Talk:The War of the Roses (film): Difference between revisions
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
I've edited this,for neutrality (would you believe!) It seemed to be written as if Barbara was the one to blame; as I remember it, they were both equally at fault, and the film took pains to show that. [[User:Swanny18|Swanny18]] ([[User talk:Swanny18|talk]]) 19:32, 27 June 2012 (UTC) |
I've edited this,for neutrality (would you believe!) It seemed to be written as if Barbara was the one to blame; as I remember it, they were both equally at fault, and the film took pains to show that. [[User:Swanny18|Swanny18]] ([[User talk:Swanny18|talk]]) 19:32, 27 June 2012 (UTC) |
||
Swanny18 is spot on, they were both at fault, if anything, the film implies Oliver is primarily to blame. The bulk of their marriage (before the meltdown) he is shown ignoring her, putting work above everything, and generally being condescending and disrespectful to Barbara. She is shown to be long-suffering and generally acquiescent. |
|||
Also, in plot, someone wrote that Oliver boarded up the house "to keep Barbara from leaving", which is silly, because all she'd have to do is remove a few boards from any door/window and leave at will. Neither person wanted to leave because they wanted to "win" their claim to the house. I actually have no idea why Oliver boarded up the windows and doors. Some parts of the film don't hold up well to logic. |
Revision as of 22:57, 3 August 2015
![]() | Film: American Start‑class | |||||||||
|
German term
I am going to remove the reference to the German speaking world, as the word "Rosenkrieg" (war of the roses) already existed well before this movie. It is more likely, that "Rosenkrieg" references the Wars_of_the_Roses (1455–1487). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.29.77.101 (talk) 09:33, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- According to this, it is now part of the german vernacular as a term for a messy divorce. It was put back a while ago; I've added the reference. Swanny18 (talk) 16:45, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
- On a broader note, should this be in the introduction? It's hardly central to an understanding of the film. Swanny18 (talk) 16:47, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'd agree that its not needed in the intro. I'm not particularly convinced the source is reliable though - are there any stronger sources out there to back up the statement? Hchc2009 (talk) 17:51, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I've moved it down to a new section, "Cultural impact". If anyone has a better title for this, BTW, please say. Swanny18 (talk) 19:29, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Marketing
As I recall, this film was originally marketed as a comedy, but when early audiences protested that it wasn't particularly funny, the nature of the marketing campaign was altered, to emphasize the more satirical aspects of the story and the darker aspects of divorce. It might be interesting to include that information in the "Reception" section. I'll try to find a reference, but perhaps someone else can come up with a good one.Lolliapaulina51 (talk) 20:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Plot
I've edited this,for neutrality (would you believe!) It seemed to be written as if Barbara was the one to blame; as I remember it, they were both equally at fault, and the film took pains to show that. Swanny18 (talk) 19:32, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Swanny18 is spot on, they were both at fault, if anything, the film implies Oliver is primarily to blame. The bulk of their marriage (before the meltdown) he is shown ignoring her, putting work above everything, and generally being condescending and disrespectful to Barbara. She is shown to be long-suffering and generally acquiescent.
Also, in plot, someone wrote that Oliver boarded up the house "to keep Barbara from leaving", which is silly, because all she'd have to do is remove a few boards from any door/window and leave at will. Neither person wanted to leave because they wanted to "win" their claim to the house. I actually have no idea why Oliver boarded up the windows and doors. Some parts of the film don't hold up well to logic.