This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hard Candy (film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Hard Candy (film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
December 22, 2014. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a New York Times Magazine writer described
Ellen Page's performance in the 2005 film
Hard Candy as her artistic breakthrough performance that "almost no one noticed"? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
I made some comments here about a week ago, they are now gone. What's up with that? Comments are wiped periodically? Raymm 22:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
She says she's 14, but near the end says how Jeff knows nothing about her; she may not even be called Hayley, her Father might not be a professor. Should it be ammended saying she's posing as a 14 year old? And, actually, everything about her. Maybe we should say "about a girl and Jeff", and then have a section on the girl and what she poses as?( Cipher Destiny 22:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC))
Jeff says he'll have to wait four years for her (Hayley). I think he implies he will have to wait until she is 18 so he can have his way with her. But this is not conclusive as some jurisdictions (i.e., Canada) allow consent for sex at 14, unless you are in a position of trust regarding the minor. Raymm 22:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
The actress who played Hayley, Ellen Page, was actually 18 or 19 years old at the time the movie was shot. Tavilis 13:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
In the movie, Jeff says to Hayley "When you're 80 I'll be 94." Would this not make Jeff twenty-eight years old?
The article about the Japanese girls in fact leads to something totally different. -- 211.29.198.229 12:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
What Japanese girls?
There was a case in Japan wherein some Japanese teenagers tricked a pedophile they met on the internet in to coming to a bus station (i think) and beat his ass Echud123456 08:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
{{spoiler}}
The article says Jeff hangs himself in the end. The way I understand it, the rope was too long and he simply fell off the roof, forced to face Janelle (and later the police, justice, prison etc.) gbrandt 08:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
The above comments aside, I think the fact that the rope pulls visibly tight suggests that he completed hanging himself. Doubly so if the screenplay called for him to be found clearly hanging. When we see Hayley leaving his house, rolling down the hill etc., there is no police cars heading up to his house. Although this is by no means conclusive there would have been lots of ways to suggest that Jeff was arrested and not killed that were not taken. Also, recall what Hayley said on the roof about Aaron, and what he said "before he killed himself". Clearly this implies that Hayley did the same to Aaron as she did to Jeff. If Aaron had survived he'd have turned Jeff in to win points with the law, and the movie wouldn't have happened. I think we can conclude that in the absence of any evidence that Jeff was not hanged, that he did in fact die, just like Aaron.
Caelarch
18:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Unless of course her friend was handling Aaron at nearly the same time. That is supported rather strongly by her friend knowing where to meet her and apparently what she was doing. You'd think that if Aaron died and any evidence showed up then Jeff would have been lying low. And if she had all this evidence on Aaron - why all the run up with torture? She just needed the gun and taser on a stick to get him to hang himself by that logic.
So the way the dialogue went there is still a tiny bit of "did she break an 'innocent man' to the point he'd confess to anything to escape public accusation and some aspect of private torture? Was her interruption with a unknown name, Aaron, the point he realized there was no point in further confessing to things he didn't do and he might as well just hang himself? Probably what most people would do if in the hands of a crazy, but one who the public might believe". Note some states don't require conviction to be in sex registry.
True the weight of the story goes against that - but then so did the evidence in Salem witch trials. There are certain crimes where public suspicion is worse than private execution. But then should we care? Its not like the world has a shortage of potentially guilty adults. 69.23.120.164 19:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
A Conclusive Argument Could Be Made For Both Points, By The Rationale That Was Stated By Caelarch, She Wouldn't Need To Kill Jeff Because He Couldn't Incriminate Aaron To Butter Up The Cops, She Stated Earlier On That It Wasn't Her Intention To Kill Him, And The Worse Of The Two Endings For Jeff Could Presumably Be Being Caught, The Ending I Guess Will Forever Be A Mystery, Evidence Suggest He Gets Offed, But Who Knows? Aside From The Writer.... ;) -Echud123456
She doesn't kill Jeff. He kills himself. Raymm 22:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Mkayy.... well i dont get it guys. did Jeff Die or not???
