Talk:Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Novels (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Drugs taken[edit]

Should there be a little section mentioning the different drugs taken throughout the course of the book? I know trivia sections are frowned upon, but I've seen that type of thing done before== —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.239.13.20 (talk) 06:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC) The opening sentence in the book is...? Something about being just outside of Vegas when the drugs kicked in...? I might be mistaken,sorry. I'd better research it, as always, speaking without the facts.Ern Malleyscrub (talk) 23:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

French Fry Factory[edit]

So, I took this out because it sounds pretty suspect and no evidence is offered:

One incident in controversy involves Thompson and his ordeals at the Ore-Ida French Fry Factory. The book fails to cover these significant events which Thompson later describes as "poignant and life changing."


1996 Spoken Word Adaptation[edit]

Does anyone know much about this?


The audio book is VERY good too, anyone know the voice actor's names?


Film Adaptation available on the internet[edit]

Someone (almost certainly not the copyright holder) uploaded the entire feature film to Google Video; a higher-resolution 900 megabyte file is also downloadable from Google. I have added a reference to its availability in the text, and a link to "external links." Since the feature is not likely to remain available for long, please delete these if/when the link goes dead. TYIA.

Someone removed the link to the full length film, and I restored it.

Google claims to review and approve uploaded video content [see here]. There is no reason to deny users of the wiki access to this resource on the basis of copyright fears. Even if the placement of the video online is a copyright violation, a link to that placement is not. If there is stated wiki policy that forbids such linking, please point me to it.Bustter 22:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I located the following policy statement:

"Linking to copyrighted works is usually not a problem, as long as you have made a reasonable effort to determine that the page in question is not violating someone else's copyright. If it is, please do not link to the page. Whether such a link is contributory infringement is currently being debated in the courts, but in any case, linking to a site that illegally distributes someone else's work sheds a bad light on us. If the site in question is making fair use of the material, linking is OK."

If a link to a copyright infringement is shown to be a "contributory infringement," then a link to a link is as well; therefor ALL links are "contributory infringement," no? Anyway, I'm removing the link again, under protest.

Here's the removed "contributory infringement":

The complete feature film at Google Video

Bustter 22:16, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Can somebody tell what happend in the year 1544 ? "There was evidence, in this room, of excessive consumption of almost every type of drug known to civilized man since 1544 AD (Thompson 188)." Max Plenert 12:32, 4 Jan 2005 (GMT)

  • Maybe this (from Wikipedia...): 1544 - Italian botanist Luca Ghini publishes the first herbarium.
    • Good hint, thank you ! --- Max Plenert 10:47, 23 Feb 2006 (GMT)
  • Or perhaps this (from British History Online: "about the year 1544 refining of sugar was first used in England." The article goes on to explain some of the history of sugar refinement (turning moist brown sugar into dry white sugar).

If anyone is interested, the DVD release of the movie version was banned in Australia (theoretically a third world country, go figure)... The strange thing was that the film was originally released in cinemas, and the VHS version is (was?) also available. If anyone has more information it would be much appreciated. --postglock 16:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Weird, found it for sale in a store recently, maybe the video store clerk didn't know what he was talking about, or it is only for sale and not available for rental. (or was subsequently let through) --postglock 06:19, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Never mind all of that - Just tell me about the golf shoes?!


  • Am I the only one who thinks the novel and the film should have separate articles? -- Pele Merengue 18:53, 20 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • I'm inclined to agree with you. But, what about all the intense collaboration between Dr. Thompson and Johnny Depp? Not to mention collaboration with other cast and crew.

What kind of novel is it?[edit]

The first sentence describes the book as a novel. Is it more accurately a roman à clef? -- Runnerupnj 04:35, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Sure. It definitely has (apocryphal, hyperbolic) elements of autobiography. I wouldn't be opposed if you wanted to describe the novel such. · Katefan0(scribble) 04:39, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Right, but know that roman à clef is a form of novel: the terms don't oppose each other. And remember that we don't know how much of this book is based on reality... the peculiar relationship in it between fiction and journalistic truth is what partly prompted the term "gonzo" as opposed to other classifications. —Tarnas 22:38, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Food[edit]

Why do we assume they didn't have anyone else with them on the trip? "Two shrimp coctails, two more shrimp coctails. One, two, three, four club sandwiches. And, nine fresh grapefruit." Would they really be ordering extra shrimp coctails to eat later?

maybe, maybe not, it always could've been that they, i don't know...wanted two each? It's not that big a meal especially if your on so many appetite supporting drugs and very little coke. To answer your first question, because he never mentions anyone else being with them. Fair basis for an assumption, yes? ReverendG 05:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Let me get this straight. You believe that he Hunter was able to round up the total amount of drugs, dive the red shark through the desert on acid, get out of paying for two hotels, infultrate the police narcotics convention and off road through the desert to get his attorney to his plane on time, but you cant accept that he ordered two shrimp cocktails?

