Jump to content

Talk:Chariots of Fire/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

'Mr Bean'

I have removed the lines where it says Rowan Atkinson performed as Mr Bean. He was very clearly credited as Rowan Atkinson and no mention at all was made about Mr Bean. Rowan Atkinson doesn't equal Mr Bean, Mr Bean is just one of his many characters. The inability for foreigners to make this distinction is ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.255.204.123 (talk) 08:40, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Source of title

I believe the correct title of the poem/song is "Jerusalem" (and that it's credited this way in the film), but not certain enough to change it on the Wiki. Many poems are indexed only by their first line in published collections and this could give rise to someone mistaking "and did those feet..." for the actual title. "The New Jerusalem" gets mentioned in relation to the poem because of its Biblical connection and may also result in its attribution as a title. See [1] Slowmover 19:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
The soundtrack album also titles it "Jerusalem". Wahkeenah 00:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
I either fixed it, or screwed it up. Please review. I changed "The New Jerusalem" to "Jerusalem", and explictly named the poem. If the "The New Jerusalem" is a proper name, than The New Jerusalem should be a disambig page. --Rob 19:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Disambig link has been added to that page now. -- Slowmover 20:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Does the film mention the Blake poem? Because the phrase "Chariots of Fire" is actually originally from II Kings 2:11 and II Kings 6:17. (I had actually edited the page to this effect a while back, but I made a mistake and put Isaiah rather than II Kings). -- HowardW June 24, 2006

Softlavender and I are disputing the source of the title. Whether Collin Welland was inspired by 'Jerusalem', which was in turn inspired by II Kings, or was familiar with II Kings at the time of making a decision about the title, is not clarified by any reliable source. An anonymous point of 'trivia' in the IMDB is simply not a reliable source, Softy. Furthermore, the film and II Kings both refer to 'chariots' as a plural noun, whereas the Blake poem refers to a single chariot - even possessively. Unless a source directly attributable to Welland can be found, the most reasonable information to put in this entry is that the title of this film is found in both the Blake Poem and II Kings. What's the point of suppressing a reference to II Kings in this entry? It makes the 'pedia less useful because, in fact, I went to the CoF entry to get the II Kings verse, and couldn't find it! Lets be more inclusive with information, less dogmatic about a personal point of view, and a bit more skeptical about anonymous stuff posted elsewhere on the 'net.98.245.50.30 (talk) 03:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

This seems like a silly argument, and the editing of this article is poor. The film title is "Chariots", plural. I found mention of the title linked to II Kings 2:11 a few minutes ago, which mentions a "chariot", singular. The Blake poem also mentions a "chariot", singular. The only source that actually mentions "Chariots of Fire" plural, is II Kings 6:17, and that verse wasn't even mentioned in the article prior to my edit. I found the IMDB citation regarding Welland's supposed inspirational moment, but this is an unreliable anonymous source, and it makes no sense. Why would Welland think that to be a great title for the film? If he found it to be such a great title, why would he change the singular "chariot" for the plural "chariots"? There were plenty of reasons to put "Jerusalem" in the sound track of the film besides its reference to a chariot of fire. So, the only exact reference to the film title is II Kings 6:17. I suppose it's alright to mention the IMDB anecdote, in the spirit of being "inclusive" as urged above. However, it is an uncorroborated anecdote, and with the singular-to-plural change, I am very skeptical of its accuracy.Verytas (talk) 06:49, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
As I recall, the book that was issued at the same time as the movie had that portion of the "Jerusalem" poem as kind of a preface. The title of the movie comes from that line in the poem/song, not directly from the Bible. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
"... why would he change the singular 'chariot' for the plural 'chariots'?" Because the film is about several runners, not just one. Softlavender (talk) 05:50, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Precisely. The poem says "bring ME MY chariot of fire". There's more than one "me" in focus in that movie. The poem could be said to be the "inspiration piece" for the film's title. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, it seems that both of you are eager to line up behind an anonymous and undocumented bit of internet trivia, and invent a rationale that cannot be attributed to anyone but yourselves to make that bit of trivia fit the facts (i.e. the title and the texts of the poem and the Bible). I edited this article solely to correct a clear omission, and cite what may be the only other place in the world literature that mentions "chariots of fire". As long as that remains, I'll leave the article alone. However, in my opinion, the current form and foundation of the article in this matter is weak because it doesn't characterize the strength of what is being cited from the internet. It would be more appropriate to write that the film title is "rumored" to have been inspired by the Blake poem.Verytas (talk) 04:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Collin Welland has stated his working title, and the source of the final title, in several interviews -- you're free to search those interviews out via the hard copies of British newspapers and magazines from 1981. I believe this is also noted in the DVD extras on the 2005 DVD -- you can give all of those features a listen as well if you like. This information is well documented outside of IMDB, which merely reflects the info from the other sources I mention. Softlavender (talk) 09:43, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I love these discussions that span 4 1/2 years. :) As you're suggesting, someone needs to find a statement from the film's director, producer, or whatever, that states definitively whether the title was inspired by (1) The Bible; (2) the poem/song; (3) both; (4) neither. The single-vs.-plural argument is a red herring. But that doesn't mean that the Bible wasn't the stronger inspiration for the title. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
It's already sourced, B, every time it is mentioned in the article. It's from the extremely popular British hymn (familiar to every Englishman) that Welland heard on television. See the "Script" section of the article for full details. Softlavender (talk) 11:16, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it's sourced to IMDB, which relies upon user input and thus it becomes circular reasoning, since their own source might have been wikipedia. If he said that on the DVD extra, that's what your source should be. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
No, the IMDB source is not Wikipedia. That info has been on IMDB for several years, whereas the info wasn't added to Wikipedia until nine months ago. Softlavender (talk) 23:07, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
The core issue is that the other user here does not think IMDB is a reliable source for trivia, and frankly that has been the standard approach here - that IMDB is OK for things that can be verified in the films, such as cast and crew, but not for external stuff like trivia. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:23, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
To repeat, my understanding is that Welland related the scenario quoted on IMDB in British interviews in 1981. These interviews are not on the internet (very few British interviews are -- the internet is very U.S.-centric, especially show-biz-wise) except in the very detailed IMDB reference. The hymn used in the film is the source for the title. (2 Kings is not ever used or mentioned in the film.) Nevertheless, I have deleted the IMDB reference and provided other sources. Softlavender (talk) 07:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Liddell's fall

