Jump to content

Talk:Angel Heart

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 23.242.135.196 (talk) at 02:49, 11 May 2016 (→‎What would have happened?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Article

Horrible Article It describes the ending indepth in the plot overview, for chrissakes. It tells you about how Cyphre is Satan in one of the beginning paragraphs... I wonder how many people have had the film ruined for them by reading this criminal article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.56.193.240 (talk) 20:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gotta love anon ips who talk about how bad Wikipedia is but never establish accounts or contribute to articles. -OberRanks (talk) 18:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ending

Come on folks. what kind of encyclopedia is this? the plot/summary/spoiler section DOES not describe the ending. it merely says "bla bla bla there's a TWIST ENDING." is this supposeds to be promotional material, or is this an encyclopedia? somebody, please, please, please put the ending information in. (don't worry about spoiling it: anybody who comes here will have already seen the movie most likely, and besides that, there's a huge "SPOILER" warning in the article text.) i don't know what the ending is, so i can't do it. somebody: get on the job. bravo, thanks, good work. 128.119.236.162 06:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at a variety of other "twist ending" films -- Sixth Sense, The Crying Game, etc. -- I'm not seeing the entire plot spelled out. It's unclear if this encyclopedia needs to give a complete plot synopsis for every film. -- Metahacker 03:50, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Did anybody else notice the similarities between the ending of this movie and the ending of The Devil's Advocate? Actor playing the devil in human form, lawyers involved, incest, the devil revealing his true nature and that of the film's protagonist while playing a phonograph? Moe Aboulkheir

Unfortunately the ending is given:

...Angel must finally face the fact that he is Johnny Favorite himself...

And there is no spoiler warning. I would fix it but I'm sure someone will just undo it. Kwyjibear 04:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Louis Cyphere or Louis Cyphre?

On http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092563/ it refers always to "Louis Cyphre", and not "Louis Cyphere". I'm going to change that in the article.-Zingazin 18:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Angel Heart and Oedipus compared

I think that a very good parallel can be made between these two stories comparing their plots.--Zingazin 20:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

this is certainly true- consider that cyphere's line to johnny/harold when he reveals his identity to him- "alas, how terrible is wisdom when it brings no profit to the wise, johnny ?"- is a paraphrase from sophocles. there is also the incest between angel and his daughter. i seem to remember a professor once saying that there was intertextuality between this movie and a certain one of shakespeare's plays, though i can't remember which one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.25.209 (talk) 20:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation?

There is also an anime titled "Angel Heart" - 68.97.135.143 05:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect character

Guys, the text on "Nightmares" says about the figure in black: "it was Louis Cyphre, who is seen wearing the black clothing outside Harry's apartment when he finally admits his fate at the end of the film". It is NOT Robert DeNiro's Cyphre, it is the real Harry Angel character. At the beginning, he comes up out of Hell in the same elevator Favorite takes down at the end, to witness the events. Just look at his face when they finally show it - that's not DeNiro. Hanz ofbyotch —Preceding comment was added at 21:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that is De Niro, but playing the role of the actual Harry Angel (ie before the surgery). One of the points in the movie was that the devil assumed the look of the real Harry while walking the Earth, probably as a test to see if Harry/Johnny would react to seeing his old self. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.45.237 (talk) 05:19, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I stand corrected, I left Parker's commentary on for that scene. It took many, many, minutes but I can see it's DeNiro now. I like what you said about the real Harry Angel, I put that in my head as well.Hanz ofbyotch —Preceding comment was added at 21:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dead person at the beginning

Does anybody know who is the dead person we see in a dark alley right after the opening credits?

Its johnny favorite I think.

