This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
This article seems determined to make the film seem like a piece o shit[edit]
Look at the reception. Look at Ebert's attribution and his actual review. 173.57.172.191 (talk) 08:53, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ebert only just touches on the symbolism which makes many scenes funny; even though this article is not a review it should mention more about how the film has to be careful about the scenes from the book, like when the devil is walking on water. The IMDB mentions that such a scene was cut out because director Miller anticipated too much reaction to that kind of symbolism. Also Roger Ebert mentions that it is not the special effects which hold/make/save the film, the climax is overdone, he wrote.--d-axel (talk) 00:19, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