A scene exists in the movie wherein Liddell is thrown down early in a Scotland–France 400 m duel, but recovers to make up a 20 m deficit to win the race. This really happened.

I'd like to suggest a rewrite to this paragraph. The "This really happened", in my opinion, sounds like Dave Barry's "I swear I'm not making this up," line. As much as I love Dave Barry, his style is hardly appropriate for an encyclopedia. --Hazey Jane 07:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

What's stopping you from doing it? Wahkeenah 13:18, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Wile E. Coyote & Road Runner?

I am not aware of any Warner Brothers' send-up by the title "Chariots of Fur." However, there is a Muppet segment of the children's TV show _Sesame Street_ in which "Chariots of Fur" appears as an episode of "Monsterpiece Theater." Cookie Monster plays Alistair Cooke in presenting, with Herry and Grover as the protagonists. It aired in the mid-1980s. 12.40.61.2 21:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Madagascar in "Cultural references"

I think that the part where those two animals meet on the beach should be put into "Clutural references".

I disagree. There are hundreds of tv shows, and movies that make fun of the Chariots of Fire theme. It would be impossible to name every movie that slows down and plays this song. Roads01 02:59, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Personally I think the whole "cultural references" section is pointless for exactly that reason and the whole section should be removed. Chris B 23/9/08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.203.152 (talk) 23:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

He Remains an Englishman

There is a song in the movie with the lyrics: 

 He is an Englishman!
 He is an Englishman
 For he himself has said it
 And it's greatly to his credit
 That he is an Englishman
 But in spite of all temptations
 To belong to other nations
 He remains an Englishman
 He remains an
 Englishman

Does anyone know where I can find the song on the net? 59.183.184.123 19:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)Vader1941

H.M.S. Pinafore 65.26.154.192 05:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Abrahams not a singer?

I thought I read somewhere that Abrahams was not in fact an amateur singer who participated in G&S productions at university. I think I read that that was a bit of artistic license in Chariots of Fire. Anyone have a link to confirm this? Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 08:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. Hugh Hudson mentions on his commentary to the film's DVD that Abrahams indeed loved and was heavily involved in Gilbert and Sullivan. Softlavender (talk) 00:19, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Do we really need to know which flags weren't quite accurate?

I've removed this paragraph from the article, as it seems far too trivial to me and seems to detract from the relevant information in the article:

A few national flags are inaccurate. During training, the American athletes wear shirts with anachronistic 50-star U.S. flags — it would not be until 1959 that Alaska and Hawaii would be granted statehood, raising the number of states (and thus stars) from 48 to 50. The Canadian flag shown on the chest of David Johnson during the 400m final did not become the Canadian flag until 1965. The flag of China flies prominently at the games, although China did not compete in the 1924 Summer Olympics.

-- Softlavender (talk) 21:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Whose funeral?

The movie begins and ends at a funeral, or possibly a memorial service. One of the athletes is remembering the 1924 team. Whose funeral was it, when and where was it, and who was speaking? 216.188.209.77 (talk) 23:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

It was Harold Abrahams's 1978 funeral, at a church in London, and the speaker is the fictional Lord Lindsay (played by Nigel Havers). Softlavender (talk) 04:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Who wrote this first?

