Talk:Cloak & Dagger (1984 film)

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Australian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Russian in Film[edit]

Can anyone translate the Russian that Dabney Coleman speaks at the start of the film? It is a short conversation where he tries to bluff his way past a Russian guard and then kills him with a cigarette dart. I've wondered what they were saying for over twenty years. Thanks! -Husnock 27 Dec 04

It would appear the guard asks him to identify himself to which Jack Flack asks him if he has a cigarette lighter. http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~ina22/splaylib/Screenplay-Cloak_%26_Dagger.pdf

Populartiy[edit]

How much money did this movie make? How'd the critics respond? Was the DvD release successful or a flop? There should be a section on these types of questions. --208.127.64.127 17:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Role-Playing Game Tie in[edit]

I recently had the pleasure of rewatching this movie, which brought back a lot of good memories. One of them was the old TSR roleplaying game: "Cloak & Dagger" and the subsequent Endless Quest books under the same title. I'd think this might be a coincidence, but between the opening scene resembling a role-playing game instead of a normal table top game, and all of the Dungeons and Dragons Material floating around in the background shots of the game store (There's a whole rack with little besides Player's Handbooks, and when the father takes away the son's games, you can clearly see The 1984 copy of the Marvel Roleplaying Game produced by TSR among other random cameos) this can't be a coincidence. TSR was making a large push during this time to bring roleplaying games into the average American household, and though I personally can't prove they had a hand in shaping this movie, I'd think a little research would bring up some rather interesting results. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.130.128 (talk) 01:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Tag[edit]

Infobox tag has been removed as article already has one. If you have any problems with this please post a message on my talk page. RWardy 22:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move according to revised proposal below Favonian (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

– Make disambig page more accessible and create consistent page names for the two films. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 14:13, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support for all-around clarity. While I considered opposing due to WP:PRECISION suggesting concise article titles, such conciseness still leaves a topic of low notability such as the 1984 film with some unneeded ambiguity. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum: What will the current article cloak and dagger be moved to? Is it necessary to do so? Maybe the general definition should be at Wiktionary (as are some other idioms I've seen). Erik (talk | contribs) 19:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To follow up, I support the nominator's revised proposal below. Erik (talk | contribs) 13:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As Erik says, this will increase clarity and it will make navigation easier for the reader. Jenks24 (talk) 19:35, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Semisupport I support moving both films, and that the current title should point to the disambiguation page. I'm not sure about the current article at cloak and dagger though, it seems fine where it is. 65.94.47.63 (talk) 04:00, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I initially missed that Cloak & Dagger and Cloak and dagger were different pages. Good catch everyone. I would like to revise my request to the following, which takes this fact into account. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 05:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cloak & Dagger → Cloak & Dagger (1984 film)
Cloak and Dagger (film) → Cloak and Dagger (1946 film)
REDIRECT Cloak & Dagger to Cloak and dagger (disambiguation)
LEAVE Cloak and dagger (disambiguation) and Cloak and dagger (with its hatnote) as is

Support revised proposal. There is no justification for one of the films taking precedence over the other, or over "Cloak and dagger" as a general term. Quigley (talk) 07:11, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support the revised proposal. older ≠ wiser 13:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.