Talk:The Doors (film)

Fair use rationale for Image:Doorsmovieposter.gif

Image:Doorsmovieposter.gif 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 06:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the commentary on this film (Artisan DVD Special Edition, Oliver Stone mentions filming in "Scope." Is this Cinamascope, and if so, is it worth discussing the use of a 1960s filming technology? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.115.212 (talk) 16:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Historical Innacuracies

This section is a bit dense and could do with being tidied up to make it easier to read (Monkeymanman (talk) 19:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I also don't really understand it. Near the beginning, this section says "in one version" and later it says "in another version". But it's unclear: is the author talking about versions of the movie that didn't get released (different edits / cuts)? Or does the author mean to say that some accounts of the appearance report one way, and other accounts report another way? This.is.mvw (talk) 00:27, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising

The opening text feels less like an overview and more like an ad for the film FruitDefence (talk) 00:07, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Doors (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/20140403102003/http://www.moscowfilmfestival.ru/miff34/eng/archives/?year=1991 to http://www.moscowfilmfestival.ru/miff34/eng/archives/?year=1991

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) 12:04, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sleeper Hit

The article contains the following sentence "Despite the film's box office failure, grossing only $34 million worldwide against its $38 million production budget, the film became a sleeper hit and a cult film." The term "sleeper hit" means that a movie was financially successful, and should therefore be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nothingrhymeswithoranges (talk • contribs) 05:58, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was unsourced, so I removed it. Also, I'm not sure where this $38 million budget is coming from. The article says $32 million later. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out that some random IP editor changed the budget a few years ago. I changed it back. I also got rid of the unsourced editorializing in the lead. It looks like successive editors have just been tacking on their opinions over the years. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:00, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The Doors (film" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The Doors (film and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27#The Doors (film until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]