Talk:Aguirre, the Wrath of God

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Aguirre, the Wrath of God has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
August 14, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Fictional

Herzog made the acknowledgement that the story is fictional on his audio commentary for the Region 1 DVD. 209.149.235.241 23:32, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 10:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes → Aguirre, the Wrath of God : This is the English Wikipedia.—jiy (talk) 22:10, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Support as nominator.—jiy (talk) 22:10, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. The English title is used on the DVD cover, and credited as the US title on IMDB. No reason to use the German title. Kusma (討論) 22:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support WP:NC(UE) (unfortunately) --Lox (t,c) 08:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak support. I remember the German being used on the DVD title page, but the standard for films and literature is to use English as possible. --Mgreenbe 01:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support --HasNoClue 08:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:UE seems straight forward, i would just move. - Spaceriqui 05:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:UE. Jonathunder 11:37, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] Francisco/Gonzalo Pizarro

The Pizarro in the film is Gonzalo not Francisco. I have amended accordingly. SCRA5071 00:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gaspar de Carvajal's account

Regarding this entry:

"Additionally, there are a number of persons and situations which may have been inspired by Gaspar de Carvajal's account of an earlier Amazonian expedition"

I am intrigued to know more about the above article edit, sources, speculations, trivia, etc. The subject fascinates me.--Rule 303 16:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ebert Top 10 Ranking

I didn't explain my change in the summary, so I'll explain it here. The cited list seems to be in alphabetical order, not in terms of 'the best', 'the second best', etc. I felt this merited the change "number one" to "in the top ten".

Ok, I'll accept that. I kept reverting until someone gave an explanation, heh. James 21:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing Text

In first section:

"Although based loosely on what is known of the historical figure of Aguirre, the film's story line is, as Herzog acknowledged years after the film's release, a work of imagination, notwithstanding the fact that several of the film's lead characters."

Not sure what this actually means - the part after the last comment seems incomplete.

Removed it. Muad 08:54, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Heart of Darkness

I've been unable to locate a reliable source indicating the film's similarities to Conrad's novella. All I've found are forum and blog references, nothing from a notable critic or reference work. The wikipedia article on the novella makes the same claim, but w/out a sourced reference. While I can see the similarities, without a citation, the claim reads like Original Research. If anybody can provide a good source it would be appreciated.-Hal Raglan 16:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Film poster

We should use the German poster at the top (since it is the original) and the U.S. one down below, no? gren グレン 02:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. Done!-Hal Raglan 05:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dubbed

I also think we need a better explanation of the dubbing of German (over English?). 1) the source has no page number given. 2) has this been checked by someone? It seems rather odd to me, but it could be the case. gren グレン 02:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I will provide more detailed info taken from David Overbey's article in the referenced Movies of the Seventies, but I'm not sure if the end result will satisfy your need for a "better explanation". 1) The page number from the referenced book is 162. 2) Not sure what you mean by "has this been checked by anyone". If you watch both the English and German language versions of the film on the Anchor Bay DVD, its quite clear that the actor's lip movements are in sync with the English language track, while they are most definitely not so with the German language version. However, quite a few other sources do mention that the film was shot in English, and if you think more citations should be included in the article to substantiate the information, let me know and I'll see what I can come up with.-Hal Raglan 04:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, so far, I've been unable to come up with an additional reliable source that indicates the film was indeed shot in English. Some review websites do mention the fact but I'd rather find something from a more notable source. I'll take another listen to the Aguirre DVD audio commentary and see if Herzog talks about it or not. If I can't find anything, I may remove the paragraph from the article until I can locate something more substantial than a brief mention in a 20 year old book.-Hal Raglan 05:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
A citation is always good... the main reason I brought it up was that I wasn't sure if an anon had added it as a joke or something... since it seemed a little outlandish to me. I've never been good at judging lip movements, but some of the English ones seemed off to me. Is it possible that some actors spoke in English while others didn't? I just watched part in English and it feels unnatural. I suppose maybe that's because I became used to the German. So, no hurry besides what you'd give to any fact needing referencing. I've added the page number, so it is referenced. I also changed the style and put a small explanation in the reference so as not to mislead people that it is more well known in English. Feel free to fix it up if you don't like how I did it. gren グレン 09:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Which river?