I believe at the end Louis cypher says it. --Steinfeld7 (talk) 22:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely not Favorite. Freeze it at 1m:51s, and you can see that it's an old woman, wearing heels and stockings. It may just be set dressing, like the woman cleaning up the blood in the church in Harlem, from the parishioner who committed suicide the night before Angel and Cyphre have their meeting. There is no indication his death has anything to do with the story we're watching, but it sets the mood that life in 1950s New York could be grim and nasty. 23.242.135.196 (talk) 02:36, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chickens and fans

Chickens and Fans are repeated motifs in the film should this be stated somewhere? The themes section perhaps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.246.235 (talk) 10:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the fan part was put down, but I'm also wondering what the chicken part means. It probably has to do with the egg scene when louis cphyre compares it to consuming souls, so maybe the chickens have to do with the eggs being souls. Hope that answers your question. --Steinfeld7 (talk) 22:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What would have happened?

In the "egg" scene, Cyphre states that the egg can be a symbol for the soul, and then he OFFERS IT to Angel, who says "No thank you" and tosses it aside. What would have happened if he had accepted it? My theory is that Cyphre genuinely begins to like Angel/Favorite and decides to offer him (unknowingly) a way out of his fate. Angel's brutish reaction merely seals that fate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.166.39.189 (talk) 15:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was just a play on words and an in-joke. The devil gobbles up the egg and then asks if Angel wants an egg. Its funny becuase, at that point in the film, its becoming obvious who Cyphre is. For me, I figured it out when he visited the church talking about "how he doesnt like loose accounts". Ultimate irony that the devil is dealing in souls inside a church. -OberRanks (talk) 01:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the "messy accounts" line is from this scene. Cyphre is seen slowly peeling the egg as they discuss the case. Cyphre asks Angel if he is aware of the egg/soul symbology, to which Angel replies: "no, I didn't know that," clearly losing patience with Cyphre. When Cyphre has finished peeling, he sprinkles salt and offers the egg to Angel. Angel takes it and throws over his shoulder with a dismissive "No thank you." The camera then switches immediately back to Cyphre, who proceeds to take a menacing bite from the egg (presumably having "summoned" it back to his own hand). This clearly shocks Angel. His question is "Would you like an egg?" Based on his previous question, this could easily be read as "Would you like a soul?" Cyphre only eats the egg after Angel rejects it. Perhaps he was trying to be a nice guy. How's that for irony? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.69.128.248 (talk) 21:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure Angel only throws some salt over his shoulder. It is a custom/superstition to throw salt like that when you spill it. 89.210.140.241 (talk) 13:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Go back and watch it again. If you listen carefully you can actually hear the egg hit the ground.
(Guys I need to check the footage out but I do remember Harry "sprinkling" with his fingers, so I'm voting for salt) Hanz ofbyotch (talk) 21:47, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it is salt he tosses over his shoulder and not an egg. 99.0.37.176 (talk) 02:14, 19 November 2013 (UTC) Up to that point he has been an average rational (albeit the phobia of chickens)detective working for an eccentric but rich religious client. By throwing salt over his shoulder his subconscious reaction betrays to the observant viewer that he harbors superstitious beliefs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panda Bearrister (talk • contribs) 19:25, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think that was more testing from Cyphre, or nudging to see if Angel is starting to remember his life as Favorite. Favorite was steeped in the occult and mysticism, and would surely have known what Cyphre was saying, whereas Angel is just an average guy, his knowledge of such things goes no deeper than superstitions about spilling salt being bad luck. I think the dislike of chickens is related to that, as the role they in the voodoo scenes that occur in New Orleans indicates that he feels that way because of things Favorite experienced there with Evangeline, that were strong enough that even Angel still feels them. Where else would Harold Angel, obviously a lifelong New Yorker, acquire a dislike for chickens? 23.242.135.196 (talk) 02:49, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The woman/man in the black dress

I've seen this movie at least five times and have never been sure of who (or what) that figure is supposed to be. It is the woman seen in the beginning scrubbing the floor, who at the end of the film we see with the face of a man. Is this the Devil or Favorite or some other figure? -OberRanks (talk) 01:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question in article

This paragraph was inserted into the main article, it should probabaly go onto the talk page. I have moved it here. -OberRanks (talk) 13:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another edited exclusive version of "Angel Heart"- The "Flashback" sequences of Harry Angel in the film was seen with different scenes and footages, from ITV channel in UK during the 90s. Why this version never made into VHS; LD; DVDs of "Angel Heart" is unknown. Question is, is that the only alternate version of "Angel Heart" Anyone?

