Talk:Where the Crawdads Sing (film)

Unsure of edit to premise section

In the premise section of this article, it currently reads:

After Kya ends their relationship, Chase attempts to rape her and she narrowly escapes.

Is it correct to phrase that as "attempts to"? If memory serves, I thought he did actually rape her in the film but, other than the film itself, I don't have a reference for that and I suppose it's somewhat ambiguous as it was partially off-screen. Any ideas? Maybe someone discussed it in a press interview or the adapted screenplay is available online somewhere...? - Procyonidae (talk) 07:58, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

I have reworked the plot section. He does try to violently rape her, but she successfully fights him off and threatens to kill him if he doesn't leave her alone. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:32, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Genres

Since a small edit war (with violation of BRD) occurred over this subject, and there is still doubt, we need to settle this. The references which justified the genres were removed, and now we have genres which, although partially correct, fail to fully describe the two major themes, Kya's coming of age story and life, and the murder mystery and trial.

Anyone who has read the book and seen the movie knows that the coming of age theme is strong, as well as the murder mystery and trial. The genres we mention should cover those two. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 03:33, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I had originally included these genres, with sources: "coming-of-age murder mystery drama film" --Valjean (talk) (PING me) 03:38, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Throwing out accusations of violations is not a productive way to start a discussion. Not sure why you thought it was necessary to remove all genres, editors generally argue for reverting to the WP:STATUSQUO while a discussion is in progress. As for WP:BRD, I made a bold change, and now we're discussing.

No sources for the genres listed were included at the time of my edit. The genre of the book is not necessarily the genre of the film, a film adaptation is shorter and usually by necessity more focused. primary genre or sub-genre under which it is verifiably classified. WP:FILMGENRE says to try and include the primary genre only and I was doing what I could to follow the guidelines and avoid listing multiple genres. There are plenty of sources listing all kinds of genres that may apply but the guidelines do say to try and list the primary genre where possible. That Rotten Tomatoes listed the genres as "Mystery & Thriller"[1] (and they quite often list multiple applicable genres) it seemed fair to summarize the primary genre as mystery, and since the other editor had wanted to be more specific (and a wikilink exists) I changed it to murder mystery film. While the film could probably be described as "coming of age" "murder mystery" and "legal drama" the primary genre would seem to be mystery. (Many genres are a subgenre of drama, in most cases, and in the case of a mystery or thriller, it would be redundant to also include drama as a genre). Please note that the WP:LEAD is supposed to summarize, but if other editors agree that they really want to "to fully describe the two major themes" then so be it. I was merely making a good faith effort to summarize and include only the primary genre. -- 109.79.173.43 (talk) 19:14, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

IP109, I'm sorry that you thought I was talking about you. I wasn't. The diff I provided was by another editor, and the BRD violation referred to them. (I even left a note on their talk page.) Their unexplained BOLD deletion was REVERTED by me, so they should have started a DISCUSSION. Instead, they reverted back to their preferred version. Well, now we have this thread to discuss the subject of genres.

Let's look at the main themes. Audiences seem to agree that the film largely (not in every detail) remains true to the text of the book, but some sources have noted a great change of emphasis, with the film giving much more weight (even starting the film with it) to the theme of the murder investigation, arrest, and trial, and less about the coming of age story, yet they are still the major themes:

1. The murder investigation, arrest, and trial justify using the "murder mystery drama" genres, with "mystery" alone being too vague.
2. The growing up alone, loss of family, falling in love, loss of lovers, establishing a loving partnership, and becoming a recognized scientist justify the "coming-of-age" genre.
3. Survival is also a major theme of the book, but the film seems to pass it over very lightly. She was alone from seven years old! The film does not do her young years justice at all, so I think it would be a stretch to include that genre.

It is mainly the film's emphasis that's different from the book. In contrast to the book, the film becomes more about the murder mystery drama than the coming-of-age story.