Aguirre was a real historical person but I am sure that the river he sailed was the Orinico not the Amazon so I have changed this.  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 14:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

If you had done a simple review of the history of Lope de Aguirre's expeditions, you would know that the river was the Amazon River. If you had SEEN the movie, you would also know that this river is supposed to be the Amazon. What made you think that the river in question was the Orinoco?

[edit] GA held

I couldn't resist reviewing this. I have a hard time picking a favourite Herzog but this one's right up there. Anyway, I've held it. I'm going to list the trivial things I could fix myself not out of laziness but, y'know, it's good get minutia down too.

  • The images need sources, that being the copyright holder and/or the URL of the site they came from.
  • The latter two, especially the 2nd poster, need stronger rationales. We just need to know the specifics of the significance, per this guy's help thing (not the first one but the last two.)
    • I have added details as to where/how the images were obtained, plus copyright info that I am aware of. I've also added more fair use rationale to all three images.-Hal Raglan 01:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I'd lose the infobox flag, per WP:FLAGCRUFT
  • The lead should cover everything in the article, for example, Kinski's temperament, shooting on location, possibly the Sight & Sound list.
    • With a little bit of rewriting and reshuffling of material, I should be able to easily address this issue. I'll try to get to this tonite (Aug 13).-Hal Raglan 13:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
      • Rewritten/expanded-Hal Raglan 04:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • The budget should be preceded by US$, infobox and text, and the first instance wikilinked, per WP:DATE.
    • Fixed, I think. Sorry, I'm a little confused by your wording.- Hal Raglan 01:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Really tiny thing, Gaspar de Carvajal's name in the lead should be piped so the apostrophe-s is included in the wikilink, per somewhere in WP:MOS.
  • I know they say it's fine to use the IMDb to confirm cast but I don't think you need it at all. If it can be confirmed by the film credits, that's your source. If they absolutely need to check the IMDb, the link's right there in the infobox and external links.
    • Not sure what you mean here. I believe I used the cast list provided in David Overbey's Movies of the Seventies. There is no ref/link back to imdb for the cast section.-Hal Raglan 01:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • This is purely optional, but if the country's West German, the release date can be assumed to be the same, you don't need the bracketed assertion.
    • Got rid of it.-Hal Raglan 01:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • If the main language in the infobox is English, the language category should be the same.
    • I understand what you are saying, but the film was filmed in English, but predominantly released in a German-dubbed version. This confuses things a little as to the proper cat to utilize. Should we have two cats, English language films and German language films?-Hal Raglan 01:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • The ISBN doesn't work, I don't think you need them for DVDs. I'm not sure if the formatting is right for the DVD items either but I won't call you on that. If there's a problem they'll get it in FAC.
  • There should be a little more on Kinski, he's such a huge part of the lore of this film.
    • It's Herzog and Kinski's first film together. They're as famous a paring as Kurosawa and Mifune and Scorsese and De Niro. Possibly this might be the place to mention that story of how they first met from My Best Fiend. Maybe not but it's something to consider.
    • To accompany the shooting incident, I believe it was in the commentary that it was mentioned Kinski hit a cast member in the head with his sword full force. It dented the helmet, left a permanent scar and could have killed him without the helmet--maybe not even in that much detail but a mention would do.
      • This is mentioned in "My Best Fiend", Werner Herzog's documentary about his relationship with Kinski. There is an interview with the man who was hit on the head, straight from the horse's mouth, and what looks like footage of the event (including the poor, dented helmet!). -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 17:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Also, Kinski had some colourful things to say about the experience, didn't he?
      • I've never read Kinski's autobiography but if he ever did comment on the film's production I'm sure it would be there. I think a line or two should be indeed be added about how/why Herzog's first choice for the role was Kinski, with some detail about their earlier experiences together, but I'm not too sure if too much detail should be expended on their subsequent filmic relationship in this article.-Hal Raglan 01:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
        • I've added another paragraph briefly explaining their early relationship and Herzog's reasons for thinking only Kinski could play the part.-Hal Raglan 04:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I know the Loch Ness parody is obvious but a reference should be easy to find.
    • Added ref.-Hal Raglan 01:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • The IMDb isn't reliable for awards, those should be re-referenced.
    • A quick search of the various establishments' websites does not confirm Aguirre actually received these particular awards. That doesn't mean it definitively did not, but at this moment I cannot confirm the awards. I have removed the reference and will re-add them only when I can find a reliable source.-Hal Raglan 02:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
      • Added refs.-Hal Raglan 04:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I don't think you need Rotten Tomatoes in with the reviews, it takes too much space to explain what it is and it's difficult to say if they're all reliable reviews, I don't think they are. An excellent job of summing up reactions has been done without it. I'd put it in External links.
    • Thanks. I put a great deal of work into this article, particularly the Response/Reception section. I know many other editors seem to think Rotten Tomatoes is one of the greatest film reference sites but I don't necessarily agree. I will probably take your advice and yank this out.-Hal Raglan 02:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • The category Films based on actual events is a little sketchy... the article pretty much says it's fantasy as soon as Herzog opened the book.
    • I'm iffy on this suggestion. The film was based on actual events, albeit loosely. I think the cat should remain.-Hal Raglan 02:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • And the cast box, I can't remember where I saw this but somewhere in the MOS I read tables were not meant for two item widths. Lose that and maybe split it into two rows to minimize dead space.
    • This will take some work on my part as I have no clue as to how to fix this problem. I did initially try with two rows for the very reason you mention but to me it looked even worse, with a lot more dead space, than the way it looks now. I'll try to figure something out, but this will have to be at the bottom of my "to-do" list.-Hal Raglan 13:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Ah, almost missed it, the Coppola thing in the lead, per WP:LEAD, needs to be in the main text somewhere as well. It seems redundant sometimes but you've got to sum pretty much everything up in the lead and then detail it out throughout the rest of the article. Maybe just spell out that it influenced Apocalypse Now along with some other response stuff in the lead and move the details down below. Aren't there any other people influenced? I can't think of anything off the top of my head but it seems like there must be more.
    • I definitely agree w/you here. I'll try to get to this at the same time I am rewriting the lead. I'll probably add a "Legacy" section, which I've wanted to do for some time. Aguirre was the major influenced work, but some critics have mentioned other movies, too. I'll see what I can dig up.-Hal Raglan 13:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
      • Done. Rewrote/expanded lead and added "Legacy" section.

