Talk:National Lampoon's Animal House

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article National Lampoon's Animal House was a nominee for good article, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
December 28, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed
This is a candidate for cinema collaboration of the week. Please see this article's entry to support or comment on the nomination.


This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.
Peer review National Lampoon's Animal House has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
To-do list for National Lampoon's Animal House: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:

    Contents

    [edit] School Dispute

    It has often been discussed that the school in the film is to some degree supposed to be the University of Tennessee. The most telling evidence of this is the Tennessee state flag displayed opposite the American flag during the hearing scene. It is easily visible beside Gregg and the Dean in several cuts, and in the background while Otter is giving the "american spirit" speech. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.159.117 (talk) 01:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC) "To add to this, the setting and style of the classroom, with the different floor levels raising the seats heading to the back of the room and the chalkboard at the lowest level in the front, is very similar to classrooms in the Glocker Business and Administration Building at the University of Tennessee. The ceiling and A/C ducts are also of similar fashion. The only major difference is the color of the classroom. In the movie, the classroom is green in different shades with the trim being the darkest. The last time I was in the building, it was more white and brown. But since the movie was filmed in 1978 and I last entered the building in 2004, I have no doubt the classrooms have had several coats of paint since then. Also, not long after my last encounter with "Glocker", aside from one side of the original side facing Hodges Library, the rest of the building has been demolished and rebuilt making it much larger than the original building. "Glocker" is still in the same style on the outside but much more modern on the inside. To my knowledge, it is on it's last leg of renovations and should be open for use by this fall(2009) or is already in use."-submitted by Tyler Tallent, Tennessee alumnus '05 Additionally there is some debate that the origin of plot comes from McMaster University (Mac)in Hamilton Ontario. The residence in question is Whidden Hall (spelling might be off) and looks much like a residence presented at the beginning of the movie. Further support comes from the fact that Ivan Reitman producer of Animal House is an alumnus of McMaster. Want futher proof, then watch the movie in slow motion, specifically the toga party where the two fish bowls imbeaded in the wall are displayed. You will see the red letters "MAC" across the wall. 209.226.137.106 (talk) skyzend

    [edit] Hidden Joke

    There is a scene when the guys are on the roadtrip to Emily Dickinson University, and go to the Dexter Lake Club, when Pinto asks his date, "What's your major?" she replies, "Primitive cultures," and the shot quickly pans to Otis singing "Oooh mao mao," into the mic.

    Cute, and ironic, as there was nothing more primitive in that film than the atmosphere at Delta House. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Leo Strauss

    Please stop adding the totally false bit about Leo Strauss and gay orgy toga parties in the trivia section, there is absolutely no reason for it since it isn't even thought to be true in the book used a reference. Even if it WERE a fact, it'd be totally irrelevant to this movie and the article. --GregRog 17:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

    The quote about Leo Strauss should be looked upon as vandalism. Having checked page 62 of Leo Strauss and the Politics of American Empire, I can now report that the book reads, in relevant part:

    ...Cornell had been the site of a particularly ugly scandal involving sexual harrassment—of women. These acts had, however, been eclipsed by the persistent rumors of homosexual rites and rituals among the Straussians: of orgiastic toga parties and gay little reenactments of the Symposium. These rumors were enhanced by [Saul] Bellow's Ravelstein. Despite the recurrent rumors—even among Straussians and their sympathizers—I don't believe the toga parties. [emphasis added]

    Thus the editor who has been adding the paragraph on Leo Strauss is wrong on several counts. They were rumors, and the book suggests no connection—as in none—to Animal House. I'm sorry, but I cannot believe that adding this paragraph was a good-faith error, since the text of the book by Norton, as we can see by the quoted excerpt above, supports the paragraph not at all. Hydriotaphia 19:53, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

    • As one among many who have been in a revert "skirmish" with that one guy, it is clear he won't discuss it, he just keeps adding it back. That adds up to point-of-view pushing, at the very least. Wahkeenah 18:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

    Also, I'm not sure what Jacrosse's terse edit summary—"This is not vandalism - the toga party is more then enough closely associated with Animal House in the popular consciousness that a connection can be inferred"—means. What "connection" is referred to here? A connection between the Straussians and Animal House? I don't see one; please explain. Or a connection between the Straussians and toga parties? This connection belongs on the toga party article, not here. Again, please stop reverting without discussion. If you continue to do so, I shall request arbitration. Hydriotaphia 06:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