For f*** sake, does the person above know how to write? Capitalising every word makes it near-impossible to read - please don't do it.
You're retarded if you can't read things cause its capitolized. It's just as much a sentence if someone TyPEs lIKE THis or any other way. Idiot. Tobias1 17:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.224.205.218 ( talk)
Only one problem with Hayley not killing him he then has the ability to tell the cops about her. Given the rest of her plan it seems odd she miss that point. Mind you notice at the end when she falls down the hill, maybe she was planning to claim she was a victim and escaped the guy? Tobias1 17:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Watching the movie I got the clear idea that Hayley tricked Jeff into believing she had castrated him. To my mind he wouldn't have been able to jump around so much if she had really done so. However the current version of the plot summary seems to treat the castration scene as factual. I haven't seen the shooting script or anything from the director or writer on this scene. Is it made clear either way? Are there any strong opinions on whether he is or is not castrated? -- Tony Sidaway 14:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Well when I saw it I assumed it had happened, and preferred it that way. To be fair, I never heard him say "I'm all here," and in that case it would be faily obvious that it did happen, but she must have gone out of her way to bloody the rag and icepack, as you/he could only see it after he had lifted it after the "operation." —Preceding unsigned comment added by WingedDrant ( talk • contribs) 07:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Do you guys watch movies at all? He retrieves a tape from the vcr, labeled castration procedures, realizing that the screen image was not a live feed. So even if you are death and did not hear his line you would get the point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.2.32.48 ( talk) 13:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
The spoiler notice was removed, so I have returned it to the article and adding my rationale here. Per Wikipedia:Spoiler:
-- SeizureDog 02:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Since the film really is relentlessly and singlemindedly about Hayley's mission, and it has won plaudits (in the real world!) for that fact, I suggest that the problem here is that we simply don't come out and state that fact in the lead section where it belongs. Once we've done so there will be no need for spoiler tags because, as an encyclopedia, we will have done our duty: to dispel misconceptions and spread knowledge. -- Tony Sidaway 04:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it was marketed much differently in the U.S. Here's the trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYBnm1xhM7I . Before I saw it, I knew the basic gist of the film just from the promotion and was not at all surprised that Hayley is seeking vengeance. -- YellowTapedR 22:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
The picture is clearly an allusion to Little Red Riding Hood, and the trap is obviously intended to catch a man (there are no bears in the film). I've changed the caption accordingly. -- Tony Sidaway 04:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
you people are missing everything. I just saw it AGAiN last night, and I saw a bear. Right where it always is. I mean, DUH. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.186.14 ( talk) 03:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I am failing this article, i don't think it can be fixed in a week, there's just too many things missing and too much copy-editing needed. Yamanbaiia 18:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Don't take this the wrong way, Yamanbaiia, but your comments are full of run-on sentences. Are those the kind of sentences you want when you say the sentences in the article should be longer? -- YellowTapedR 16:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Isn't the film a 2005 film? It even says so on David Slades Wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.1.101 ( talk) 22:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
"The soundstage was based on Higgins' home, in case their budget did not allow them to use a soundstage." Who is Higgins? This question was posed in-article by a vandal. Could someone check the edit log and see when this appears? J1.grammar natz ( talk) 00:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
On the officiell site of the film they say that Janelle Roberts was played by Jennifer Holmes. Does anybody know why? because after I googled pictures of both actresses it seems to be clear that the film does not star Jennifer Holmes but Odessa Rae. Has anyone an explanation for this? 90.128.73.29 ( talk) 16:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
The plot summary is badly incomplete, but I don't remember the movie well enough to finish it. The plot summary is also badly in need of some copy editing. Raywin42 ( talk) 17:17, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Freikorp ( talk · contribs) 04:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I made several minor fixes myself. Unfortunately this article currently falls fairly short of GA status; i'm putting this on hold for 7 days so the nominator has a chance to address the issues. I've reviewed everything except checking for copyright violations/close paraphrasing, which I currently cannot do as duplicates detector appears to be down and I don't have the time to do it manually. I'll get to that at some later stage as there are plenty of other things that need improving at this article. Freikorp ( talk) 08:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hard Candy (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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:36, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hard Candy (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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:23, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
