Jump to content

Talk:Thelma & Louise

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

Soundtrack

[edit]

Is someone willing to add a section about the soundtrack to this movie? The songs chosen for the soundtrack are a big part of the movie and it is not that often that they work so well. Dollvalley 14:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will try later, although I have heard of this film ALOT I've only just seen it now (well the last 30mins?. Wolfmankurd 23:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re-cast

[edit]

According to the Wikipedia article about Cleopatra (2003 film), that film closely follows the plot of T&L. Is this worth mentioning?202.179.19.18 (talk) 06:20, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia

[edit]

I've done my best to incorporate the trivia into the article and give it better structure. I don't feel it's done and will carry on later.Wolfmankurd 23:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And yet it keeps coming back. I think the only way to handle this is to completely obliterate the section, move the content about Tori Amos (which I feel is appropriate) to another section (critical reception????) and leave an html comment stating that all mentions of spoofs in Family Guy and the Simpsons are not appropriate, please stop adding them in. Any objections? Dave (talk) 20:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Car still in bottom of Grand Canyon

[edit]

I have reverted this statement for several reasons

  • The scene was filmed in Utah not Arizona, per imdb and the DVD directors commentary
  • Such activity (especially abandoning a car) would not be permitted in a National Park. Similarly no government agency would grand permits to use an environmentally sensative location in filming a movie without promises to recover the car.
  • personal experience- My brother worked for the Grand county Search and Rescue at the time, and was employed to retrieve the car (actually 2, there were 2 takes of this scene).

Davemeistermoab 04:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relation

[edit]

Friends. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.199.91.47 (talk) 20:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cast

[edit]

This section needs to be referenced or redone; according to the director's commentary by Ridley Scott, the Davis and Sarandon were cast relatively early on and no other actors were really considered for the parts. -Kez (talk) 16:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to Louise in Texas?

[edit]

Is it revealed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.100.99.41 (talk) 23:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is not revealed in the movie itself, I can't speak for any subsequent interviews, directory commentary, etc. Dave (talk) 16:13, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While there is some deliberate ambiguity, the film implies and it is widely inferred, with proof neither offered or really needed, that Louise was raped (or at least experienced some similar form of sexual violation) and, further, that the police were dismissive of the charges. The screenwriter's workbook makes explicit reference:

http://books.google.com/books?id=9gztRwYxZHIC&pg=PA119 

IMDB plot synopsis suggests Louise was raped: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103074/synopsis A book on rape and film points out that att one point (which you can see by watching the movie or reading the subtitle file) that Thelma tells Louise that Louise was raped and Louise does not deny it, just says she won't talk about it. http://books.google.com/books?id=ycIuGP3ZlVwC&pg=PA130 http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/5912496-rape-culture-thelma-and-louise Google: "thelma and louise louise raped in texas"

The screenwriter, herself, deliberately left some ambiguity that was partially filled in by the director: "Plus, to give her more depth and dimension, I knew something had to have happened to Louise, something she wasn't going to expose, and I didn't know what it was. I didn't know what had happened to her until about halfway through the screenplay. And she was never going to expose it, never going to open herself up like that again. Which is why she's sometimes hostile with Thelma, because she felt that if she had really tried, the whole thing could have been avoided, which is really how society fells.

[This "something" that happened to Louise was that she was raped in Texas several years earlier.] "I wouldn't let myself say she had been raped. I never said it in the screenplay. We added a reference to it toward the end because Ridley Scott, (the director), felt that people would come out of the movie going, 'Well, what did happen?'

"It doesn't really matter what happened to Louise. What happened to her happened to her. There are thousands and thousands of women walking around that have something in their past we don't know about, and they deserve to be treated with respect, whether we had anything to do with it or not." Interview by Syd Field, author of The Foundations of Screenwriting. http://www.sydfield.com/featured_calliekhouri.htm Whitis (talk) 03:45, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

literary/cultural references

[edit]

Movie pages often list iterary/cultural references, parodies, and homages to or by other films and other media. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%22In_popular_culture%22_content

[edit]
  • Joe + Belle (2011): 1:05:30 (Netflix stream), This is an explicitly lesbian Israeli female buddy picture in which two women take to the road after inadvertently killing someone. (police siren) (English subtitles) "should we pull over or keep going?" "there's no cliff, Belle. If we keep going we'll get to 'Netivot' and that's not a good place to end up in." Whitis (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Boys on the Side (1995): Jane (Whoopie Goldberg): "I am not going over a cliff for you two"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112571/movieconnections Whitis (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dos días en la vida, a song by Fito Paez from the Album El amor después del amor (1992)
  • Rent (2005): Copied from imdb: 'In Angel's number Today4U she sings "just like Thelma and Louise did when they got the blues / Swandove into the courtyard of the Gracie Mews"'

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103074/trivia?tab=mc&ref_=tt_trv_cnn Whitis (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Barney: "Hey, Thelma, Louise, y'all don't drive off no cliffs now, y'hear?" Whitis (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More can be found at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103074/trivia?tab=mc&ref_=tt_trv_cnn i have only included references I have personally seen Whitis (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing links?