Personally, I would have loved to see how a different female director (Nora Ephron is gone, but maybe Jane Campion, Debra Granik, or Greta Gerwig?) would have treated it, with it being longer and more about personal growth, relationships, and the nature (which is a huge "character" in the book). Very quickly during the film, my wife and I looked at each other and whispered that the relationships were almost stiff, cartoonish/CGIish, and passed over quickly, but the film got better as it proceeded, with Daisy Edgar Jones doing a good job. Anyone who has seen Normal People knows this girl can really act.

So, would you be satisfied with using the following genres: murder mystery, drama, coming-of-age? The sourcing is easy for them. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:55, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

It violates WP:FILMLEAD, which says, "Genre classifications should comply with WP:WEIGHT and represent what is specified by a majority of mainstream reliable sources." Once you start mashing up genres, it becomes original research because either very few people or no one in the real world have actually described a film that way. My suggestion is to check as many sources as possible and see which description is the most common by itself and use that without any mashing-up. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 14:56, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

One way to capture the sense of the film (when genres are a bit mixed) is to include the premise at or near the beginning. WP:LEAD says the article body should be summarized in the lead section, and the plot section should be covered there too. (No one has included the premise there.) In my experience, a film's official synopsis can be referenced and paraphrased into one sentence. Like for this film, the synopsis is, "From the best-selling novel comes a captivating mystery. Where the Crawdads Sing tells the story of Kya, an abandoned girl who raised herself to adulthood in the dangerous marshlands of North Carolina. For years, rumors of the “Marsh Girl” haunted Barkley Cove, isolating the sharp and resilient Kya from her community. Drawn to two young men from town, Kya opens herself to a new and startling world; but when one of them is found dead, she is immediately cast by the community as the main suspect. As the case unfolds, the verdict as to what actually happened becomes increasingly unclear, threatening to reveal the many secrets that lay within the marsh." Obviously a bit on the long side, but it's shorter than a 700-word plot summary and a better starting point. No idea at this time what a good single-sentence paraphrasing would be. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:09, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Here are a few genre descriptions:

• "It's a murder-mystery folded around a coming-of-age tale"[2]
• "Part murder mystery, part swoony romance, part cornpone coming-of-age tale, it’s an atmospheric and gleefully overheated melodrama"[3]
• "a romantic mystery/drama"[4]
• "mixing a coming-of-age story with a murder mystery, a courtroom drama, and not one, but two, romances"[5]
• "a dragon short of a genre fiction compendium: children’s survival tale, young adult romance, murder mystery and legal thriller."[6]
• "Drama, Mystery, Thriller"[7]
• "The film version of Delia Owens’s novel incorporates many genres: misery memoir, courtroom mystery, romance."[8]
• "A mixture of love story, courtroom drama and whodunit"[9]
• "Genre: Drama, Mystery, Thriller, Women and Film"[10]

Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:51, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

TropicAces, I agree with your reasoning for adding "murder-mystery"] as a genre. That is clearly a major focus in the film, unlike the book. I think we should add "coming-of-age" as it is also frequently mentioned in RS, and anyone who has read the book or seen the movie recognizes this is also a major genre, even if it's not as big a focus in the film as in the book. Would you object to that addition? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:29, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

I just think we need *a genre* mentioned. It doesn’t need to be in the very first line, an example would be like The Lighthouse which says “2019 film” then elaborates the different genres critics and publications assigned it a few sentences later. TropicAces (talk) 18:23, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Okay, TropicAces, here's what's in that article: "The film has defied categorization in media, and interpretations of The Lighthouse range from a horror film, a psychological thriller, a survival film, and a character study, among others."

