Talk:Troma Entertainment/Archive 1

Archive 1

Not a Hollywood studio

Troma is in no way, shape or form a Hollywood studio, in both the cultural and geographic senses. Troma's an independent film studio that has been located in New York City for the past 30 years. (Not every American movie studio should be classified as "Hollywood") --Tripps 15:50, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. The blather about Troma "leaving the mainstream" due to financial hardships encountered after nuke 'em high is ridiculous...the unpaid ['intern'] crew of nuke em High lived in a Troma crashpad in NJ that would surely have been closed by the boards of health or labor, if either had known anything of it. Kaufman & Herz are/were lowlifes who squeaked by via the sweat of unpaid labor from kids willing to endure anything for a film credit. A few, like James Gunn, were able to use Troma in equal measure to how Troma used them, but Gunn in particular has rehabilitted Kaufman's industry rep by candycoating myriad labor abuses. Of course, Roger Corman and Ne/w World Pictures is a very similar story. imo, the whole pack of 'em should have served time. Bustter (talk) 12:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Needs more detail

This article has the feel of a stub, although it's not marked as one. It doesn't mention quite a few of the Troma "aspects", like the Tromettes gallery of scantily clad/nude women which is in line with the mentioned people wearing very little which is in the article, or the UK television channel "Channel 4" who commissioned a series entitled "Troma's Edge TV" to run late nights a few years back. Sadly I'm not quite up on the whole Troma trivia so I can't really do it myself :) ElectricSkrill 10:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

I'm pretty sure Troma doesn't suck eggs or find particularly fat talent, so I've axed the mentions of such in there. --The Centipede 20:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Heh, but they do have LardAss, Toxie's sidekick and serial Troma actor : ) 82.93.133.130 12:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Lloyd Kaufman stated in both his books that he uses fat people as background extras due to the amount of space they take up on film. ~ SEEnoEVIL punch the keys 09:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Brechtian?

What's the "Brechtian form"? I read the article it links to but still have no idea. Is this something that the entire film world knows, or is it something that should be explained in detail in this article? --68.195.25.63 05:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

There's already an article on it in the form of Bertolt Brecht. ~ SEEnoEVIL punch the keys 09:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, a link to Bert Brecht's bio doesn't explain the adjective. It should be explained as Brecht wasn't a horror movies director. My guess is that it refers to Verfremdungseffekt or Epic Theater.--87.162.1.203 (talk) 13:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Porn?

I'm curious as to why someone would write that Troma produces porn films? Certainly, many of them feature sexual content, no doubt, but classifying their films as porn seems kind of weird to me. I changed it to "B-movies." Seems more accurate. (Ibaranoff24 22:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC))

New Biography n' such, I guess.

I deleted my original little post because every time I look at it, it mocks me with it's piercing stare. Plus it doesn't contribute to the current argument. I guess. Huh? Skibz777 20:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Look, you can't unilaterally decide to dump a whole article simply because YOU don't like it. This article was the work of several editors, and it was built by consensus. Your arrogance in the matter is frightening. Also your objective is in doubt. Ending this discussion with ,"Fellow Tromites" clearly suggests your agenda to promote a POV, the Troma-fan POV. Your interest in this article is NOT to make an objective article.

MY RESPONSE/OBJECTION <<<This is NOT a Troma Fan Page, follow Wiki Policy please (below)>>>

If you need a reminder about policy here, then please refresh yourself on the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ownership_of_articles

This page in a nutshell: If you create or edit an article, know that others will edit it, and within reason you should not prevent them from doing so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPOVD#What_is_NPOV.3F

This page in a nutshell: Neutral Point Of View. An NPOV (neutral, unbiased) article is an article that has been written without showing a stand on the issue at hand (i.e. admitting you are Troma fan whose interest is promoting Troma is not unbiased). This is especially important for the encyclopedia's treatment of controversial issues, in which very often there is an abundance of differing views and criticisms on the subject. In a neutral representation, the differing points of view are presented as such, not as facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:V

This page in a nutshell: Articles should only contain material that has been published by reliable sources. Editors adding or restoring material that has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, or any quotations, must provide a reliable published source, or the material may be subject to removal. Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for fact-checking or with no editorial oversight. Articles about such sources should not repeat any contentious claims the source has made about third parties, unless those claims have also been published by reliable sources. Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources.Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer; see WP:BLP.

(i.e. Lloyd Kaufman's autobiography, his books, his blogs, and the Troma website ARE NOT veriable sources since they are biased and unsourced. And clearly Wiki policy does NOT allow this AT ALL.

As the other editor pointed out on your talk page, your agenda presents a conflict of interest. You should NOT be editing these pages in your manner in the first place:

"This is Skibz777's own personal...page...thingy. Or something. On WikiPedia, I like to call myself The Troma Guy. I am currently creating pages for EVERY SINGLE FILM made and distributed by Troma Entertainment, as well as elaborate on the pages for the films already on WikiPedia. This is all done not only because I'm a total loser with a lot of time on his hands, but as a pledge of allegiance to the greatest film studio the world has ever known."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest

[[1]]

This page in a nutshell: Avoid making controversial edits to articles where your close connection to the subject may cause a conflict between your agenda and Wikipedia's goal of producing a neutral encyclopedia. Please contact us if you are concerned about the content of such an article.