Service number info

The info about the service number in the film is cited from Army records and is notable for the reason that no Army officer ever had that number. I've come across numerous questions over the years, both in person and on net chat rooms, from people who have asked who's number that really was. The answer being, it was made up. For this reason, its a good bit of information for the article. Unless it breaks Wikipedia policy to have it in there, there really is no reason why it should be removed. -OberRanks (talk) 14:41, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not notable information. It's a piece of trivia. License plate numbers, telephone numbers, addresses, etc. are made up in thousands of other movies but sections like this do not exist in those articles. Sottolacqua (talk) 15:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can put the info on the talk page if you would like until we get more opinions. I found it notable due to the questions raised about it over the years. Most military people, when they see that number, often wonder if its a real service number. A similar thing can be found in Jacob's Ladder. -OberRanks (talk) 16:03, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most people wonder if telephone numbers or addresses are real places seen in other movies. That doesn't warrant an entire section in other movie articles and the argument about military personnel caters to a very specific audience. I'm sure movies like Full Metal Jacket and Platoon contain many references that may pique the interest of servicemen but neither article contains trivial comments or sections like the one above. Sottolacqua (talk) 16:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, neither of those films reference service numbers. In fact, in all my research, I have only found four movies that actually give reference to a character holding a United States military service number and, of those, only two which actually show a correct one (this film and Jacob's Ladder). And this is a somewhat different matter from the "555" telephone numbers or license plates which appear in films (are those not real plate numbers used on cars owned by the studios?) Not saying it cant be removed, just asking the info be posted on the talk page if we choose to do so in order for other editors can give their views. -OberRanks (talk) 16:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC) BTW-In response to this (valid) concern, I renamed the section from trivia to providing information about the film's production and props and requested it be expanded. If there is no real expansion within the next few days or weeks, then by all means we can axe it out. -OberRanks (talk) 16:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed section

Added the removed section in case other users wish to comment -OberRanks (talk) 19:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"A set of dog tags bearing the Army service number "O-168042" can be seen in the film as the service number of Harry Angel. According to U.S. Army records, no officer was ever actually issued this number; the only person who ever held this service number was an enlisted soldier named John W. Cunyus who served during the First World War.(ref)United States Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Freedom of Information Act Inquiry, February 2009(/ref)"

The information is not pertinent to the film article. A "Production" section for this article should have key details about the development, writing, filming, and editing process. Erik (talk) 19:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This information still has no applicable reference to the topic of the article. Additionally, a Google search turns up results containing references to this in other trivia sections, and in the two applicable results with links still in tact this reference is repeated verbatim to what you have above.(1)(2). The article for 867-5309/Jenny has a detailed section about the use of the telephone number after the song was published because that number is directly related to the content of the article. What you're proposing including is akin to a reference of "123 Anystreet USA is an address seen in the film. John Doe once lived there." Sottolacqua (talk) 20:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just clarification about the Google links you found. They appear to be copies of this article on Wikipedia, not the other way around. I wasn't sure if your suggestion was that I had copied the material from another website - I didn't, I did the original research with the Army that located the material to begin with. -OberRanks (talk) 21:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, that anecdote in Jacob's Ladder (film) you referenced above is there because you added it. Sottolacqua (talk) 20:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't disputing its removal, I was simply recording the removed information here in case others wished to comment upon it. I also never denied I was the original contributor. I am actually quite proud of the Service number (United States) article that led me to discover this material. -OberRanks (talk) 21:01, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lucrezia