Per that example, we (re)move the genre mention from the first sentence and add the following as the last sentence in the first paragraph: "It has been variously categorized as a murder-mystery, coming of age, and romance film. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:22, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

References

Correlation

I could be wrong, but this edit summary by TropicAces may be wrong. There is a direct correlation between audience reception and ticket sales, but neither is always directly correlated with Oscar wins. OTOH, a later Oscar win can boost sales. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:24, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

The box office success does imply that audience that saw it did actually like this film but I would not even go so far as to say There is a direct correlation between audience reception and ticket sales because I've bought plenty of tickets for films I wanted to see for myself only to conclude they were in fact bad. I think it is better to avoid trying to say anything about audience reception and to instead simply state the gross. Correlation but not direct causation.

in practice replace X: " Audience reception was more positive and the film became a box office success" with Y: "It was a box office success" etc -- 109.78.204.166 (talk) 03:44, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Where the Crawdads Sing (film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 14:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I'll have a go at this one that's been languishing in the queue for 6 months. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll respond to your comments within the next few hours. ℛonherry☘ 14:24, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• The English is pretty much fine. I suspect that "Maligning the film as 'downright cringey'" is straying too close to an opinion: suggest "Calling the film 'downright..." would be better.

• Structure is largely suitable, though a brief paragraph of 'Context' about Delia Owens and her novel would improve the article (indeed, it's probably a "main aspect" that needs to be covered). It is (very) rare among zoologists to write a bestselling novel; just as rare for an ecosystem to star in a novel. I think we need a few words about the North Carolina marshes (how about a photo?), the zoologist and her work, that she lived for a while in North Carolina, and the novel. Nobody is suggesting that the novel (or film) is autobiographical, but some critic must have mentioned that the biology/natural history in the story is convincingly realistic because it's based on knowledge.

• Amount of plot is reasonable. I do think the friendly retired defence attorney deserves a brief mention, however, given the importance the film gives to the courtroom drama.

• Is it still relevant to 'Production' that the project was announced on January 25, 2021? I'd have thought the announcement was superseded by the fact that the production went ahead. The "was announced ... would join" tangle of tricky tenses can go: let's just say the actors took part.

• I wonder if the difference in emphasis between film and book doesn't deserve slightly more of a mention; at the moment it's dealt with in passing via a couple of comments in Reception. Are there no more detailed analyses we could use?

• There isn't any "detailed" analyses I could find. Just some minor details that is already covered by the section. ℛonherry☘ 15:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

• All right. The article can always be worked on further, the advantage of being a constantly-maintained online encyclopedia.

• The 'Critical response' rightly mentions that critics gave the film a B and called it "a smallish movie". It doesn't really explain why the film has this character, something that seems necessary if the article is to cover "the main aspects" (criterion 3a).

• I do not understand this. Would you mind elaborating please? ℛonherry☘ 15:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

• Not sure what happened there, the section is fine and detailed.

• I don't want to say that the 'Accolades' section is overblown, but I can't help noticing that a) none of the nominations have resulted in an award, and b) 10 of the 12 nominations were for a Song, not the film. I'd be inclined to take the Song items out of the table and format them compactly in a single sentence, i.e. "Taylor Swift's song "Carolina" received 10 nominations for best song.[ref/footnote]" and then format the 10 items in a list either directly in a single ref, or in a footnote which itself has 10 refs.

• Further, the ceremony dates are now all in the past, so the four "Pending" entries now need to be updated.

• Apart from a tiny bit of the usual vandalism, the article is entirely stable. Roll on user registration.

• Film poster has valid NFUR.

• Other images seem to be correctly licensed on Commons.

• Spotchecks are all good.

@Chiswick Chap:  Done all. ℛonherry☘ 15:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

“Tate Walker lends her books and teaches her to read, write, and count”

IIRC, Tate Walker teaches her to read and write. As for counting, IMHO, Kya learns it earlier, when selling mussels to Madisons. IIRC, there was a very short scene related to that (NB: not the one when Mabel just discovers Kya can't count (that's another one, much earlier and longer than then one I'm talking about), but later (already after the Kya's failed school attempt; when Kya already had started to actively interact with Madisons for mussels and shoes)). Sasha1024 (talk) 09:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)