Talk:Delicatessen (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
August 28, 2008 WikiProject peer review Reviewed

Grammatical Fix[edit]

Just thought I'd mention it here since I already fixed this and found it reverted, but you can not "center around". You can however "center on". It seems that RepublicanJacobite may have accidentally lumped my single grammatical fix in with random vandalism. To quote John B. Bremmer's book Words on Words,

"It is physically impossible to center around. Make it center on. If you want to use around, use it with cluster, hover, revolve, rotate. Use around with circle when the context is dynamic ('The protesters continuously circled around the stadium'), but not when the context is static ('Police circled the hijacked plane')."

I've taken the liberty to re-institute this grammatical fix in the first paragraph, but if consensus is that we should center "around" and not "on", I won't change it again if it's reverted, so no worries on a revert war over one word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Post-Apocalyptic Category[edit]

I think Delicatessen should be taken out of the post apocalyptic movie catagorie and moved somewhere else since, it appears to take place during WWII (At least this was my impression of it).

I disagree - it is definitely post-apocalyptic and is set in the future.--Colin 17:10, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I note from the DVD comentary on Amelie that the director included Princess Diana in that movie to fix it to a point in time - perhaps because of this confusion about Delicatessen! The film seems to be deliberately vague about time; it is certainly post-apocalyptic, but everything in it seems to be of a style assoicated with the 1950s, so identifying the apocalypse in question is difficult.Biglig 13:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Some films (Alien: Resurrection) are placed intentionally in some future time. This film and the next (The City of Lost Children) are intentionally beyond time. They are tales and/or metaphors in imaginary space-time (although this one could be claimed to be "in France"). Even the term "post-apocalyptic" does not necessarily place an event in "real time". I think one should not limit the imagination of the reader (or viewer) by trying to place a film in time, if this is not the intention of the director or writer. The way this article starts does this. It is also not so encyclopedic to include possible interpretations. I will therefore move the first phrase which attempts to connect it in "real space-time" to trivia and if at a later time more information, or quotes from some acceptable source are found, it can be reintegrated. I leave a "post-apocalyptic" and "possibly France" mention as they fit the film's style. --Hoverfish 08:09, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I accept Esn's compromise. Singing Badger's claim is understandable and partly accepted. The only thing is to avoid grounding the spell of a tale-universe in our everyday-universe. It is a mystery place, in a lose way a kind of Twilight Zone. It is not like Mad Max where a story is clearly placed in a post-apocalyptic Australia, given in raw everyday terms. There are no miraculous actions, no fairy-dimention, yet a surreal design is strongly present. It is France, but it is a surreal France. It is in future, but it is in a surreal future. Hoverfish 16:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
I use the term alternate universe for this kind of thing. By the way, it doesn't just look like France, it looks like France in the 1950s from the costumes and the TVs. The Singing Badger 17:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
I tweaked your tweaking of my edit a tiny bit more, because I think that "unspecified" is more accurate than "unknown" (one would assume that the film's characters would know where they are). Otherwise, I think it's fine now (unless someone wants to add a wikilink to "alternate universe"). -Esn 20:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
It does look very much like the past, with almost all of the technology. Maybe particularly the TV sets. There is one anachronism, however: The remote control for the TV. And yes, it is definitely and obviously a post-apocalyptic setting. If you can't see that, there's something wrong with you. --Peter Knutsen (talk) 17:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Parts of France were post-apocalyptic within recent memory for the folks of the fifties. The landscape reminded me of some Bill Mauldin cartoons showing similar scenes in Italy in the forties. Crude remotes such as the one seen in the film were available on Zenith TV's in the middle fifties. __Just plain Bill (talk) 12:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
If so, I suggest to pipe it directly to Parallel universe (fiction). I think "unspecified" sounds better. I also think the plot needs more detail too. The way it is it says very little about the film. If next year Life of Pi comes out, it is bound to get a lot of attention. So we still have some time to polish up the existing Jean-Jeunet films. Also this link to the recent criminal case mentions less details on Haarmann than the wikipedia article... Hoverfish 21:19, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 03:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The giveaway of the plot twist[edit]

It has been a long time since I saw this movie so my memory may be failing me. I remember that the butcher's scheme in the movie was an important plot twist and it is spoiled immediately at the first paragraph of the Plot section. The section may be rewritten so that it gives away the twist at the end, maybe? Avnibu (talk) 10:40, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

starring Karin Viard.?[edit]

She's in it sure but she's not one of the "stars". How come neither the butcher or his daughter are mentioned as stars? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:54, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Delicatessen (film). 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}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)