The Book and the Film...[edit]

...should have separate articles. And a disambig. Tenebrous 10:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with you. I just made separate articles to fi.wikipedia.org and I find that it is much better that way. After all the book and the film are two whole different things.
I agree as well. Shall we split the articles, yes? 87.11.230.89 19:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, do it, or I will. :-) --05:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
If it isn't done in a week, I will. Or sooner. Depends on when sobriety finds me.

Mapping out journey in google earth[edit]

I'd like some assistance in doing a project of mapping out the journey on google earth, anyone want to help? I uploaded the KMZ file so far on here http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=403926&page=0&vc=#Post403926 Jackpot Den 23:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

How do you intend to map the part where Dr. Gonzo flies back to California, only to be waiting for Duke at the Flamingo Hotel? "It's all a big joke. I'm actually sitting poolside; talking to you on a portable phone some dwarf brought out from the bar. Don't come anywhere near this place! Foreigners aren't welcome here."
It was Duke who said he was at the Flamingo. He was actually in Baker when he said that, and Gonzo was still in California. Duke goes back to the Flamingo from Baker, and Gonzo flies in from California. That's how it happened. VolatileChemical (talk) 05:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the images[edit]

I suggest the images for the book and the dvd are changed. The original artwork for the book is depicted on the DVD cover, and the original Artwork for the film is depicted on the book. If someone is prepared to provide an originial artwork dvd/poster for the film, I can upload the cover of my book with the original art. Jackpot Den 23:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


Rumors about real drug abuse in the movie[edit]

I have heard that Johnny Depp and Benicio Del Toro actually used real drugs during the shooting of the movie. I assume this is just a rumor (as authentic drug abuse in a movie presumably would be strictly prohibited in the US), but does anyone know enough to verify/falsify this claim? Mogura 12:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a pretty far-fetched rumour... It's not mentioned on IMDB - so I'd leave it out. To avoid libel. -- the GREAT Gavini 19:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
The use of narcotics has always been severely frowned upon in the American film industry. I wouldn't pay these rumors any mind. --24.58.13.127 02:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but then again, a lot of the grass in Easy Rider was real. If there were ever to be a drug movie where the goods were real, wouldn't this one be a likely candidate? VolatileChemical (talk) 05:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

No, not at all. If you're familiar with the effects of the drugs used in the film, you will know that Depp and Del Toro are not using them. It's an enjoyable portrayal of drug-use, but it in no way convinces you that you are watching two actors on drugs. DanTheShrew (talk) 09:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Cheech Marin was always asked if they were really high during the filming of up in smoke abd he said flat out that there is no way to film a movie well while being high. Now SNL in the 70's was full of cocaine but that was primarily during the writing process. Drugs help you think abstractly, but they don't help you in the acting sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irock440 (talkcontribs) 15:10, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Split the articles![edit]

I really think the articles for book and film should be splitted. Also the differences in the plots could be mentioned.

Golfshoes, by the way, give better grip on slippy terrain.

Comment[edit]

There should be a section on the various attempts to adapt the book as a film. (Sugar Bear 18:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC))

"Wave speech"[edit]

I just fixed up the "wave speech" to match the punctuation and italics in my copy (paperback, '90s-ish, ISBN 0-679-72419-2). If anyone has a more primary-sourcey copy (such as the Rolling Stone originals, I guess!), feel free to re-correct. Also, I think my wikification kind of detracts from the impact of the piece, but we really need explication somewhere of "the Fillmore" and what a "650 Lightning" is, and bluelinks seemed like the easiest way to go. --Quuxplusone 06:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and the quote does leave off the first two sentences of the first paragraph: "Strange memories on this nervous night in Las Vegas. Five years ago? Six? It seems like a lifetime, or at least a Main Era — the kind of peak that never comes again. San Francisco in the middle sixties was a very special, etc." (And what's a Main Era, do you think? A yuga? Or just a mystic phrase that sounds good in this context?)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 07:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Plot Summary[edit]

The book does not end with them going to a law enforcement drug convention. That ends "part 1" of the book. What really happens is that Dr. Gonzo leaves by plane, and Raoul does later. Raoul gets into Denver and goes to a pharmacy and picks up some amyls. He pops one open in the store and laves, and that ends the book. I'm right, right? 69.247.34.190 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.247.34.190 (talk) 04:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

It is the best book ever written[edit]

Removed this clear statement of opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.125.94 (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

What is the connection between Lacerda and Bill Cardoso?[edit]

Obviously, Bill Cardoso coined the term "Gonzo" journalism, and was a friend of HST.

Cardoso was proud to be a Portuguese-Amercian from Massachusetts (as am I), and I can only assume that the character of Lacerda in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (The Portuguese Photographer) is some sort of homage to him, unless of course there was a real-life counterpart to Lacerda (which I doubt). Interesting to note that HST once claimed (possibly in a deliberately false manner) that 'gonzo' was a Portuguese word. He was right however; because 'gonzo' is a Portuguese word (that only has one simple meaning). A ‘gonzo’ is a noun of Latin origin in the Portuguese language, and would be called a 'hinge' in English (for say, a door or a window). Maybe it really means a type of of journalism that is simply hanging on by a hinge (or maybe not), but the only two men who can really answer that question have moved on, so now it is left to the whims of the Great Magnet. Regardless, I think this connection is worth mentioning when one talks about Fear and Loathing (and maybe it will help you sound smarter at parties)...

