Talk:True Romance/Archive 1

Feedback is welcome on this. I felt like allusion was so prevalent in this film that it ought to be mentioned. I held back a bit with the Hamlet parallels, on which much more could be said (for instance Donowitz and Blitzer as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern would be an interesting analog to explore) for fear of imposing a particular reading onto the film. Jvandermeer 15:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)Jvandermeer

What do you guys think? I just added the section, and I think I did a pretty good job with it. Give me some feedback! EliasAlucard|Talk 16:08, 17 Aug, 2005 (UTC)

Should a point be made that it isnt true? It's unfortunate that so many people take the dialogue from that scene in the movie as historical fact when it clearly isnt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.88.134.38 (talk • contribs) 07:05, 22 February 2006

Well, Tarantino himself claims it to be true on the True Romance DVD audio commentary track. I've checked up some facts on Wikipedia about the Moors, and there seems to be some validity in this claim made in the movie. EliasAlucard|Talk 00:45, 07 May, 2006 (UTC)

It's somewhat accurate. Slanted, but accurate. You've got to realize, Sicily is an island smack in the middle of the Mediteranean Sea and is of extreme strategic importance. It was constantly being invaded by the Moors, one of the Punic Wars started there, I mean, it was constantly the sight of conflict throughout the Roman Empire and beyond. What that generally means is every time it was conquered, there was a raping/pillaging period and as a result you get an island that's sort of an artificial melting pot. It isn't as simple as described in the movie, that being one major invasion by the Moors changing the whole bloodline, but the bloodline is the result of a long period of vastly different groups of people taking over Sicily and mixing genetic material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.88.134.38 (talk • contribs) 07:05, 22 February 2006

It isn't true, the movie gives the false illusion that Sicilians are somehow "black" when its an urban legend. Unsuprising that it is an American film and as such myths like these are snowballed.

Moors is a term applied to the Berber people, these people conquered Spain and also Sicily. Although these people are from part of Africa (Morocco for example), they are not the same colour as the stereotypical African-American; in terms of skin colour a modern day example of these people would be Zinedine Zidane or the Princess of Morocco.. who as you can see, are not black.

In the article on the History of Sicily, it states that "Complex urban settlements becomes increasingly evident from around 1300 BC" on the island.... the Moors were only at the helm in Sicily for around two centuries (from 831 AD till 1071 AD). A relitively small period of time when you consider the entire history of the island.

So to clarify...

Light skinned people from Africa did control Sicily for a short period two centuries, but they didn't "spawn" the people of the island, nor where they Black people in the popular sense of the term, unlike what the film claims. - Deathrocker 20:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Look far enough into the past, and we find that all of our great great great great great grandmothers "fucked a nigger." While an Eng instructor at the Univ of Alabama, I caught heat for saying, in evol terms, "we all used to be black." Jvandermeer 15:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)Jvandermeer

Both plot summary sections need a serious pruning - they go into far too much detail. I might get some of it done soon myself, but if anyone else wants to help, please feel free. --Doug (talk) 18:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, this is insanely long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.90.252 (talk • contribs) 03:54, 10 June 2006

I was going to add wikiquote in the external links, but something happened and half the article disappeared. EliasAlucard|Talk 13:39, 03 Jun, 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. Personally I think we could improve the article by losing three quarters of it, though. ;) Henry^Flower 11:47, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, and that was why I tried to add Wikiquote, so that we could move the quotes in the article to where they belong. EliasAlucard|Talk 04:42, 04 Jun, 2006 (UTC)

User:72.72.106.79 has added a piece of "trivia" that I recently removed, namely that Quentin Tarantion makes a cameo in the film as a customer with a prostitute on a monitor in Drexel's den. While the man on the TV does bear some resemblance to QT, the scene is actually from the film The Mack, as is clearly stated in the dialogue. I'm removing this again, unless anyone has any objections. Nscheffey^(T/C) 04:30, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Got inspired to tacle this by seeing the masterpiece that is the Ghost Dog article. Great films shouldn't have poor articles. If anyone fancies jumping in there's more than enough things to work on. Chris Cunningham 15:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Finally did some work on the massively overwrought plot section. It's still a bit intense, mind. Chris Cunningham 23:16, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

So how does the original screenplay actually start? It can't originally start in two different ways... Chris Cunningham 10:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

What the-- No! That's ridiculous. I'm Sicilian. Most of us are really dark, including me. Christopher Walken is not dark at all...What is up with that? That's offensive. Tarantino needs to find a real Sicilian to play a Sicilian...especially if the role involves stereotyping Sicilians. You could at least get the stereotype right! "Christopher Walken as a Sicilian gangster".....that's ridiculous. He doesn't even slightly resemble a Sicilian! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Callmarcus (talk • contribs) 16:02, 30 November 2006

