Talk:Hannibal (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hannibal (film) 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.

July 28, 2007

Good article nominee

Listed

	This article, category, or template is part of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to horror film and fiction 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.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.

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.

This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.

Editing Guidelines

Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article:

If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film)
- For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films)
When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references.
Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.

Additional Information:

[edit] COMEDY???

The categories place this movie in comedy categories! Other than Hannibal Rising, this is the only of the Lecter movies I haven't seen, but could someone make it clear why this is considered a comedy? 71.243.181.204 05:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

It could be considered a black comedy.--CyberGhostface 21:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Hannibal Lecter films

Template:Hannibal Lecter films has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --CyberGhostface 21:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] peal his own face off

he asked this so that he can't see his smille,kind of "psycological therapy" i mean,so that he can't take advantage of children.Or for the suposed "sexual" purpose.--87.65.171.194 02:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Length

Recently, this article has gotten ridiculously long with unneeded information and atrocious spelling and grammar. Can someone please do something about this? I am working on grammar, but I may need help. Dr. Hannibal Lecter 18:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More about the ending....

The very end of the film, which shows Hannibal on the airplane with his arm in a sling is supposed to be one of the biggest character revealing elements of the whole series. It's implied that rather than cutting off Clarice's hand, he chopped off his own, which could be considered a display of his love for her. Yet, this is conspicuously absent in the plot summary. Would anyone mind filling it in? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stottpie (talk • contribs) 22:27, 10 March 2007 (UTC).

Yes your right - ive added stuff on the romantic 'themes' in the film, under 'themes'. Ridley Scott says in his commentary - its an act if ultimate sacrafice what he does there. He loses his hand. Whataboutbob 12:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed Trivia Section

Christopher Reeve was offered and turned down the role of Mason Verger, but he regretted it when Gary Oldman won rave reviews for his performance. Reeve then signed on to play reclusive . Virgil Swann in two episodes of the popular drama show Smallville.

Although the character of Jack Crawford appears as a minor character in the novel, he does not appear in the film, although is mentioned in a deleted scene as having passed away between films.

In a scene inside the Italian police offices, a television screen can be seen in the background with a game of soccer on. The match shown is not of Italian soccer, as one might assume, but is actually an English Premier League game with former Aston Villa player Julian Joachim clearly visible on the screens.

MasterA113 03:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Good one moving the trivia section Whataboutbob 13:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Has anyone else noticed...

Krendler reads the postcard supposedly written to Clarice and then says, "Sounds like him to me." If you read the card, you can clearly (maybe you have to pause it) see the words "sounds like him to me" as the last sentence. Obviously that wasn't supposed to be on the card. I just thought that was interesting; I wonder if they put it there on purpose. 24.10.97.60 09:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA comment

There are a few minor things that should be addressed before another user reviews this. The movie poster needs a fair use rationale, and go through the article and make sure that all of the inline citations are directly after the punctuation with no spaces in between. Also consider removing a few of the nonfree images, as this article probably has too many to be able to declare fair use. Keep the most relevant ones to the information being discussed. Good job so far, and good luck on the review. --Nehrams2020 16:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The article has two other problems that should really be addressed. At 66k, it's really questionable whether it's properly focused. It's one thing to have an article this size about fairly important historical topics, but not just one very recent (if currently notable) book-to-film adaptation. The level of detail is at times excruciatingly dull.

The article suffers from a severe case of footnoteitis and quite a bit of quoteamania. That statements like Lecter being a household name needs a separate citation quite frankly makes the article (and Wikipedia) look somewhat stupid; this is not a fact that anyone, unless trying to make a point would question, would question. As for quoting, providing readers with verbatim transcripts of what critics and those involved in the film have said or written makes sense, but it seems as if the article tries to let them tell the entire story instead of properly summarizing the various events. For example, the section on Jodie Foster's involvement could be cut in half and still tell the exact same story, but without terribly dull quotes like "Would definitely be part of it" and "The studio is just back from the holiday and is regrouping based on the news, and has no cohesive game plan at the moment".

Peter ^Isotalo 04:43, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry person above, but what are you on about? How can an extremely well researched article have "severe case of footnoteitis". It went from "start" to "good articicle nominee" purely on my work, 100%, no debate at all. There are under 2000 good articles in wikipedia. The boring quotes you refer to were quotes taken from reliable news sources emanating from people working on the film. uld you do? Make it up. I quit Wikipedia becuase of people like you. Whataboutbob 12:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

AND as you can see, length has nothing to do with it. It is broken down into sections, just like a DVD for example, or a book - so you can choose what you want read, or not! Whataboutbob 12:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The article is well-researched, yes, but it's not a good read and there's absolutely no given correlation between the number of footnotes in an article (or the number of times a certain footnote is repeated) and how well-referenced is. This is no different than overuse of, say, images or tables.

The quotes tell a very simple narrative in the form of "person A said X, but then person B said Y, and person C went on to say Z". This makes for very a very unappealing read and leaves the reader wondering why a relatively uncomplicated story was told in excruciating detail. It's not a matter of "making it up", but summarize in your own words. That the quotes happen to be reliable or true does not mean that they're either interesting or have to be included. That's supposed to be an editor's job, even on Wikipedia. Think of it as editing out mediocre footage from a film or a book, even if that content might mean the article gets bigger. Just like with footnotes, quantity does not equal quality.

As for length, an article is a whole. Paragraphs don't magically split into X amount of sub-articles just because you put a section heading over them. Give the reader a break and avoid writing articles that are designed after what your peers might find interesting. As an enthusiast, you should in general assume that the average reader is interested in roughly half the material you wish to include in an article, especially when working on an article about a very narrow topic.

Peter ^Isotalo 13:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Passed

This article easily fulfills the GA criteria with its extensive citing, comprehensive citing, and decent quality of prose. Suggestions for improvement: check the quotes in the Themes section and make sure the syntax/grammar/flow is correct - I wasn't sure the proper format for multiple quotations like that so I left them alone. --Meowist 04:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

GA article huh! My days and stupid amount of hours working on this must have paid off then. From a "start" to "GA". Whataboutbob 13:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UK

It should be joint origin from the UK, seeing as the director and main star are British

I might be wrong, but I think country of origin is based on where the production company is located and where major production work is done. A British director and star does not make a movie British, it just means they worked on a movie made elsewhere. -Etoile 17:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Union Station Carousel

I was surprised by the article's implication that the carousel at DC's Union Station was placed there because Ridley Scott requested it. It seems more likely that the movie made good use of the "Turn of the Century" carousel, a temporary Union Station exhibit sponsored by The History Channel. [1] -Etoile 17:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Hannibal knife.jpg

Image:Hannibal knife.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 10:39, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ridanddino.jpg

Image:Ridanddino.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot 23:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ridleygram Hannibal.jpg

Image:Ridleygram Hannibal.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot 23:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Clariceandhanniballift23.jpg

Image:Clariceandhanniballift23.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot 14:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Alovemoment562.jpg

Image:Alovemoment562.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot 07:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Krendler&Claricehannibal.gif

Image:Krendler&Claricehannibal.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot 03:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Julianneoncar45.gif

Image:Julianneoncar45.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot 04:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Pazzicafeshades.jpg

Image:Pazzicafeshades.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)