Talk:Billy Jack
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters 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. | ||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Spinoza1111 03:56, 18 June 2006 (UTC)To say that the message wore thin as the 1970s wore on is faux-hipster POV which treats the wearing-on of the 1970s as an unquestionable process which to all hipsters may only go, chukka chukka and assent. I have changed it. The film did become rapidly unpopular because its message made white boys uncomfortable insofar as they resembled Bernard; the rape scene forced a lot of cool dudes to confront their own feelings and they didn't like what they saw. But, that was the whole point. Furthermore the film has undergone a quiet revival now that a Favored Son, a "Bernard", is President.
- Replacing POV with POV doesn't do the job, to be honest. I've rewritten the sentence to reflect established fact, and removed my own WP:OR that I can't corroborate with a WP:RS. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 04:07, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Spinoza1111 00:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)Take a look, then, at the revision. I agree that Laughlin grew more political. But at the same time the audiences were drifting in an apolitical direction.
- I would prefer to see a WP:RS, but I think the sentence as written is neutral enough to pass muster. Thanks. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 02:07, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] In theaters?
The article states,
-
-
- which quickly lost its resonance with increasingly apolitical audiences of the 1970s (the second sequel never made it into theatres). ***
-
I am not sure how this can be said, as I myself saw it in a theater in, I think, 1974. To be specific, I watched "The Trial of Billy Jack" in Garberville, CA. Ironically, my mother ran a nearby 'hippie' school, which had recently experienced a no-warrant search by the local sheriffs. -Paul C
- I would respond only that your memory, unless you can find a reliable source for theatrical release, constitutues original research—for example, I can recall being deeply moved by the first film (which wove its story into an action-adventure setting), sorely disappointed by the second (which served little purpose other than to drive home its point via sledgehammer), and utterly unable to find a host for the third. That said, if you can find a reliable source for even a limited release then, yes, it should be included. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 01:17, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I forgot to 'sign' my initial post. I'm relatively new to Wikipedia. Well I *did* see it in a theater, but may have difficulty posting some 'linkable' evidence or external attribution. I will check around. -Paul C
- Wait, I just reread this thread, and I believe I made the same mistake that the author of the passage did—forgetting that Billy Jack was actually the first sequel, not the first film. I've rewritten the passage. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 04:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