Did an IMDB synopsis editor copy Wikipedia, or did a Wikipedia editor copy from IMDB? 216.188.209.77 (talk) 23:39, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

The former. You can check the dates of the IMDB synopsis and the dates of the Wikipedia synopsis. One can also check the Wayback Machine when these sorts of questions arise and there is no date of origin given for the text that is similar to Wikipedia. Softlavender (talk) 04:02, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

filming locations

it would be nice to know the location of lord lindsay's estate. 63.142.146.194 (talk) 15:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Distributor

Softlavendar, there really is no call for adding a foreign distributor to a non-US film. Should we add UK and other foreign distributors to US films? Without a good and notable reason to do so, then the UK distributor suffices - especially as the UK one was the main international one too. - SchroCat (talk) 16:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Please see Template:Infobox film. "Distributor: Insert the company name(s) of the distributor(s) that first released the film. Separate multiple entries using {{Plainlist}}. In addition, link each distributor to its appropriate article if possible." I'm replacing the information, as it's in accordance with the template and with WikiProject:Film guidelines, and is relevant, notable, and, as I mentioned in my edit summary, was absolutely crucial not only to the film's success, but to its extremely difficult and hard-won financing. If you want citations for the information; I'm happy to supply that. By the way, if you would, in the future please avoid using phrases like "absolute tosh" in edit summaries; please confine your reasoning to courteous opinions and Wikipedia policies and the like, especially when removing notable and relevant information. Thanks very much. Softlavender (talk) 17:07, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Should we add multiple distributors for every country? Should we add every distributor for every film, regardless of country? Less is more for infoboxes entries, and superfluous and meaningless entries should be avoided if possible. I'll point out that you've reverted 3 times now and are at the limit of WP:3RR, which I suggest you don't breach. - SchroCat (talk) 17:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi SchroCat, there were no other distributors except those two, as detailed in my edit: Fox distributed the film outside of North America, and Ladd distributed it in North America. The North American distribution rights are neither superfluous nor meaningless to a film which would have floundered without them, and which without them would never have been nominated for seven Academy Awards and won four. The film's greatest financial success by far was in the North American market. Also this article states in the body text that Fox acquired the distribution rights for outside North America, so North American rights do need to be detailed somewhere, at least in the infobox. And, to repeat, the infobox instructions state to "Insert the company name(s) of the distributor(s) that first released the film." There is no reason to exclude or censor this information, and there is every reason to include it, since it is relevant, notable, and vital to the film's success, and without the information there is an incompleteness to the information given in the body text. Softlavender (talk) 18:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
"incompleteness to the information given in the body text": the infobox should - wherever possible - be made up information from the article. The film would not have floundered without N America, or at least there is no evidence for such a supposition. In other cases where people have claimed such things—like that it's there because it explains the oscar success etc—the consensus has been that there is not a sufficient claim to include. - SchroCat (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
There's no indication that an infobox should be made up exclusively of information from the article. Articles generally do not mention editors, cinematographers, exact runtime, distributors, producers, exact release dates/locations, etc. That's one reason there are infoboxes: to contain all the vital statistics that often don't get mentioned in the body text but are extremely important to provide. It's a handy way of keeping all that important technical info together and prominent and easily located. The North American market was by far the film's largest market and its most successful, and as I mentioned led to all the Academy Awards, which led to further sucess and acclaim. Softlavender (talk) 23:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
And as I mentioned, success in one national film awards does not mean that we have to mention the distributor - Both Pesci and Thelma Schoonmaker won BAFTA awards for Ragin Bull: should I add Park Circus as the UK distributor because of that? Or Entertainment Film Distributors as the distributor for The Departed as there were six BAFTA nominations for the film? Seems to me to be a fairly flimsy reason, really. Ditto for box office takings: many countries contribute significantly to box office takings, and there is no need to single out one single market just because it hapens to be the US! - SchroCat (talk) 08:13, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Master of Trinity

It looks like there may be some synthesis going on in asserting that Gielgud is playing Nobel-prize-winner J.J.Thomson in the movie. Putting together "Gielgud was playing the Master", "The movie was set in 1919", and "J.J.Thomson was Master in 1919" would lead to this conclusion. However, it doesn't look like Gielgud is playing a physicist specifically, and the credit is just for "Master of Trinity", so I think there's no reason to put these facts together in this article. - Ttwaring (talk) 18:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Chariots of Fire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:20, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chariots of Fire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chariots of Fire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:10, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Script

  • I am desperately looking for the script of Chariots of Fire. If anyone has, please send me and email: equinoxe@post.cz

Best Foreign Language Film?

Hey Americans!!! This film is in English. Is that a forein language for you?!

Tut tut tut. It won "Best foreign film" in the Golden globes, and not "best foreign LANGUAGE film".

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chariots_of_Fire/Archive_1&oldid=1029718137"