Some interesting links on Bill Cardoso, where the Portuguese connection is noted:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/05/BAGFOHIRT21.DTL&hw=cardoso&sn=001&sc=1000

http://www.worldhum.com/weblog/item/rip_bill_cardoso_the_writer_who_gave_us_gonzo_20060312/

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/obituaries/articles/2006/03/15/bill_cardoso_journalist_helped_define_hunter_thompson_image/

65.96.143.168 22:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)Goose.

Photo of Thompson and Acosta[edit]

Okay, listen up, people; it looks like no one has responded to the last seven comments on this page, and let's not let this happen again! I recently stumbled upon this photo of Dr. Thompson and Acosta that can't have been taken very long before or after the events of the book—possibly, by some freak miracle, even during one of the events. The thing is, as you can see, the image is very low-resolution and poor quality. Does anyone know of a source on the internet with a bigger and/or better version of this image? I'm well aware that there are numerous high-quality images only of Thompson in the photo (for instance, here), but I want the whole thing, this article demands it. If people can get a 500-pixel-high photo of Thompson, then we should be able to get the same photo of Thompson, at least 200-pixels-high, without the right half cropped off. I mean it this time, people, get on it! VolatileChemical (talk) 11:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Never mind. I found it. VolatileChemical (talk) 03:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't get it...[edit]

The North Star Coffee House? Is that the "seedy diner" where Duke and Dr. Gonzo find the American Dream, as described in the article text? Maybe I need to re-read that part of the book, but that wasn't exactly where I felt the search for the American Dream ended...hell, Terry's Taco Stand USA seems more likely. Who wrote this? Who can justify it? Quote the book, man! I'm putting up a reference marker. And respond to my previous comment! I can't possibly be the only one who visits this talk page! VolatileChemical (talk) 07:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Answer me, you fiends! Do it now. VolatileChemical (talk) 03:34, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge the search for the american dream ends at a abandoned parking lot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.210.133.211 (talk) 20:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Wiki Journalism[edit]

This book should be re-classified under the heading of journalism, because in it's origonal form, the book was a set of magazine articles written for rolling stone. To classify under the novel section is incorrect, because it was only intended to be in a magasine, if anyone agrees, post on my talk page. Tom.mevlie (talk) 07:52, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

References/Sources[edit]

Someone decoded the entire Reference section of the page- seeing as i'm not very good with hyperlinking and all that jazz, so could someone maybe fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrianrorheim (talkcontribs) 19:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. It's just a question of closing your brackets. Someone had written "</ref" where it should have been "</ref>". Skomorokh 19:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Either it has been unfixed or you made an error. But I don't know how to make it look right. It looks bad now. --bodnotbod (talk) 03:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

fear and loathing about and why to watch[edit]

to start off the movie fear and lothing describes my most inner motives to be a journalist. To go out and adventure the world, but with out the drugs and alcohol this movie demegraphs its a changing heart felt story of a struggling writer mixed up in drugs choosing to go from one hotel to another, to another place of journalism. he is said to be jhonny depp the main character of the movie and the secondary artist of acting is Benicio Del Toro . he has his stuff the charter of jhonny depp he rolls through life seemingly pretty easy with a party there and a kick back of a few friends there, but other than that this is a straight drug movie. showing nothing of the elicit use of everything from marijuana to lsd or acid something I learned from whatching, lsd is acid in a sense I get it the street drug acid the chemical warefare in the lab that destroys the brain cells of many, lsd but really this movie is based around the drug lsd or acid its a fun drug of partying and drinking of un motered skills they apper to have when induced with the intoxicating drug acid. but besides that it shows the party the life style choices dr. gonza made as a writer and the struggles he whent through as a writer and dealing with cops was a major issue in this movie, or should I say twisted documentary. its a shame it was so controlled by drugs but I did learn a lot about the life of dr. gonza the greatest writer in my eye not from whatching the film but reading his early articles on the internet. but other than that if your a drug addict or a movie lover this movie will blow your mind with its special effects and rendering mind twisting plots the two go on. its full of imagination and sparking ideas id highly recommend this movie to an aspiring writer of course that's why I whatched it in the first place, im an aspiring writing but if not its still a great bust of an old film with unique writings mixed into it the words from inside your head really are dragged out and put into this movie that's how captivating it is drawing you closer and closer to the acid friendsy this movie was. but besides the acid I must say great film by Terry Gilliam and a job well done by jhonny depp a great actor and Benicio Del Toro they really formed a great film to whatch and whatch something I often put on repeat meaning its like my iphone my tv and I can just play and play that movie. so with that yes I recommend this movie to everyone and give it a thumbs up of 5 stars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.20.38.101 (talk) 22:57, 3 September 2013 (UTC)