Talk:The Breakfast Club
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. | ||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Contents |
[edit] Title
anyone knows why is The Breakfast Club called what it's called? Atriarch 17:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've been wondering that myself. --The Lone Bard 16:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Someone post the Essay
That essay at the end was basically the entire point of the film. Someone post.
-G
[edit] Talk Page Etiquette
This may be just nitpicking but the talk page itself is pretty unclean. Make sure to make headings for new topics and sign your name after you add to this. --Torourkeus 05:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Not to mention spellchecking section titles. *changes "Ediquite" to "Etiquette"* --KittyCollier 19:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
The movie was filmed in March of '84 but not sure of the exact day.
The events of the movie took place on Saturday, March 24, 1984. Politician818 00:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC) "The movie is also known for its disappointing ending, in which Ally Sheedy's character renounces her maverick ways and succumbs to the mainstream female image (makeup, pink dress, rather submissive, etc.).": This is way out of NPOV! --Daniel C. Boyer 17:20 Oct 9, 2002 (UTC)
- Patrick's revision resolves this problem very well. --Daniel C. Boyer
While not making an argument here about the editing out of reference to my drawing in Surrealist Subversions, it was not a movie poster! I think people should read more carefully. --Daniel C. Boyer 14:46 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)
The last paragraph of the article is VERY confusing. What is the name of the alleged sequel and the 'sequel of sorts'? Without some reference to the movies names or name it makes little sense nor serves any purpose.
- It's referring to Not Another Teen Movie. Paul Gleason makes a cameo appearance as Principal Vernon in a scene that intentionally parodies TBC. The paragraph should be deleted. --Dynamite Eleven 02:33, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
This took place in SHERMER, not Sherman.
[edit] Barry Manilow question
What was the point behind John Bender's asking principal Vernon about whether or not he had raided Barry Manilow's wardrobe? (That earned him an additional detention).
- He means that Vernon wears old-fashioned seventies clothes (wide collar, etc). Mikkel 16:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Also, was the film really filmed on March 24th 1984?
- films take a bit to finish. i doubt it was filmed in a day. especially since imdb anounces 5 filming locations. --Torourkeus 05:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Down with the "Legacy"
I propose splitting up the section marked "Legacy", which implies it's going to be about the lasting cultural impact of the film, or proof of the importance as a generational touchstone, but is ultimately a list of parodies and jokes on TV shows. This list may be relevant, but should be marked as such, and drastically shortened. Nearly every entry on the list simply explains that an episode of a program parodied The Breakfast Club, which amounts to a long-winded version of the IMDb "Movie Connections" list. One might question the usefulness of listing every such parody in an article woefully short on hard data to begin with. Chris Stangl 02:16, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Eat my shorts"
Unless someone can demonstrate conclusively that no one in popular media uttered "Eat my shorts" before John Bender, or that the quote was largely associated with The Breakfast Club prior to being a Bart Simpson catchphrase, I continue to fail to see why this non-connection is noteworthy. Supporters, please discuss. Chris Stangl 21:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- I believe that's false .. I've only seen the clean version on VH1, and I sware, if you look closely at Bender's mouth, you can see he's most likely saying 'Eat my shit', which is a more common insult.
-
- Bender certainly yells "eat my shorts" in the R-rated cut. That doesn't make it the origin of the phrase, though. Don't forget to sign Talk comments. Chris Stangl 00:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Friends" reference
I don't have the Friends episode handy, but I'm almost positive that they were whistling "the Odd Couple Theme," and not "Don't You Forget About Me." Can anyone confirm?
The "Odd Couple Theme" was whistled, hummed, and "da-dudah"ed as an opening to one episode, on the couch at Central Perk, starting with one of the cast, and slowly growing until all six of them are performing it. It ended, a brief silence, and then Chandler starts up on the "I Dream Of Jeannie" theme, before Ross stops him quick by saying "We're done." It might be this scene you are thinking of. D f cornish 09:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Two big problems
This article has two major problems:
- It features no discussion whatsoever of the plot
- The "Interpretations" section is largely original research and unsourced statements.
Both of these problems need serious attention.
- "Strong points" is a nonsensical section-header... and a nearly nonsensical section. I'm happy to take a pass through and simply delete the POV and original "research". Please sign your comments on Talk pages. Chris Stangl 19:29, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Citations
There are lots of places where citations are requested even though I don't think they are necessary. Like, the very first line in the introduction. No other movie articles require this...--Torourkeus 05:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- "... considered a quintessential 1980s coming of age teen film " is POV or orignal research unless it's cited. Unless sourced it also begs the question "considered by who, exactly? I added most of the citation requests, and will defend them all if needed, but was actually pretty conservative; there are not only dozens of unsourced "facts" but not a single citation to reference them. Citations are certainly part of other film articles of any substance. See Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Media for what featured-quality film articles should look like. Chris Stangl 08:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] TV Edit
Can anyone add some information about the television edit? I'm watching the full version for the first time and it is INCREDIBLY different. Lots of stuff were taken out that i think are important in making it such a kick ass movie. --Torourkeus 05:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Letter
Someone made this edit and it may include more information, but does not look nice and would need proper formatting for it to be included. I also am not sure if that was the actual words that transpired as it seems to have too many repetitive words. I will revert it for now and if anyone disagrees, please post your reasons here. Cbrown1023 00:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
The two parts of the letter (start of film, end of film) are supposed to go together in a "cut-and-paste", and only together is the full impact appreciated. Too much is lost when the part where Brian writes "You see us as a brain, a jock, a basket case, a princess and a criminal. Correct? That's the way we saw ourselves at seven o'clock this morning. We were brainwashed" gets cut out.
First point; he lists the labels that Mr Vernon sees them as. The "Correct?" is what makes the statement into an accusation. Second point; he confesses that the five students themselves also saw both themselves and each other as these labels. By saying "We were brainwashed" he turns that into an accusation, too. Not just at Mr Vernon, but against everyone who only saw them and treated them as a label.
Plus it makes more sense when the first part is quoted. Why would he start a paragraph with "But what we found out..." without starting off with what they believed before detention began. "But" doesn't make sense without the preceding sentences.
As for references - watch the movie, it is all there. But for those too lazy to, the entire dialogue/script can be found at http://members.fortunecity.com/breakfastclub/Script/script1.htm through to http://members.fortunecity.com/breakfastclub/Script/script7.htm D f cornish 09:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- I beg to differ, they may be both be notable, but they can't go together like that, look how much it repeats! They are meant to be book-ends for the whole movie, an opening and a closing. Plus, what is referred to as "the letter", the letter at the end, is what is written. Cbrown1023 20:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- The purpose of having an article in Wikipedia is to mainly display its importance to our culture, such as achievements, impacts, criticism, etc. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information; The letter itself can by no means help to explain the significance of the film. And after all, Wikipedia is not IMDb and should instead focus on its notability, proving why this article should have its own article. Showing only the obvious parts of the letter is enough; if the readers wish to interpret the entire letter by themselves, let them buy/rent one themselves or whatever and watch it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vic226 (talk • contribs) 03:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Final paragraphs of cultural impact
there is an interesting but unrealiable series of ascertions in the final paragraphs of the cultural impact section. It is clear that this section needs a clean up, a clean up that would represent the final stage of the articles general cleanup. I don't want to erase these claims without discussing them first, so I would like for anyone withe views for and against to step up, suggest new ideas for teh cultural impact section and help in completing the article's finale. Kiske 09:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