Your close connection:"I pledge of allegiance to the greatest film studio the world has ever known, Troma."..."I'm the Troma guy."

You are in no place to objectively weigh disputes about Troma edits since you "pledge allegiance" to them. You're clearly biased in Troma's favor. That violates the spirit of Wiki.

If you have ever read Kaufman's work, listened to his interviews, or watched him speak, it is easy to figure out what he's being truthful about. All of the sections in Troma's history can be backed up by OTHER biographies on the company and interviews with OTHER persons.
Second, the original article is riddled with inaccuracies. 'The Toxic Avenger' was NOT Troma's first hit, 'Troma's War' was NOT a "financial ruin", Troma did not "downgrade" to an independent film company (they were always independent), etc., etc.
I also, in no way, "deleted" ANY information on the page. EVERYTHING MENTIONED IN THE PREVIOUS ARTICLE IS MENTIONED IN MINE, with the exception of the factual innacuracies. I'm also not claiming complete "ownership" of the article. I never "prevented" anyone from editing my changes, they were all just instantly deleted.

More things:
:Improperly sourced content like this doesn't belong, "The company is also known to steal it’s sets from the dumpster near the props department of CBS Studio."Not to mention a lame joke.
There is video footage from Troma interns showing the crew actually doing such an act. This is not an uncommon occurance in low-budget filmmaking.

:You're account page makes it clear that you have a bias toward Troma. That, and your edits are clearly biased. Using phrases like, "The world worships Troma" is not only untrue but unsources, and big POV violations.
Not ONCE did I say "the world worships Troma". In the first draft I did say that Troma was "practically worshipped by independent filmmakers", but I promptly deleted that and rewrote it.

:The alleged success/fame of Troma is largely unsupported by your sources (or lack thereof)'
What alleged success/fame? When did I ever say Troma was famous? However, 'The Toxic Avenger' WAS big, it made a large profit, and 'The Toxic Crusaders' was a top-rated kid's show back in the day. I remember the constant advertising and a whole mess of products.
The reviews for 'Tromeo and Juliet' are credible and The New York Times review of the film can easily be found. Other smaller reviews will also back up the film had a considerable run in theatres.

I will admit that I made some of their films seem like much bigger hits than they really were. Maybe instead of "large cult followings around the world", I wrote "internationally successful", and such to that degree, and for that I apologize. But NONE of my information included any sort of LIE or SLANDER towards the company. Now, I wouldn't necessarily call myself a Troma "fan", per se, but I'm just trying to make a somewhat satisfying article for them, something that's hopefully a bit more in-depth and factual. Troma apparently has a huge following and this stub-like article just isn't cutting it.Skibz777 20:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TromaLogo.gif

Image:TromaLogo.gif 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 11:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Where did their name come from?

Where did "Troma" come from? Is it a play on "trauma"? Or does it have another origin? Some info on this would be helpful. -Rolypolyman (talk) 23:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Kaufman writes in his book All I Need To Know About Filmmaking I Learned From The Toxic Avenger that he and Michael Herz just made it up, that the word has no special meaning, and at the time, didn't stand for anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.18.66 (talk) 02:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

How?

If Troma was made in 1974, how did they release shit in the early 30's-60's?

They didn't -- they acquired rights to older films, including some decent independent films from past eras. Bustter (talk) 12:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Explain "Demise"

Movie monsters often come back from the dead and continue as though nothing happened to them ; the audience is supposed to go along. This article mentions Troma's "demise" and immediately continues making references to things the firm did after somesuch demise befell it. I have never seen any of these movies, let alone kept track of the firm's production difficulties in other references ; I cannot not possibly go along, having no data [which is not given in this article] to refer to. What financially happened to the firm, when, and why ? What got the firm back ? Be a journalist. 4.154.255.56 (talk) 20:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Untitled

I originally wrote the article for "B-Movie," and had listed the three films listed here as classic examples, along with the film "Girlfriend From Hell." Now that the page has been re-written, and these three films moved under "Troma," the other listing, which still exists, is linked to nothing. Should we just eliminate the listing of "Girlfriend From Hell," or is there some other way to link it to something? -EB-

Why don't you just put it back in B-movie? BTW if you type three ~ one after the other it automatically signs your name like this Mintguy , if you put fout it adds the dat like this Mintguy 00:29 Dec 23, 2002 (UTC)

Troma's motto is "quantity over quality", something which I think should go in there somewhere. I just can't figure out where

• I always though Troma's motto was "movies of the future." I've never heard Lloyd Kaufman say "quantity over quality." ~ IICATSII punch the keys 23:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

One important point that doesn't really emerge from reading the article is that Troma clearly don't intend their films to be taken seriously. They are mostly a glorious send-up of B-movie conventions. JH 18:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)