    • I'm assuming you're directing your warning to the other guy, not me. :) I was thinking that, forgetting the controversial nature of the citation (which is what I assume is the agenda behind his continual pushing of it, despite his denial) it's a little like including a writeup about how filmstock is made, in an article about a specific film; it might be interesting in the article about filmstock, but not about a specific movie. In fact, he put it in the toga article also, where one can debate its factual merits, but at least that's the place for it, if anyplace. As I and others keep saying, and to which he won't respond, it has nothing to do with this movie specifically. Wahkeenah 13:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Oh yes, I'm talking to Jacrosse, not to you. I completely agree with your comments above. Hydriotaphia 15:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
    • But is is great and I live with a bunch of Straussians and they do the toga party thing with me, so why not have Animal House take part too?
    Right...--GregRog 20:07, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
    If you haven't noticed I've surrendered, but please let it stand on the Toga Party page those of you who have been after me there to.--Jacrosse 21:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
    Dude, this isn't a battle. It's not about "winning" or "surrendering"—it's about making a decent encyclopedia. I hope you'll continue to contribute, but please do it responsibly and defensibly. Hydriotaphia 02:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
    Du-ude, I was just saying so with a little literary license, and I have every intention of remaining a part of the Wikipedia community.--Jacrosse 16:14, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Jack Daniels

    The Bloopers section contains a bullet that states; "So the story goes that Belushi actually chugged the bottle of Jack Daniels, which was actually full oif booze. Doubtful, since it would have killed him. I suspect it was iced tea." This is blatantly POV. Could someone rephrase?

    [edit] Plot Summary

    Are there any plans for someone to put in a proper plot summary? The one that's there only lists the characters and has nothing more. I'd do it myself but it's been too long since I last saw the movie to do it justice.--MythicFox 05:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

    Done. Clarityfiend 07:24, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

    Very well-written, thanks.--MythicFox 09:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Trivia Section

    This article is far too long, we need to trim the trivia section. I started with the most unneeded ones. --Liface 23:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

    Removed some trivia that only has a weak connection to the movie: "After the film's release, the administration of Dartmouth College, in an attempt to clean up the reputation of the Greek system at their school, filed eight charges against one of the fraternities on campus, Phi Kappa Psi, now known as Panarchy [1]. The fraternity eventually won the case." Clarityfiend 06:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
    Got rid of second hand gossip: "Director John Landis has said that he heard that Animal House is both George W. Bush's and John Kerry's favorite movie. [2]" Wouldn't surprise me if it were true though. Clarityfiend 22:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
    Another one: *A dying urban legend states that the numbers of the houses in scenes are significant. For example, in the scene where Bluto uses a ladder to look at naked women, the number of the house is 763, which would stand for "GFC" or "Go Fuck Chicks." This idea has not been mentioned by any of the writers." Clarityfiend 16:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

    Hi. This part: "Things go from bad to worse. "Babs" (Martha Smith) "reveals" to Gregg Marmalard that his girlfriend, Mandy (Mary Louise Weller), and Otter are having an affair. (Babs lies because she wants Gregg for herself.)" isn't true. In the cafeteria scene, when Otter sits next to Mandy and asks her about getting together again, she says "Besides, it wasn't that good." Otter looks incredulous. That would indicate that yes, they had had sex at least once.

    One encounter does not an affair make. Babs implied that their relationship was ongoing when it plainly wasn't. Clarityfiend 22:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] various DVD versions

    Some mention should be made of the music score changes made in the "Double Secret Probation" DVD.--Mike18xx 01:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

    I have the Double Secret Probation edition (Region 1) and the soundtrack music seems fine. Sam Cooke's Wonderful World is in place during the cafeteria sequence, as are the other songs from the original soundtrack. I think for some releases outside North America, the music was changed to some really bland sounding instrumentals. It was horrible; really ruined the mood, especially in the moments leading up to "Food fight!" I know for sure this happened on the Region 3 release, though I'm not sure if it was a Double Secret Probation edition. I've also seen mention of the alternate soundtrack on releases for Region 4. If there's a definitive, reputable source out there that documents these alternate releases, then the reference should be added. -Wisekwai 04:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] {{fact}} tagging

    This article is littered with with unsourced claims. Anyone have some cites? L0b0t 14:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

    I've removed a few of the ones where we have no citations, and where I expect we aren't going to. The one about Belushi and the Jack Daniels, for one, has flip-flopped on a few occasions, so I find it useful to just straight-up remove the troublesome passages. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    I found an article for this first citation about it being the originator of gross-out comedies. An article on NPR's site mentions briefly that this was probably the case. J.D. 16:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Cultural References

    The 'The next day, Homer went to work in a toga' bit isn't from the episode where he goes to college. It's from the one where Marge is telling stories to the kids at the library, and near the end, Homer randomly mentions Animal House.

