentence in the Plot section that opens with reference to many Lars Von Trier films highlights the fact that the Plot section is being used to include content that extends beyond a plot summary, and that this article, like so many others at WP, does not take seriously WP's own standards requiring that its content be based on sources (rather than the unsourced views of Wikipedia editor's). While the content in that and other such unsourced content (essentially all in the infobox, all in the cast and other lists, as well as the film's lede description, comparison to Dogville, references to its staging, etc.) may indeed be correct—accurate to some source, somewhere—until all such material is tied to sources, this article is just another of WP's prevalent "just trust us" pieces. That is, it is not encyclopedic by WP's own lean, and poorly enforced standards. 2601:246:CA80:3CB5:D425:5DAE:53F5:779E (talk) 22:15, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A citation found in two minutes of searching, with substance that ought be in an encyclopedic treatment (e.g., its content on the film's inspiration): [1]. 2601:246:CA80:3CB5:D425:5DAE:53F5:779E (talk) 22:25, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Manderlay&oldid=1165661637"