Talk:The Thirty-nine Steps
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class. | ||
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
Contents |
[edit] spoiler!
what's the plot/storyline/ minus the spoiler ;)
- made changes to the "Plot introduction" without to much of a spoiler. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
The spoiler warning needs to be placed prior to the "Plot Introduction"!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.60.98.133 (talk) 16:12, 8 March 2007
[edit] Film or Book ?
This article is about the book. Therefore I propose removing the info about the Hitchcock film ( the side bar info ) to a less prominent position where it is clear that that info is film related. There were 3 films anyway.
[edit] Hangin' Out
Hannay hanging from the minute hand of Big Ben? Who was his stunt double, Harold Lloyd? Trekphiler 06:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] By the number
I went looking for the Canadian band, The 39 Steps, & got this. Some fan write an article? Trekphiler 06:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Film or Book ? 2
I agree with the previous writer that this page is rather a mess - the emphasis is on the 1935 Hitchcock film rather than the novel and the other films are somewhat left out. I would suggest that either the films page be separated, i.e. under a 'the thirty-nine steps' (film) page or each version is given its own section on the page, i.e. the novel, the film, then subdivide the film versions into 1935, 1959, 1978.
[edit] Revision
This page has now been altered as requested, with a separate film page for the 1935 adaptation, which has also taken with it the 'Hitchcock template' and the picture. This page is now more about the work in general, the original novel first and then a section about each film individually. Plenty of links have been revised to accomodate this change, and the new page site is made quite clear at the beginning of the article to avoid confusion. Bob Castle 01:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC) BC
- The plot summary at the film page was of the book, not the movie. I removed it, but somebody might want to merge it in here (I didn't, because it contradicts the plot here in a few places, and since I haven't read it I don't know which is right). You can grab it out of the history here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_39_Steps_%281935_film%29&direction=prev&oldid=36390309 .—Chowbok 19:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- (By the way, is there a Wiki-way to link to an old revision?) —Chowbok 19:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, good idea. Stupidly, I haven't actually seen the 1935 film, only read the book and seen the other 2 films, so if you could write a new (correct) plot summary for the Hitchcock film that would be great. I felt like the above opinions that its dominance over this page was unfair on the novel. Feel free to incorporate the older plot 'summary' into this, but I suspect it was simply copied from elsewhere and was so long that it wasn't really encyclopedic. Bob Castle 21:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Decided to restore the large description of the plot, and keep the shorter one as a 'plot summary'. Thanks for your help. Bob Castle 22:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Hope you don't mind my barging in...I replaced the plot summary sections for two of the films with "Main article" links. If there's going to be a separate article for every film version (sounds like it's headed that way), a summary here would be redundant. This should be just about the book, imho. Her Pegship 05:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- Decided to restore the large description of the plot, and keep the shorter one as a 'plot summary'. Thanks for your help. Bob Castle 22:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, good idea. Stupidly, I haven't actually seen the 1935 film, only read the book and seen the other 2 films, so if you could write a new (correct) plot summary for the Hitchcock film that would be great. I felt like the above opinions that its dominance over this page was unfair on the novel. Feel free to incorporate the older plot 'summary' into this, but I suspect it was simply copied from elsewhere and was so long that it wasn't really encyclopedic. Bob Castle 21:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- (By the way, is there a Wiki-way to link to an old revision?) —Chowbok 19:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wembley steps
Does anyone know whether this was intentional or merely a coincidence? Lisiate 08:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- As it stands now, that item, in the 'Trivia' section, doesn't seem to me to have any relevance to the book. Can anyone say why it should be included in the article? Marieblasdell 16:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- It's been deleted before, but always creeps back in. Worth another try?--Old Moonraker 17:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds like a plan! Marieblasdell 17:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- It's been deleted before, but always creeps back in. Worth another try?--Old Moonraker 17:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Radio play too
Orson Welles also seems to have adapted The Thirty-nine Steps in August 1938 for the Mercury Theatre. Maybe this should be mentioned somewhere in this entry? But the only reference for it I have is the link to the (dress?) rehearsal of the radio play in http://www.mercurytheatre.info/. I don't know if the radio play was aired in finished form in the end: the rehearsal seems almost ready for airing. --Calmansi 18:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- It definitely was aired; it's uncertain whether a recording of the broadcast exists. —Chowbok 18:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Bold text
[edit] Canadian
Should he not be referred to as a Scottish/Canadian author in the opening paragraph? He was after all, the former Governer General of Canada Canking 12:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Capitalisation
The capitalisation looks a little inconsistent. It should probably be consistent to be either The Thirty-nine Steps (as most of the page seems to use) or The Thirty-Nine Steps (as some references use, and which appears correct to me). But given that both appear a number of places I've found and that I'm not familiar with the book, I wouldn't presume to know for certain which of the two should be the standard. - Cafemusique 22:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree, the page used to be "The Thirty-Nine Steps", which looks more aesthetically pleasing to my eye, but it's difficult to say which is the correct form. I suppose the current form is the most gramatically correct, yet most versions of the book I've seen have the capitalised N, i.e. the Penguin and the Oxford World Classics versions. I propose it should be changed back. Bob talk 01:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- I thought both halves of hyphenated words were to be capitalised in titles anyway. I really need to buy myself a style guide. - Cafemusique 12:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Radio Version
I just listened to the hour-long radio version starring Glenn Ford, apparently aired live on March 23, 1948. This was over the Radio Entertainment Network.
Someone might make an entry about this... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neopeius (talk • contribs) 10:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