    Partial credit. The episode you named is correct, but Homer's mention of Animal House is far from random. If I remember it correctly, and I do, Marge was telling a story about Mozart which clearly parodied "Amadeus." Homer mentions that the guy in that movie, Tom Hulse, was also in Animal House. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ROG 19 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

    Ironically, his characterization of Mozart was rowdier than his characterization of Pinto. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

    Unbelievable - no one has put in the Twisted Sister reference yet. <Tekito> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.187.181.30 (talk) 02:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Legacy, Baseball

    I first heard that clip of Bluto's "pep talk" used as a 9th inning rally cry in the South Atlantic League in the early 1990s. I saw the clip at the Metrodome a couple of months ago. Independently, there are editors saying it's used at Yankee Stadium. There are many internet references. Just Google "animal house" "baseball" "ninth inning" "germans bombed" and you'll find some. Whoever asked for the fact tag, do the research and pick the one (or ones) that you like. Baseball Bugs 01:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

    I placed the tag, and until we get a reliable source for it (along with the fifteen bazillion other tagged spots), we need to keep the tag. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Pop Culture: Double Secret Probation

    The article says that Double Secret Probation is part of pop culture. I'm sure that's right, and I've probably used it myself, but the article makes no mention of where it is used outside of Animal House. Anybody want to do some research? superlusertc 2007 August 24, 01:14 (UTC)

    [edit] Featured article status

    When did this article lose its featured article status? - Throw 19:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

    Did it ever have it? --J.D. 21:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
    Yes, I remember a few months ago having it. I remember vividly since seeing it as a featured article is what made me buy the DVD. - Throw 21:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] GA Review

    GA review (see here for criteria)
    1. It is reasonably well written.
      a (prose): b (MoS):
    2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
      a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    3. It is broad in its coverage.
      a (major aspects): b (focused):
    4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
      Fair representation without bias:
    5. It is stable.
      No edit wars etc.:
    6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
      a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    7. Overall:
      Pass/Fail:

    Though I love the movie and had hoped to pass it, there are far too many problems with the article at the time to allow it to be a Good Article, here are just the biggest concerns

    1. The lead needs to conform to WP:LEAD. Specifically, it must summarize every major point/heading made in the body of the article, which it does not even come close to doing. There's barely anything on the plot, production, music, pop culture or the characters, to name a few. The lead should leave the reader with at least a basic understanding of the key points of the article, which it fails almost entirely to do.
    2. The plot summary is way too long and detail - I (or rather, my copy of Microsoft word) counted over 1000 words. According to WP:FILM's guidelines, "Plot summaries should be between 400 and 700 words and should not exceed 900 words unless there is a specific reason such as a very complicated plot." As I said, I love this movie, but I wouldn't exactly describe the plot as "very complicated." I suggest cutting down a lot of the detail and flowery language.
    3. The referencing of this article is entirely inadequate; entire large sections lack even a single reference. While it would be tedious to list every last one, a general guideline is that, at minimum, every paragraph should have at least one in-line citation. Some of the most noticeable (and this is by no means all-inclusive) are "Origins" (only the first sentence is cited), the second paragraph of "Casting," the first three paragraphs of "Location," most of "Soundtrack and score," most of "Pop culture" and "DVD editions"
    4. The prose for the first half is casual, although it could easily be worked with, but after the "Production" section, it starts to become choppy, highlighted by the frequent use of one-two sentence paragraphs. The casual style also seems to make the prose "wander" a bit, and makes me wonder about the "focused" criteria for Good Articles
    5. There are some neutrality concerns that could easily be turned into less POV statements. Here are the most obvious examples: "Since the film's initial success, the film has become pop culture treasure" (uncited POV), "The soundtrack is a mix of rock and roll and R&B, mostly of songs that were popular around the approximate time period in which the film is set" (uncited POV and wishy-washy to boot), "Rick Meyerowitz, the illustrator who drew Animal House's iconic poster"

    These are just the most pressing concerns and the article would need a serious revamp (especially with the references) before the smaller details would be worth picking out and addressing. For these reasons, I am going fail the article at this time. If you feel that this review is in error, you may take it to Good Article reassessment. Thank you for your work thus far. Cheers, CP 23:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] No mention that this is a slob comedy

    Wow, I thought wiki was good. I look up slob comedy, there is nopage for it. Also, there is no mention on this page that it is. If you need an example to prove slob comedy is a real genera, Porky's is a slob comedy. So can we make a mention in this page and mabye make a page on slob comedies. --Fresh Prince Carlton (talk) 14:24, 25 April 2008 (UTC)