I've removed the crime genre in the lead. The Ebert source mentions several genres, so we shouldn't cherry pick them. And who would say this is a romance? Gluh. It doesen't even say "crime thriller" in the Ebert lead. According to AllMovie, "A type of crime film that offers a suspenseful account of a successful or failed crime or crimes. Unlike police procedurals, crime thrillers focus on a criminal/criminals rather than a policeman. Crime thrillers usually emphasize action over psychological aspects - murders, robberies, chases, shootouts and double-crosses are central ingredients. Reservoir Dogs, The Asphalt Jungle, The Getaway and The Killing are prime examples. source" This doesn't apply. I've changed the source accordingly. Thoughts? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 20:25, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
The proposed origin is highly dubious, as "hard candy" is an extremely common term referring to paedophilic acts. Given the plot, it clearly fits quite well. Perhaps it would be sound to mention this far more likely origin in the article? The proposed one is clearly something made up by whoever said it, akin to John Lennon's claims about Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. 15:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change every reference of Ellen Page to Elliot Page and pronouns from she to he. The actor came out as transgender on twitter, so this needs to be updated. 173.216.168.112 ( talk) 00:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
It seems positively Orwellian for Wikipedia to rewrite the past. By all means let people define their own future and give them the freedom and respect and call them by the name they chose but it seems misguided for an encyclopedia to override the past and then explain further with a footnote. I think it would be far better, more rigorous, more like what an encyclopedia should do, to list the Cast as they were credited at the time, and to put any further explanations in the footnotes. I am not edit warring over it and I will respect the consensus and abide by the policy but it is disappointing that a more rational facts based approach was not taken. It is disappointing some editors are accusing others in their edit summaries of being transphobic for expressing their disagreement. Even if we disagree editors should still be civil about it. -- 109.78.195.245 ( talk) 21:34, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hard Candy (film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Hard Candy (film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
December 22, 2014. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a New York Times Magazine writer described
Ellen Page's performance in the 2005 film
Hard Candy as her artistic breakthrough performance that "almost no one noticed"? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
I made some comments here about a week ago, they are now gone. What's up with that? Comments are wiped periodically? Raymm 22:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
She says she's 14, but near the end says how Jeff knows nothing about her; she may not even be called Hayley, her Father might not be a professor. Should it be ammended saying she's posing as a 14 year old? And, actually, everything about her. Maybe we should say "about a girl and Jeff", and then have a section on the girl and what she poses as?( Cipher Destiny 22:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC))
Jeff says he'll have to wait four years for her (Hayley). I think he implies he will have to wait until she is 18 so he can have his way with her. But this is not conclusive as some jurisdictions (i.e., Canada) allow consent for sex at 14, unless you are in a position of trust regarding the minor. Raymm 22:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
The actress who played Hayley, Ellen Page, was actually 18 or 19 years old at the time the movie was shot. Tavilis 13:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
In the movie, Jeff says to Hayley "When you're 80 I'll be 94." Would this not make Jeff twenty-eight years old?
The article about the Japanese girls in fact leads to something totally different. -- 211.29.198.229 12:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
What Japanese girls?
There was a case in Japan wherein some Japanese teenagers tricked a pedophile they met on the internet in to coming to a bus station (i think) and beat his ass Echud123456 08:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
{{spoiler}}
The article says Jeff hangs himself in the end. The way I understand it, the rope was too long and he simply fell off the roof, forced to face Janelle (and later the police, justice, prison etc.) gbrandt 08:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
The above comments aside, I think the fact that the rope pulls visibly tight suggests that he completed hanging himself. Doubly so if the screenplay called for him to be found clearly hanging. When we see Hayley leaving his house, rolling down the hill etc., there is no police cars heading up to his house. Although this is by no means conclusive there would have been lots of ways to suggest that Jeff was arrested and not killed that were not taken. Also, recall what Hayley said on the roof about Aaron, and what he said "before he killed himself". Clearly this implies that Hayley did the same to Aaron as she did to Jeff. If Aaron had survived he'd have turned Jeff in to win points with the law, and the movie wouldn't have happened. I think we can conclude that in the absence of any evidence that Jeff was not hanged, that he did in fact die, just like Aaron.
