Talk:Blue Velvet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Blue Velvet 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.
Film Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Good article GA
This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Top
This article has been rated as Top-importance on the priority scale.

Contents

[edit] Frank's drug

I changed references to oxygen huffing to nitrous oxide huffing. The screenplays on the Internet say Frank's mask dispensed helium, and several sources seem to confirm this, and claim Dennis Hopper shot down this proposal before the movie was shot. Then some Net articles say it's an oxygen mask, but an Entertainment Weekly article claims it's nitrous oxide, quoting Dennis Hopper:

"That would have been too self-conscious," he says. "I did enough drugs to know that nitrous oxide would be more effective."

When the camara zooms out of the ear at the end, it's Jeffery's if memory serves and not the original severed ear. The wording currently makes it sound otherwise. Also regarding the gas that Frank uses, sure in interviews, Hopper says what it is, but the movie never says exactly. Thus, the only thing we know for sure judging by the movie is that Frank gets high on some sort of gas. I don't think the article should try to incorporate information from interviews only. Jason Quinn 30 June 2005 16:41 (UTC)


I've read it was supposed to be Amyl_Nitrite. --B. Phillips 15:25, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

here is an interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYbu8g4gUy4

Mr. Hopper even comments on how maybe leaving it in could have been good too (~2:45). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.28 (talk) 02:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] original research

I removed the following sections, as they would seem to clearly be original research, and perhaps more appropriate to a college paper than an encyclopedia. Unless someone knows an acceptable sources for this info? --Mr Wind-Up Bird ✈ 06:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Symbolism

The most consistent symbolism in Blue Velvet is an insect motif introduced at the end of the first scene, when the camera zooms in on a well-kept suburban lawn until it discovers, underground, a swarming nest of disgusting bugs. This is generally recognized as a metaphor for the seedy underworld that Jeffrey will soon discover under the surface of his own suburban, Reagan-esque paradise. The bug motif is recurrent throughout the film, most notably in the horrific bug-like oxygen mask that Frank wears, but also in the excuse that Jeffrey offers when he first gains access to Dorothy's apartment: he claims he is an insect exterminator. One of Frank's sinister accomplices is also consistently identified through the yellow jacket he wears. Yellowjacket happens to be the name of a type of wasp, which double-layers the symbolism on yet another level, as the economically dominant groups of the USA are the WASP's - Wealthy Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Finally, a robin eating a bug on a fence becomes a topic of discussion in the last scene of the film. Some believe that this is just 'one bug' and that there is still a criminal underworld left (indeed, earlier in the film when the police raid Frank's hideout, it certainly doesn't look like they're winning).

The severed ear that Jeffrey discovers is also a key symbolic element; the ear is what leads Jeffrey into danger. Indeed, just as Jeffrey's troubles begin, the audience is treated to a nightmarish sequence in which the camera zooms into the ear canal of the severed, decomposing ear. Notably, the camera does not reemerge from the ear canal until the end of the film. When Jeffrey finally comes through his hellish ordeal unscathed, the ear canal shot is replayed, only in reverse, zooming out through Jeffrey's own ear as he relaxes in his yard on a summer day.

A number of scenes contain red drapes or curtains, a popular recurring image for Lynch, especially prominent in Twin Peaks.

[edit] Possible influences

Many elements of Blue Velvet are reminiscent of Charles Laughton's 1955 one-shot-wonder, The Night of the Hunter. The story of a child or naïve young man thrust into an unexpected adult world of crime, sex, and murder is common to both films, and the development of this subject as something of a journey towards the redemption of innocence also seems similar. Both films feature a helpless woman held under the power of a sometimes disarming but ultimately terrifying madman. Both madmen are tied symbolically to a primal, animal or insect world. And in both films the child character loses his father in the first scene, and later seeks the help of a surrogate father figure but is disappointed in this appeal to adult, masculine authority.

If Lynch was indeed influenced by Laughton, the ending of Blue Velvet deserves special attention. In both Blue Velvet and Night of the Hunter, the trial of the adult world is ultimately followed by a return to innocence and childhood. However, whereas Laughton's treatment of this ending seems heartfelt and has in fact been criticized as too saccharine or simplistic, Lynch's ending seems tongue in cheek, or even sarcastic. Just as Lynch's opening shots of perfect suburban America quickly prove too good to be true, his ending leaves doubt as to whether normality has really been recovered. The appearance of a deliberately stiff and artificial-seeming robin singing merrily to Jeffrey cements the impression of cynicism.

Additionally, Kenneth Anger's 1949 dialogue-free short Puce Moment, which features a dark-haired woman slightly past her prime modelling an array of bright clothing for the camera, may be counted as an influence.

[edit] Rating

I've rated the article as a B. IMO, at least the following issues should be adressed to move towards A and beyond:

  • a Reception section on critical reaction and boxoffice
  • while it does have references, inline citations seem to be the thing now
  • pieces of trivia should be integrated in the main text where possible

Also, BV as a Lynch film could probably be expanded into a more comprehensive section on themes and symbols AdamSmithee 07:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I've added a Reception as requested. Count Ringworm 15:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Various Versions

This was pasted into the actual entry and really belongs in the Talk section. Count Ringworm 14:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

(I have a historical question that needs to be put here...