Historically, this film has literally scared some people so much, they broke out in tears. Others have taken advantage of this fact, and taken advantage of others, and actually imitated charactors in the film! Would have been nice to see dvd extras following film, yet if persons have taken part in such miserable kaos, for real, that's them. Has nothing to do with reality. The Craft. Jaguar *)75.201.222.35 (talk) 18:17, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incest

I just saw this film for the first time a couple days ago, and I'm still a little shocked that there was a (graphic) incest scene. Although the viewer doesn't realize that Proudfoot is Angle's daughter till later, I would have thought this film would have been tagged with something to warn of an incest scene, even if the father did have amnesia and the daughter (presumably) didn't recognize him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leftynm (talk • contribs) 18:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there was an incest scene in it. Both with the father unknowingly having sex with his daughter, and the grandfather or Robert DeNiro's character being implied that he'd had sex knowingly with his granddaughter in a ceremony. Someone should edit the article to say that it's a movie that deals with incest.71.175.70.125 (talk) 19:54, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bonet's departure from Cosby

The article contains a question as to Bonet's departure from Cosby: "Some[who?] blamed the controversial sex scene for Bonet's departure from The Cosby Show, which resulted in her starring on the Cosby-produced program spin-off, A Different World which premiered in 1987." I don't have a resource to back this up, but I do remember it. Being pre-internet, I probably saw it on Entertainment Tonight, or a similar show. I'm pretty sure the Cosby people never said anything official, but it was at least pondered by the media. Someone may be able to find a reference: I challenge you! 72.219.62.17 (talk) 22:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Angel Heart/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:40, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Ok I will take a look, make straightforward copyedits as I go and jot queries below. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:40, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As he wrote the script, Parker made several changes from the novel Falling Angel. - you've already mentioned the novel name so it is unnecessary here.
He titled his script Angel Heart, as he wanted "to give the film an identity of its own, separate from its literary beginnings" - can be rewritten to not use a direct quote. Direct quote marks are often jarring to read, so using them only in places where they are really distinctive and add something is prudent....
The "identity of its own" sounds schmoozy like from an advertising brochure...but I can't think of an alternative so not a deal-breaker at this point....
''Parker sought to make Harry Angel a "sympathetic" character. - sounds odd, also be good to de-quote. You mean it to be "Parker sought to make Harry Angel a character that evokes sympathy." (?)
it took extensive convincing for him to actually commit to the role - any elaboration from source here would be good...
to "defuse the tension" of the scene - can be rewritten to not use a direct quote.
What I meant was to change the wording as well to distance from source paraphrasing-wise, so maybe something like, "to make the actors more comfortable while shooting" or something like it.

Thanks for reviewing the article, Casliber. I have gone through the article and made the changes you brought up thus far, including De Niro's commitment to the role. FrankRizzo (talk) 21:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The De Niro stuff is really cool - any color like this is great - anything about (for instance) casting..any other alternate actors..etc.
Thanks for your replies. I've taken your comments into consideration.
  • I've expanded on details involving the casting.
  • I've changed to "defuse the tension" of the scene to your suggestion of "to make the actors more comfortable while shooting".
  • I've also removed the "identity of its own" comment in the Writing column. "Parker made several changes from the novel, and titled his script Angel Heart." If possible, I could change this to "Parker titled his script Angel Heart as he wanted to distance his film adaptation from the source material." FrankRizzo (talk) 16:07, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber, are you still reviewing the article? FrankRizzo (talk) 05:16, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, sorry, yes I like your suggestion above to change to "Parker titled his script Angel Heart as he wanted to distance his film adaptation from the source material." Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:06, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Casliber, for reviewing and passing the article! FrankRizzo (talk) 15:21, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written?:

Prose quality: - just waiting on last tweak above. all good
Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources: (NB: fals positive with earwig's copyvio detector due to quotes - clear)
Citations to reliable sources, where required:
No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:
Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: (on FU image of film poster)
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:


Overall:

Pass or Fail: - just final couple of things - looking good otherwise. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:09, 5 April 2016 (UTC) all good. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:06, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Angel_Heart&oldid=719673111"