You appear to have mistaken this for an actors' guild. In 1994. That's ignoring the fact that Tarantino had no say in the casting anyway, having sold the script. Chris Cunningham 16:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

This article says that the money from selling this script allowed Quentin Tarantino to make Resevoir Dogs. But, Wikipedia says that Resevoir Dogs was made in 1992 and that True Romance was made in 1993. So, obviousely, something is wrong. Are the dates wrong or is statement about selling True Romance false. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.196.115.56 (talk) 22:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

He sold it before filming Reservoir Dogs, but whoever bought it, didn't film the script right away. True Romance was filmed (or released at least) after he made Reservoir Dogs, I suspect (POV) that his success with Reservoir Dogs is what finally made filming/releasing True Romance possible.

Vicco Lizcano 15:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC) ^{(Hey! Listen!)}

i just added the "allusions" section. i've been a fan of the film for many years now and am friends with others who are very thoughtful fans of the film as well, so when i recently brought up the hamlet allusion to some new friends and TR afecionados and they were less than convinced, i googled "true romance hamlet" and found only a comment i myself had made on another film forum, so i added the allusions section to this wonderful film. any advice or corections are welcome. Jv

Image:True romance.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 15:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale added to image. AnmaFinotera 03:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if this is a blooper or what but the final scene couldn't possibly be Cancún. The sun is setting over the sea and Cancún faces east. It must be a pacific beach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.27.248 (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The music with the southern drawling lady over it is obviously an hommage to "Badlands" and the elvis/mentor bears stark similarities to the Humphrey Bogart/mentor in "Play it again,sam" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.232.66.242 (talk) 22:39, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that the page that is currently up is basically someone's condensed college paper for a first year film class...

...and its not even a good one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.121.231.161 (talk) 09:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

The Script section is not cited and is in direct conflict with the interviews in this article in Maxim: http://www.maxim.com/Trueromance15yearslater/articles/24494.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.135.107 (talk) 07:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there should be a separate section on the "Sicilian scene." The section does not really explain why the scene deserves special attention, and it contains seemingly excessive (and in places, contradictory) information. The scene is in truth peripheral to the plot. On top of that, the scene's dialogue is deeply racist, implying that it deserves special attention only if it has unusual artistic merit, which it does not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.53.69 (talk) 14:42, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored, and that regarded as a classic scene.[1][2] Skomorokh 14:46, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree, this section should not be removed. In fact, I have something that could be added to the section. During their conversation, the Flower Duet is playing. --82.171.70.54 (talk) 00:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

That's nonsense. This isn't TV Guide or IMDb. There's no citation and it's rather editorial. Now it's gone and shouldn't be replaced without the proper inline citations for these types of entries. And the talk page isn't where you put references. These belong in the article, Skomorokh. Mjpresson (talk) 22:41, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

It was the best scene in the movie, classic Tarantino.--72.24.207.77 (talk) 14:28, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

The lede is full of unreferenced assertions which need to be sourced or removed. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 03:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Something should be changed, but I'm not the right person to do it. "Val Kilmer is heard but not seen (except in silhouette) as an inner-voice to one of the main characters" is not correct; he is seen, albeit in soft focus, in the bathroom with Slater's character right after the gangsters burst into the room at about 1:54:55. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.67.225.15 (talk) 04:04, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I took out a lot of unreferenced personal research and fan knowledge and editorial writing. These things must be verifiable and encyclopedic. This isn't TV Guide or IMDb. Mjpresson (talk) 22:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

The plot section details the movie as I saw it in the theater, but I have seen a cut where Slater's character is dead, and we fade out as she ditches the Cadillac and starts hitch-hiking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wpjonathan (talk • contribs) 14:23, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Some of the versions I have seen have subtly different edits for unrated release For example in one version the fight scene with Gandolfini and Arquette ends with two shotgun blasts to Gandolfini and another has her emptying the shotgun (5 shots I think). Similarly one version has Arquette killing the character played by Chris Penn - in the other version he was killed by a different person (one of the Italian gangsters I think). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.234.141.175 (talk) 19:42, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

See

• True Romance - The Quentin Tarantino Cut at letterboxd.com
• Alternate versions for True Romance (1993) at imdb.com

There's probably additional information out there. Some of this info should probably be in the article. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:42, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

When content is removed because of notability issues, the burden falls upon the editor seeking to add said material, not upon the editor seeking its removal. The anon. editor needs to come to the talk page and prove that the information he added is notable. He has, so far, failed to do so. If he does not do so in the next 3 days, I will remove the material. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 01:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

It has now been four days and the anon. user has failed to offer any comment to the notability concerns I noted above. Therefore, I am removing the material he added to the article. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 18:13, 19 October 2013 (UTC)