|Bicycle Thieves has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Art. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|WikiProject Film||(Rated C-class)|
- proposal The Bicycle Thieves → Bicycle Thieves. The Bicycle Thieves is plain wrong. Bicycle Thieves is the more correct translation of the Italian Ladri di biciclette. Mandel 14:50, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- add: * Support or * Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation and a signature:"~~~~"
- Support. Even in America, where the film is generally known as The Bicycle Thief, the more accurate Bicycle Thieves seems to be gaining ground. --Kevin Myers 14:32, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)
Ladri di Biciclette translates to thiefs of bicycles.
This is kind of infuriating - this movie's been known as "The Bicycle Thief" for 60 years. Why the sudden change? Personally, I find the original title infinitely superior, as it retains the European sensibility (and the ambiguity they treasure so much) - are there others here that don't want to see this amazing piece of cinema referred to by an inferior name? Also, "the Bicycle Thief" is what it was released as, and it's what it was honored at the Oscars as. I vote to change it back to "the Bicycle Thief". I don't want to get crucified by over-zealous WikiWatchers for changing it, but I feel quite strongly about it. My two cents - anybody agrees, please share your thoughts. Also, just out of curiousity, when did this get changed? --Bblakeney
- The Bicycle Thief is the old American title. Bicycle Thieves is the more accurate and European (UK) title, used (as you correctly stated) for 60 years. As for retaining whatever "European sensibility"...clearly you are not European and the British have opted for Bicycle Thieves. The USA is not the world, it is only part of the world, so don't try to bend everything to US standards just because the rest of the world refuses to. Furthermore, this is an Italian film. DORC (talk) 06:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- "it works, and there isn't any real reason to change it to appease the purists who know a little Italian or care that the UK release translation was "correct". Well, friend, if you think the UK, Italy or de Sica should sucker up to your personal preference, don't pretend to have made this film. Unless the director comes up with his own title otherwise (eg. In the Mood for Love), I think it safe to assume he prefers an accurate translation. Or maybe we should just call it A Man, His Son, and One (or Two) Stolen Bikes. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 15:00, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
---Add any additional comments on the "Requested move" below this line ---
This entry title cannot be called The Bicycle Thief. The film was released in the UK as Bicycle Thieves; that's the correct translation of the original Italian title. The singular tense is ludicrous since there are more than 1 thief in the film. It's a major distortion of De Sica's intentions. Mandel 12:38, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)
- I also heard it called "Thieves" too. But according to the IMDb, it was originally released in the US under the singular title. I have moved it to the plural because these days it is the one you hear. Pcb21| Pete 22:25, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- according to IMDb it was Bicycle Thieves in the UK and The Bicycle Thief in the US. I don't think it is The Bicycle Thieves anywhere. So I think it should be moved to one or the other. I suspect that more English Speakers know it as The Bicycle Thief than Bicycle Thieves, but it doesn't really matter where it ends up as long as it doesn't stay here! Since Bicycle Thieves is a better translation, I'll go along with that. --Samuel Wantman 20:57, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
User:SamuelWantman messed things up with this and it's not a simple case of moving it back because of a copy/paste move. I'll leave it in the WP:RM holding pen so that the article histories can be merged when the block compression error is no longer causing us problems. violet/riga (t) 17:27, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I never moved anything to "The Bicycle Thieves". I did move the article to "The Bicycle Theif". I will take discredit for the copy/paste thing. I was rather new to wikipedia at the time and didn't know what I was doing! Sorry. -- Samuel Wantman 20:20, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Though I am a little late getting to the discussion there are a couple key points I think make sense regarding the title and the comments above. 1) User:Mandel, if you're going to make a comment on "correct translation", i.e. grammar, et al, you might want to make sure you use correct grammar yourself: "since there are more than 1 thief in the film"? Uh, nice try. Talk about singular and plural usage. 2) Translations from one language to another are not always so cut and dry. For example, during a visit to France in 1993 I found it odd that the French translation on the poster advertising the release of The Mighty Ducks was Les Petit Champions. I am sure the French language can accommodate "mighty" and "ducks", but purists are worried about the plural of thief? 3) Yes, the street urchin steals the original bicycle, and finally the hero steals a bicycle, too. Two thefts, two theives. But the story is not about the urchin, it is about our protagonist. One could argue that the first real theft in the film is his lying about having a bicycle in proper order and stealing a job from the other able-bodied men who say they have bicycles and can do the job. He's desperate and he steals from those other men the opportunity to get the job. He is the bicycle thief in the beginning and in the end of the film. One could, and I, argue that though The Bicycle Thief may not be Di Sica's title, it works, and there isn't any real reason to change it to appease the purists who know a little Italian or care that the UK release translation was "correct".Jtrackcoach (talk) 22:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- It seems pretty low to attack someone for grammatical mistakes when the person clearly does not write in his native language. Also, your personal preference is your personal preference, it does not make The Bicycle Thief a better title than Bicycle Thieves. We know that De Sica chose the plural tense, so why are you making a case where you prefer (out of custom) the more inaccurate title over the other? You did not make this film, de Sica did, and we are respecting his wish to translate it properly. It is not a matter of the letter but the spirit of the letter being lost. In this case, the spirit goes with the letter. DORC (talk) 06:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
"it works, and there isn't any real reason to change it to appease the purists who know a little Italian or care that the UK release translation was "correct". Well, friend, do you think the UK, Italy or de Sica should sucker up to your personal preference? Unless the director comes up with his own title (eg. In the Mood for Love), I think it safe to assume we should render accurately. Or maybe we should just call it A Man, His Son, and One (or Two) Stolen Bikes. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 15:00, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
In light of the controversy over the name (here and elsewhere), I've added a section for it. - AKeen 21:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
"Thief" feels better
I completely agree with who the article quoted as saying he prefers the title "Thief" to "Thieves". It makes the ending so much more poignant, and when you reflect upon the title after the movie is over, it means so much more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6045:CA:79B3:EBD9:87A7:C57F (talk) 19:14, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Deleted from the article:
- Director Tim Burton has stated that his film Pee Wee's Big Adventure (1985) is loosely based on Bicycle Thieves.
It's either true or it isn't.
- Comparing the plot summaries of both films will swiftly reveal that even if Burton did say that, he was joking. Cop 633 00:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, the plots aren't all that different. Both are about men whose bicycles are stolen and their efforts to get them back. I haven't seen Pee-Wee's Big Adventure in years, so at least that's how I remember the plot. --YellowTapedR 04:50, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Ladri3.jpg
Image:Ladri3.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 ensure 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.