Talk:Miller's Crossing

Fair use rationale for Image:Millerscrossingposter.jpg

Image:Millerscrossingposter.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 insure 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 01:45, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Recent edits to synopsis/cast

The expansion to the synopsis and cast sections I recently wrote (after having forgotten to log in) are being reverted under the accusation that they are "interpretive and opinionated and unencyclopaedic". I do not feel that they are any of these things, and would like some follow-up on how exactly these charges are being justified. If we can address specific objections and work them out, I think that would be a lot more constructive than a simple revert war.-Captain Crawdad (talk) 04:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I have reverted your changes to the cast section after discussing the matter with members of WikiProject Film, who agreed said information was inappropriate and unencyclopædic. Thanks. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 14:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

May I get a link to this conversation so I can see the justification for this opinion?-Captain Crawdad (talk) 21:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Here is a link to my conversation with WP:Film member Melty girl. Her link to MOS:FILM is most relevant. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so the objection is that the information was "plot information, not cast information" and that behind the scenes casting info would be preferable. However, in my research of featured articles, cast sections often contain character information and even small bits of plot information in addition to casting info. E.T.'s section has character information and then a paragraph of casting information. Jurassic Park's cast section includes character info, plot info, and some casting info mixed in. Latter Days has character, casting, and some plot information. Kung Fu Hustle has cast and plot info only, with casting broken off into a different area. So that's four featured articles, representing "Wikipedia's very best work", that include character and plot info in the cast section. I agree that the cast section is incomplete without casting information, but that can be added to the rest of the info as soon as it's found. I'll wait to get responses before doing any editing to the article. -Captain Crawdad (talk) 17:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's been two weeks, so if anyone is unconvinced by the logic of my argument, they can continue this discussion. In the meantime, I'll restore the character descriptions. -Captain Crawdad (talk) 21:22, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Homosexuality in the film

A question has come up regarding the homosexuality of characters in the film. I can see how this would be easy to miss or forget considering the stylized dialogue of the film and the round-about way that things are discussed. The characters Bernie, Mink, and the Dane are all referred to as having romantic or sexual relationships with each other by various characters in the film. Various film reviews provide confirmation, including: http://www.dvdtown.com/reviews/millers-crossing/1550/2 says, "The most arresting ideas involve the frequent homosexual references in the film, particularly to Bernie's character, Mink's, and even Dane's." http://www.kamera.co.uk/features/millerscrossing.html says, "Bernie is also in a homosexual relationship with Mink (John Buscemi) - not for emotional needs, but as a business decision." http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9C0CEFDB1630F932A1575AC0A966958260 says, "Bernie, who is also identified, for no special story reason, as being a homosexual." I'm not sure that the issue requires references in the article, but if someone else disagrees they can use these or find their own. Captain Crawdad (talk) 00:20, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

There is absolutely no indication that Bernie and The Dane were ever lovers. There is, obviously, a love triangle between The Dane, Mink, and Bernie, but no indication of a past relationship between The Dane and Bernie. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Cinematic Influences

I think in the Influences section it might be useful to cite some of its cinematic influences as well as the films literary influnces. The most obvious cinematic influence has to Bernardo Bertolucci's The Conformist. Its down to the influence of the conformist that the movie uses light the way it does and the scenes in the woods in autumn are shot the way they are. Even the way Gabriel Byrne's character dresses and acts is influenced by elements in the Conformist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.32.22 (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, any such claim would require a very good source. If you have, or can find, one, go ahead and add it. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 00:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Cinematic Influences

Someone who writes better than I do ought to mention that this film is one of many (Fistful of Dollars, Last Man Standing, etc.) in a series of cinematic/thematic tributes to Akira Kurosawa's "Yojimbo," who used the the themes and political messages in Hammet's works as commentary of the political corruption of postwar Japan. The Coen Bros borrowed heavily from Yojimbo (that is afterall the hallmark of what they _do_ in their films), to express their take on the American economic socio-religious trinity: the Military, Congressional, Industrial Complex. 208.106.86.253 (talk) 21:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

This film is not, in any way, based on or inspired by Yojimbo. Rather, the Coen Bros., by their own admission, borrowed heavily from Dashiell Hammett, as the article states, which was also Kurosawa's source material. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 21:25, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

'What's the rumpus?'

Is it appropriate to have any mention of a phrase used frequently in the film, 'What's the rumpus?" I'm not aware of it being period slang. DQweny (talk) 01:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Read Hammett, you'll find it, especially Red Harvest. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 02:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

"The movie poster."

The line under the poster: "The movie poster." seems incorrect to me. Unless anyone has any objections, I'm changing it to "Theatrical Poster". In my opinion it should at least have capitals and no full stop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.172.84.214 (talk) 05:52, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Gross revenue

I don't see why the gross revenue is not in the info box, especially considering the exact sum is mentioned further down in the article as being $5,000,000. Can some one please add this as I don't know how.