Caelarch
18:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Unless of course her friend was handling Aaron at nearly the same time. That is supported rather strongly by her friend knowing where to meet her and apparently what she was doing. You'd think that if Aaron died and any evidence showed up then Jeff would have been lying low. And if she had all this evidence on Aaron - why all the run up with torture? She just needed the gun and taser on a stick to get him to hang himself by that logic.
So the way the dialogue went there is still a tiny bit of "did she break an 'innocent man' to the point he'd confess to anything to escape public accusation and some aspect of private torture? Was her interruption with a unknown name, Aaron, the point he realized there was no point in further confessing to things he didn't do and he might as well just hang himself? Probably what most people would do if in the hands of a crazy, but one who the public might believe". Note some states don't require conviction to be in sex registry.
True the weight of the story goes against that - but then so did the evidence in Salem witch trials. There are certain crimes where public suspicion is worse than private execution. But then should we care? Its not like the world has a shortage of potentially guilty adults. 69.23.120.164 19:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
A Conclusive Argument Could Be Made For Both Points, By The Rationale That Was Stated By Caelarch, She Wouldn't Need To Kill Jeff Because He Couldn't Incriminate Aaron To Butter Up The Cops, She Stated Earlier On That It Wasn't Her Intention To Kill Him, And The Worse Of The Two Endings For Jeff Could Presumably Be Being Caught, The Ending I Guess Will Forever Be A Mystery, Evidence Suggest He Gets Offed, But Who Knows? Aside From The Writer.... ;) -Echud123456
She doesn't kill Jeff. He kills himself. Raymm 22:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Mkayy.... well i dont get it guys. did Jeff Die or not???
For f*** sake, does the person above know how to write? Capitalising every word makes it near-impossible to read - please don't do it.
You're retarded if you can't read things cause its capitolized. It's just as much a sentence if someone TyPEs lIKE THis or any other way. Idiot. Tobias1 17:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.224.205.218 ( talk)
Only one problem with Hayley not killing him he then has the ability to tell the cops about her. Given the rest of her plan it seems odd she miss that point. Mind you notice at the end when she falls down the hill, maybe she was planning to claim she was a victim and escaped the guy? Tobias1 17:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Watching the movie I got the clear idea that Hayley tricked Jeff into believing she had castrated him. To my mind he wouldn't have been able to jump around so much if she had really done so. However the current version of the plot summary seems to treat the castration scene as factual. I haven't seen the shooting script or anything from the director or writer on this scene. Is it made clear either way? Are there any strong opinions on whether he is or is not castrated? -- Tony Sidaway 14:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Well when I saw it I assumed it had happened, and preferred it that way. To be fair, I never heard him say "I'm all here," and in that case it would be faily obvious that it did happen, but she must have gone out of her way to bloody the rag and icepack, as you/he could only see it after he had lifted it after the "operation." —Preceding unsigned comment added by WingedDrant ( talk • contribs) 07:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Do you guys watch movies at all? He retrieves a tape from the vcr, labeled castration procedures, realizing that the screen image was not a live feed. So even if you are death and did not hear his line you would get the point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.2.32.48 ( talk) 13:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
The spoiler notice was removed, so I have returned it to the article and adding my rationale here. Per Wikipedia:Spoiler:
-- SeizureDog 02:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Since the film really is relentlessly and singlemindedly about Hayley's mission, and it has won plaudits (in the real world!) for that fact, I suggest that the problem here is that we simply don't come out and state that fact in the lead section where it belongs. Once we've done so there will be no need for spoiler tags because, as an encyclopedia, we will have done our duty: to dispel misconceptions and spread knowledge. -- Tony Sidaway 04:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it was marketed much differently in the U.S. Here's the trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYBnm1xhM7I . Before I saw it, I knew the basic gist of the film just from the promotion and was not at all surprised that Hayley is seeking vengeance. -- YellowTapedR 22:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
The picture is clearly an allusion to Little Red Riding Hood, and the trap is obviously intended to catch a man (there are no bears in the film). I've changed the caption accordingly. -- Tony Sidaway 04:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
