This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Chicago This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. United States This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Film: American This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

The Plot summary was way too long, way too detailed, and way too poorly written. I made it short and sweet, leaving out all the messy detail that takes two hours on screen. Nick Beeson ( talk) 02:30, 22 October 2014 (UTC) reply

That's an improvement, but it seems a bit short. WP:FILMPLOT recommends between 400 and 700 words. This is about 215 words. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 04:04, 22 October 2014 (UTC) reply

@ Nwbeeson: Work on the plot more to get it to 400 to 700 words and make it concrete as possible. BattleshipMan ( talk) 16:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Congratulations. This would be one of the most coherent and cogent film reviews I have read on Wiki. Also extremely well written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.98.241 ( talk) 10:28, 5 December 2016 (UTC) reply

The article interprets several sources to mean Jack Nicholson "turned down" the role, but the director explains it quite differently [1] saying that they would have loved to have Nicholson but he wanted further rewrites and they didn't want to risk delaying the project. Accordingly the production section could do with a rewrite to avoid the oversimplification that Nicholson "turned down" the role. -- 109.76.153.229 ( talk) 09:37, 23 June 2020 (UTC) reply