Talk:Possession (1981 film)

Possession (1981 film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 15, 2023. (Reviewed version).

Film: French / German

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is supported by the French cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the German cinema task force.

Horror Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media 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.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

A fact from Possession (1981 film) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 January 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that although Andrzej Żuławski's film Possession is referred to as a psychological drama and horror, its genre is still a matter of controversy?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2023/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Possession (1981 film).

Wikipedia

Neutral point of view

"Andrzej Żuławski delivers a masterpiece cult movie" doesn't seem like a good way to start a neutral article about a film. There may be more. Would somebody please take a look? --Tony Sidaway 12:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems this statement has been changed to a more neutral point of view which seems satisfactory and can be accurately cited from a variety of sources. TGTommyrocket (talk) 07:04, 10 March 2012 (UTC)TGTommyrocket (talk) 07:04, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plot Summary

I am going to attempt a plot summary on this least narrative of films because while it is mostly a surreal examination of a dissolving marriage, it does have plot points which will be of interest to readers. TGTommyrocket (talk) 08:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC) TGTommyrocket[reply]

Seemingly in disregard of my TALK message on 29 Jan 2012, Doctorhawkes has attempted a summary. Because the summary is so badly written, inaccurate, and riddled with grammatical and syntactical errors, I have conflated it with my own, removing the bad grammar and unimportant details, fixing syntax and correcting plot errors. I have replaced it with a more objective plot summary which does not misinterpret events and which describes plot incidents rather than interprets them. TGTommyrocket (talk) 07:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC) TGTommyrocket[reply]

Crystal Castles videoclip

The movie is featured in a videoclip from the band Crystal Castles. The videoclip is called "Plague".

Tweet

Is citing the tweet from Red Letter Media really needed in this case? It adds no information about the film. It only indicates that a single critic liked the film. Unless there are any objections, I'm going to remove it. Webster100 (talk) 22:48, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence about the tweet has been removed Webster100 (talk) 18:23, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Expand Production Section

This article's production section is way too short and needs to be expanded in more detail than what it currently has. More information on the film's production should be added to the article since compared to the other sections it is the most underdeveloped, making expansion necessary so that it is more balanced with the rest of the article.--Paleface Jack (talk) 19:46, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some links to some interviews with the director/cast on the film that we can use:--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:57, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Possession (1981 film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110514122650/http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/review/5639 to http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/review/5639

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:51, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

I've adjusted the genres to only match what is written specifically in the article per WP:RS, WP:OR and WP:STICKTOSOURCE. This removed some other genres which I could not see written anywhere in the prose in full or abbreviated formats. If I'm missing anything, please fill in the blanks. I'd be happy to go into a deep dive for seeking out how the film is interpreted genre wise. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:04, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found some sources that describes the film as "psychological horror"

1. https://nofilmschool.com/possession-andrzej-zulawski

2. https://collider.com/why-was-possession-banned-explained/

3. https://www.slashfilm.com/1203963/sam-neill-says-slapping-isabelle-adjani-in-possession-was-the-most-distressing-thing-hes-ever-done-on-film/

I don’t know if these you would consider these sources reliable, but I think it’s enough to be classified as a psychological horror film. If not, I think it would at least be better sounding to merge the two genres together in a sentence say "a horror drama film" instead of saying it’s a "drama film and a horror film" or a "psychological drama and horror film." Valddlac (talk) 00:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that they are good sources or not, but we shouldn't just hunt for a genre we feel the film belongs to. If we really want to apply it, I'd just look through reviews or critical/scholarly commentary on the film (just so we know the person in question has actually seen the film) and try to find out the general consensus or more commonly applied term is for the genre that way. Andrzejbanas (talk) 07:32, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 22:13, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Possession (1981 film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 06:49, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