[edit]

The link to the main article is "Thelma and louise" when the talkpage is saved under "Thelma and Louise" needing a redirect. Could someone please correct the link so a redirect isn't necessary? 72.239.133.237 (talk) 19:46, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell are you talking about? Both pages have a capital l in Louise. --The Old JacobiteThe '45 21:03, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Connection to WP:Oklahoma?

[edit]

Although the article text suggests that some scene or scenes may have been set in Oklahoma, that is all the connection with the state. It seems to me that is too tenuous to warrant listing to list it under WP:Oklahoma - especially as a Class C article. Bruin2 (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comedy, Drama , or crime film?

[edit]

We've got a slow moving edit war about if this film is a comedy, drama, crime film, buddy film or what. While this has been going on for years, near as I can tell the word Comedy was first introduced as the genre of the film in August 2022 with this edit [1]. For most of the article's history it was not identified as a comedy, but granted many edits through the years have changed the genre of the film. While I grant the film does have a few jokes, such as when the police officer is locked in the trunk of a car in the Arizona desert, and a passing biker drops puts his marijuana into the air hole, I don't think it counts as a comedy. (Hilarious? That's technically torture. If this is a comedy, it's a dark comedy.) For one, the rape of the lead actor in the opening scenes is not a staple of comedy, and to me strongly favors drama. For the record imdb uses adventure crime drama however I did find this article that does not call the film a comedy but says it has elements of a comedy. However, what most disturbs me about this edit war is a user who has repeatedly inserted the word "comedy" with an edit summary of "unsourced". This is inappropriate, unsourced is a rationale to remove material, not add it. If someone knows of a definitive review that declares this a comedy please include it. However, barring such a review I don't think comedy is appropriate and plan to revert. I would be ok with either a drama or buddy film. To me those are the primary genres of the film.Dave (talk) 22:08, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Curiously enough The French wikipedia article only states in the lead that is is a combination of several genres, and has an entire section devoted to justifications as to why the film should be considered a part of several, including comedy. Is this the approach we should take, borrow this content from the French article?Dave (talk) 22:31, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can source it with the AFI, which calls it "Drama, Adventure" and sub genre "Road". The BFI simply names it "Road movie". Mike Allen 05:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Dave for starting a talk page discussion about the genre info for this film. I don't have strong feelings about the genre(s), so I will support whatever consensus is reached here.
But as the person who made so-called "disturbing" and "inappropriate" edits to this article, I feel I must defend my actions. I did not "insert" the word comedy repeatedly, but instead I used the undo option to re-add existing text that was deleted by what I interpreted to be drive-by edits by IP editor(s) and possible subtle vandalism. I saw two edits to the genre in the lede sentence two days apart, both without any edit summary or references. When I looked at the user contributions from both IP addresses, one had no other edits and the other had multiple reverts in their contribution history since 2020. (Yes, I know that IP addresses are not always static and the older history via the most recent IP address could have been made by a different person.) But before undo-ing, I also looked at the content of the article: the word "comedy" does appear in a review of the film, and the article currently has 8 categories that include the phrase "comedy-drama". My use of the word "unsourced" in my edit summary was in reference to the actions by the anonymous editor. Perhaps I should have used different text in my edit summary, but I assumed that a look at the actual recent edits would have made that apparent to anyone who wanted more details.
I have been an editor here since 2016 and was approved for auto-patrol privileges last year. Other than a nasty, and inaccurate, comment on my Talk page from an IP editor with a bone to pick about a particular subject (and who was subsequently blocked several times for inappropriate behavior), never have my edits been singled out like this, and I find this especially surprising coming from an Admin. My next action will be to remove this article from my watchlist, as I have many more productive ways to spend my editing time on the platform. NOLA1982 (talk) 20:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@NOLA1982: Certainly I could have made my point without identifying any specific edits, and perhaps should have given this has has lasted years and over a dozen editors have been involved at one time or another. However, I assure you my intent is to identify the slow moving edit war and discuss possible resolutions. Nothing more, and apologies for any perceived snark. I hope that calms some nerves and we can work productively on a resolution. With the comment above I'm currently leaning towards changing the lead to say "the film includes elements from many genres with the AFI identifying it as ...." using the source MikeAllen identifies above. How does that sound? Dave (talk) 00:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback Dave, it is appreciated. But as I said, I'm done with this one. Other editors can work out these details. NOLA1982 (talk) 01:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong person in cast section

[edit]

References a person who was born in 2002. Unless time travel was invented, he is the wrong guy. I cannot find another candidate with that name on Wikipedia and IMDB references another person altogether: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0820660/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t27, that would be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_St._John. IMDB states he is "uncredited" though. 2001:9E8:6129:9B00:E133:9D72:B63C:862B (talk) 07:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Smith review

[edit]

I removed Kyle Smith's 2016 New York Post review from the Feminism section because as he is a known conservative columnist (written for the National Review) who has vocally criticized feminism and the Bechdel test (his own words: "women’s movie ideas aren't commercial enough for Hollywood studios" because "women tend to write movies about relationships, and men tend to write movies about aliens and shootouts") it does not feel relevant to the subject at hand to include his thoughts on a film with strong feminist themes. Spectrallights (talk) 06:44, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]