Talk:Dante's Inferno (1967 film)
|WikiProject Film||(Rated Start-class)|
Thank you for the changes you made to the article on Russell's film Dante's Inferno. They may well be correct, but the problem is that you provided no sources and deleted material that was sourced. In one case you deleted a passsage of criticism (for no discernable reason other than the fact that you presumably didn't like it). It would be helpful if you would provide citations.
Some of the statements you made are a bit problematic. I know of no evidence that Russell was personally responsible for an "explosion in gallery prices" of PR paintings in the 60s, though I guess he was part of the process. If the location shots were mostly done in the Lake District, its unlikely that the scene portaying Millais' Ophelia was shot on the location used by Millais, which was in Surrey. If you have supportive evidence, please provide it. Other statements seem to contradict extant sources. Of course they may be wrong, which is why the new sources used should be made clear to the reader. Paul B (talk) 09:38, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Paul, I'm five years in writing the fully authorised biography of Ken Russell, and my sources are the actual day by day production records from the BBC, so congratulations for replacing my accurate corrections with guff and for continuing Wikipedia's work of peddling falsehoods and dissuading real academics from sharing their knowledge. My books include Lindsay Anderson, The Diaries (Methuen).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk • contribs)
- Butting in - these changes are perfectly reasonable (what exactly are "gallery prices"?) and most of your additions remain, at this article anyway. In case you didn't see it, there was a note at your talk page explaining the main problem. Johnbod (talk) 12:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Real academics are typically aware of the need to cite sources. As Johnbod says, I left a note on your talk page. Your IP is identical to the one you used then, so you should have seen the yellow strip telling you that you had a message. Or is it the case that real academics do not engage in discussion? If you want real academics to take your views on the matter seriously, I hope you will read some real academic literature on the background to the increase in the value of Pre-Raphaelite art during the '60s. I recently read a PhD on the topic. Ken Russell, strangely, was not accorded a major role. I think my alterations of your text were fairly minor, considering the fact that they contain a number of problematic claims. I left in the following statement: "Dante's Inferno's visual style is taken mostly from the Pre-Raphaelite paintings themselves, many of which, such as Millais's Ophelia are filmed in the actual locations where the paintings were created." I'm not sure what it means to say that a painting is "filmed". Of course I did change your sentence by altering it from "Millais's Death of Ophelia", since "Death of Ophelia" is not the title of the painting. In other words, I removed what you would call "guff", written by someone who calls himself a real academic. I presume you mean that the artist is depicted working on the painting. So perhaps you can explain how exactly the painting was "filmed" in "the actual location"? Obviously, the painting of the Surrey landscape is not depicted. Millais completed the painting in London. He was living in Gower Street at the time, which would have made it feasible for Russell to pop over to film in his old studio. Is that what you meant? The scene is set in a small room painted white - not very authentic for the 1850s. Boshier absurdly has a reproduction of The Hireling Shepherd on the wall behind him (and Rossetti has L'Inconnue de la Seine!), so in one sense at least it is not aspiring to be very realistic. Paul B (talk) 12:55, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- p.s. I don't doubt your assertion that you are "Paul Sutton, Ken Russell's authorised biographer", but obviously we have no way of knowing that for sure. I kept in changes you made that contradicted current published sources because I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I removed what I knew to be wrong. Paul B (talk) 21:31, 21 February 2011 (UTC)