Version 2 Hours. DVD VHS Version 2 Hours 1 min. DVD VHS Version 2 Hours 16 min. VHS There must be another version of this flim. For I have seen a version that had Dennis Hopper abusing the woman in front of her husband and the yellow jacket cop. He kills both the men, leaving his dirty cop buddy standing like a zombie. This is not in any of the above versions. This also is why she is naked and is found on the porch. I remember this so clearly, the impact of Dennis Hopper shooting the police officer in the head.... Can anyone verify what I am stating here? I feel the DVD edition just cut this out as being to harsh, but it is critical to why she is wondering around naked and is not in any version I have, which is now 3 copies of this film. HELP!!!!! )

[edit] Poster, instead of DVD cover?

Wouldn't it be better if the infobox for Blue Velvet had a original theatrical poster, rather than a Special Edition DVD image. I don't know how to upload images on Wikipedia, so if it isn't too much trouble, would they do so. I know most film pages on Wikipedia are meant to have the poster in the box. RaptorRobot 11:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

You can upload images here. It's the easiest thing ever. Cop 633 13:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I've uploaded the theatrical poster. Count Ringworm 14:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't like the color on this new image. It's inferior to the previous one. --Steerpike 13:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Update

I’ve updated this article, and added some further information. And to better organize the direction, music, casting, and reception and added some more citations, since the article was kind off looking messy and seemed to be repeating it a bit. How far it is from getting a peer review request and what can be done to further improve the article? Anyone got some suggestions. Discuss them or add them below. RaptorRobot 08:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Needs a few good images...and non copyright ones to

Perhaps a few for the plot section would me good. RaptorRobot 11:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

Yes, Blue Velvet in popular culture should absolutely be merged because everything in it is already in the main article and there is simply not enough information to warrant its' own article. Please merge them. FilmFemme 22:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, merge (or just delete the pop culture article). There's no point in a separate entry. This is very obvious. I don't know why someone would have created the new article. Jason Quinn 19:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ok, so how far now?

So how far now is it for a possible FA review. A lot has been done to this article, so its all a matter of a request.203.57.68.20 15:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I would say go for an GA review first. I don't think this article is quite up to FA status yet. --J.D. 13:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, I'll do so. 203.57.68.20 06:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA failed

I'm afraid for the time being I have to speedy fail this article's GA nomination. Primarily, this was due to a substantial number of fact tags throughout the article. The concentration of these in the "Themes" section was especially worrying, and the whole section would appear to be OR unless sources for the allegations made can be found. Sorry. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 17:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grammar

English is not my mother tongue, but in the sentence "Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan) returns home from college after his father (Jack Harvey) suffers a stroke." in the first line of the synopsis, should not be: " after his father (Jack Harvey) suffered a stroke."? --192.33.238.6 18:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

No. Look at the tense of "to return" it is in the present tense, "returns", which is why the verb "to suffer" has the same tense. (unsigned comment)

Moreover, use of the present tense when describing the plot of a film (or novel or play etc.) is a convention. AngelaVietto (talk) 20:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Any suggestions?

Any suggestions on what should be done to the "references in pop culture section" at the end of the article - it has been tagged as trivia, and was wondering what should be done to it, in order to further improve the quility of the article. Angel2001 05:34, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I would say remove it and place it here until all of the points can be cited or it can be integrated into other sections of the article. --J.D. (talk) 16:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Better still, go through each one and ask "does this tell me anything new about Blue Velvet or is more useful to the article on the work that is referring to the film?" For example, the fact that a song quotes one of Frank's lines does not tell us anything new about Blue Velvet, but would be useful information for understanding that song, so move it to the relevant article if it exists.
If you feel the list of pop culture references as a whole is useful to showing the impact of BV on pop culture, try shortening it to one example per type of media and delete the rest: "BV has been sampled in many songs; for example Green Day's "My Generation" samples Frank shouting "Heineken? Fuck that shit!". It has also been alluded to in many films: for example the film Haute Tension features a shot-for-shot homage."
Cop 663 (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Also this discussion has produced good ideas: Wikipedia_talk:Notability (in_popular_culture) Cop 663 (talk) 16:44, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Beyond Zork

I wonder if there's a connection between this movie and the game by infocom, as Frank Booth is the default name of the character if you don't select a name at the beginning. The dates match up, as the movie was released in '86, and the game was released in '87. Of course, it probably doesn't matter very much.--Vercalos (talk) 10:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor nitpick

High Tension is an exploitation film, not an "exploration" film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.30.107.86 (talk) 22:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Successful good article nomination

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Congratulations! Blue Velvet has met all the criteria to become a good article. Thanks to all who contributed! Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 14:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Text lifted directly from Mulholland Drive

While I should be flattered that someone lifted text directly from Mulholland Dr.: "The filmmaking style of David Lynch has been written about extensively using descriptions like "ultraweird","[21] "dark",[22] and "oddball".[23] and "An author of a book on Lynch wrote, "One cannot watch a Lynch film the way one watches a standard Hollywood film noir nor in the way that one watches most radical films", I am not. I quite understand that many articles I've written have already been plagiarized by thousands of students, but the articles I write are an expression of honor for the subjects. I would be most ashamed of being so lacking in creativity or ability. This inclusion does not honor Blue Velvet, but rather says something about how little the editor cares about being thorough and original.

I cannot impose my own moral standards on articles I do not edit, unfortunately. But if you are entertaining the idea of bringing this to FAC, I will oppose strongly until that material is changed. Read your own resources and find your own quotes. The second one is from a book full of information about Lynch. --Moni3 (talk) 16:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)