It's a great article. I commend you for choosing this film and the work done. It seems like there should be more sections but I can't think of what would be missing. Maybe Home video but certainly few FAs have that. Anyway, it's enjoyable and informative. Doctor Sunshine talk 16:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the kind words. Its a great film and deserves a thorough wikipedia entry. Another editor nominated this for Good Article status, and I think with some of the changes you recommend it should definitely get there with no problem.-Hal Raglan 13:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
No problem. Regarding the IMDb comment, I should have clarified further. I meant in the infobox, I assumed that last reference after the budget was meant to cover the entire infobox. I see it's just meant for the budget. There's a better reference (currently 9a) in the 2nd paragraph of the Production section. In regards to the language category, no, you're right. Thinking about it again, it should go by the original country. So, of the things I haven't crossed out, the lead, Kinski additions and legacy are the only key issues. The others aren't pass-fail considerations in my mind. Keep up the good work. Doctor Sunshine talk 14:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I found some citations for the awards.

Thanks! I did a search myself but was able to locate only the German Films website. You obviously are a much greater search engine master than I am. W/the addition of the references you provided I think it can be safely said that the film indeed received the noted awards.-Hal Raglan 19:03, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

This may be useful: FilmReference.com. Also, if you haven't already, I would seek out academic studies of the film at Google Scholar. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

If you need help retrieving these academic studies, I can either explain to you how to access the full content or provide it myself. I've done so for Schindler's List, Memento, Fight Club, etc. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA passed

That was fast. Great work. Erik brings up a good point though. A themes section is entirely appropriate for this film. However, I'm passing it as it's most definitely a good article. And it's well on it's way to FA status. I'd recommend adding the themes section, then taking it to a peer review just to be we've not missed anything else. Kudos. Doctor Sunshine talk 20:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Erik provided me with six very useful scholarly articles that will assist in the development of "Historical Accuracy" and "Themes" sections. These will take some time/work and I'll get to it eventually. I'll definitely hold off on a peer review request until the sections have been added. Thanks for your terrific suggestions/assistance.-Hal Raglan 22:09, 14 August 2007 (UTC)