you people are missing everything. I just saw it AGAiN last night, and I saw a bear. Right where it always is. I mean, DUH. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.186.14 ( talk) 03:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I am failing this article, i don't think it can be fixed in a week, there's just too many things missing and too much copy-editing needed. Yamanbaiia 18:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Don't take this the wrong way, Yamanbaiia, but your comments are full of run-on sentences. Are those the kind of sentences you want when you say the sentences in the article should be longer? -- YellowTapedR 16:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Isn't the film a 2005 film? It even says so on David Slades Wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.1.101 ( talk) 22:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
"The soundstage was based on Higgins' home, in case their budget did not allow them to use a soundstage." Who is Higgins? This question was posed in-article by a vandal. Could someone check the edit log and see when this appears? J1.grammar natz ( talk) 00:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
On the officiell site of the film they say that Janelle Roberts was played by Jennifer Holmes. Does anybody know why? because after I googled pictures of both actresses it seems to be clear that the film does not star Jennifer Holmes but Odessa Rae. Has anyone an explanation for this? 90.128.73.29 ( talk) 16:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
The plot summary is badly incomplete, but I don't remember the movie well enough to finish it. The plot summary is also badly in need of some copy editing. Raywin42 ( talk) 17:17, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Freikorp ( talk · contribs) 04:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I made several minor fixes myself. Unfortunately this article currently falls fairly short of GA status; i'm putting this on hold for 7 days so the nominator has a chance to address the issues. I've reviewed everything except checking for copyright violations/close paraphrasing, which I currently cannot do as duplicates detector appears to be down and I don't have the time to do it manually. I'll get to that at some later stage as there are plenty of other things that need improving at this article. Freikorp ( talk) 08:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hard Candy (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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:36, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hard Candy (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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:23, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
I've removed the crime genre in the lead. The Ebert source mentions several genres, so we shouldn't cherry pick them. And who would say this is a romance? Gluh. It doesen't even say "crime thriller" in the Ebert lead. According to AllMovie, "A type of crime film that offers a suspenseful account of a successful or failed crime or crimes. Unlike police procedurals, crime thrillers focus on a criminal/criminals rather than a policeman. Crime thrillers usually emphasize action over psychological aspects - murders, robberies, chases, shootouts and double-crosses are central ingredients. Reservoir Dogs, The Asphalt Jungle, The Getaway and The Killing are prime examples. source" This doesn't apply. I've changed the source accordingly. Thoughts? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 20:25, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
The proposed origin is highly dubious, as "hard candy" is an extremely common term referring to paedophilic acts. Given the plot, it clearly fits quite well. Perhaps it would be sound to mention this far more likely origin in the article? The proposed one is clearly something made up by whoever said it, akin to John Lennon's claims about Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. 15:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change every reference of Ellen Page to Elliot Page and pronouns from she to he. The actor came out as transgender on twitter, so this needs to be updated. 173.216.168.112 ( talk) 00:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
It seems positively Orwellian for Wikipedia to rewrite the past. By all means let people define their own future and give them the freedom and respect and call them by the name they chose but it seems misguided for an encyclopedia to override the past and then explain further with a footnote. I think it would be far better, more rigorous, more like what an encyclopedia should do, to list the Cast as they were credited at the time, and to put any further explanations in the footnotes. I am not edit warring over it and I will respect the consensus and abide by the policy but it is disappointing that a more rational facts based approach was not taken. It is disappointing some editors are accusing others in their edit summaries of being transphobic for expressing their disagreement. Even if we disagree editors should still be civil about it. -- 109.78.195.245 ( talk) 21:34, 25 September 2021 (UTC)