There is not much to do. The quality of this page is high, and it just needs tightening. It's been so long your eyes might be fresh; you may find more. 7-day hold to Nyxaros. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copy changes

she is a gentle character, and does not demand anything from Mark This comma isn't needed; see User:Sammi Brie/Commas in sentences (CinS)
allusion (the sounds of sirens and the rumble of explosions) on the I think allusion to would be more idiomatic.
Thompson suggested Frederic Tuten, thus Żuławski went to New York to meet him Change the comma to a semicolon and add a comma after "thus"
Remove the "the" in In 1976, he divorced the actress Malgorzata Braunek.
Carlo Rambaldi, the famous Italian special effects artist maybe "a famed Italian special effects artist"
The Philadelphia Daily News's Joe Baltake deemed the film a "boringly camp-elegante attempt by a group of reputable French, German and Polish filmmakers," and assessed Adjani's performance as "babbling, incoherent yet arresting."
- Remove the comma after "filmmakers"
- Move the period after "arresting" outside of the quotation marks (MOS:INOROUT). When you quote a sentence fragment, the period goes outside of the quotations. (This recurs a few more times with sentence fragments)
  - All Done Hope I got them right. ภץאคгöร 19:15, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing and spot checks

Aside from two sites copying us (one being Metacritic itself), the highest Earwig percentage.

Five sources were chosen for spot checks.

2: Box Office Mojo is used for the US box office figures, which are correct. Y
9: Goddard 2017 is used four times. The increasingly desperate attempts on Marc’s part to hold onto his family, however contaminated or distorted it might be by evil and unfathomable forces, is the masked expression of a real struggle and a real loss not only of Żuławski’s family but also of the violent wrenching from his former social context. Y This source's citation should be expanded. His CV lists it (reproduced after this bulleted list). It appears to be the same one that already has an SFN set tied to it. This is apparently a chapter in the volume.
20: Attribute this quote in-text to Tom Huddleston, but it's there. Y
29: Citation of ASIN number proves volume's existence. Y
32: Quote from Schwartz is faithfully reproduced. Y

Goddard, M N. 2014. Beyond Polish Moral Realism: The Subversive Cinema of Andrzej Żuławski. In: Ewa Mazierska and M N Goddard, eds. Polish Cinema in a Transnational Context. Rochester NY, Woodbridge: University of Rochester Press/Boydell & Brewer, pp. 236-257. ISBN 9781580464680

Other items

The plot summary is 690 words long, at the high end but within the 400–700 word range of MOS:PLOT.
Run IABot to archive any unarchived references. (Some aren't, most are.)
The film poster has a valid NFUR, and the 1977 image of the Berlin Wall is libre licensed. I recommend adding alt text.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by BorgQueen (talk) 02:06, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that despite the film Possession being referred to as a psychological drama and horror, its genre is still a matter of controversy? Source: The four citations after the sentence that mentions it in the themes section. I'm too lazy to put them here.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Politics in The Simpsons

Improved to Good Article status by Nyxaros (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 22:30, 18 January 2023 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall:

Elevated to good article status within last week. Multiple inline citations for the hook. QPQ done. This should be good to go. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Poster by Barbara Baranowska, aka Basha

@Nyxaros: The French version of the film poster, used in the article, was created by one of the members of the Polish Poster School movement, one of the few who was female. This poster is one of her most well-known works. This information should be reflected in the article, or at least the illustration's description. WP:RED states that "In general, a red link should remain in an article if there is a reasonable expectation that the article in question will eventually be created (either as its own article or as a redirect); remove red links if and only if Wikipedia should not have any coverage on the subject." I had indicated there would be an article on her forthcoming, and leaving red links in general help other task forces like WP:Women in Red to contribute articles about hard-to-find historical figures. Some discussion of her notability: https://web.archive.org/web/20230610115101/https://www.thefirstnews.com/article/the-forgotten-siren-of-polish-poster-art-barbara-baranowska-25391 https://www.new-east-archive.org/articles/show/13170/barbara-baranowska-polish-poster-artist-women-recollected https://culture.pl/en/article/basha-the-polish-poster-schools-most-reluctant-member LovelyLillith (talk) 18:13, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only one ref was added to the infobox on the page, and the link was left there after an indication that the page would be created. The referenced information should not be added to the infobox in this way and should be included in the relevant section as well. I don't think that the other two references are sufficient either, at least until there is a consensus that these three websites prove her notability and are reliable. ภץאคгöร 18:43, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]