Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Eraserhead/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Eraserhead

edit
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this fella's heading to FAC within the next few weeks and I'd like a few extra stern sets of eyes on it in the meantime. There's only one more major source for me to find and include; the DVD has a 90-minute feature which I'm hoping will let be expand the post-production information a little but I would assume it will repeat a lot of what is already present. I'm also not too concerned about the breadth of the Themes section as every author has a different take and rather than list every single interpretation I've gone with those that seem to be common to a few authors; though obviously there's still room to improve it. And for those who haven't seen the film yet, go do so. It's good.

Thanks, GRAPPLE X 06:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Great to see your work here Grapple X. I'm popping out the house soon, but just gave the introduction a quick look over, with a few points of improvement:
    • If you link to body horror then you should probably link to surrealism too.
      Got it. GRAPPLE X 13:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'd mention that either the film is American or that Lynch is American. Perhaps refer to "American filmmaker David Lynch" ? All too often, pages reach FA-status without even mentioning that the subject of the article is American; this clearly betrays an ingrained American bias within the English-language Wikipedia, an assumption that being American is somehow the assumed norm. Not to attack you for this Grapple X, but its just something that Western Europeans like myself get up in arms about!
      See, I had assumed that the mention of the American Film Institute covered this enough to avoid repeating it elsewhere; much as how I wouldn't specify that the British Academy of Film and Television Arts are English. I could slot it in if you'd like but if I did then I'd probably rework the first two paragraphs to move the AFI mention into the second one instead to avoid repetition. GRAPPLE X 13:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I don't believe that it is repetitive to state both that Lynch is American and that the film was produced through the American Film Institute. It is perfectly plausible that a non-American might study at that particular institution, just as Lynch himself tried, in early life, to study in Europe. I don't really mean to be pushy here, but I really think the inclusion of "American filmmaker David Lynch" would be of real benefit to the average reader Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:22, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, added. Was toying with the idea of going for state of origin but since it's Pennsylvania and not Montana that figures heavily in the film I figured it would just confuse things. GRAPPLE X 15:51, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • "through the American Film Institute during the director's time studying there" : where is the American Film Institute ? You should mention that it is in Philadelphia because that city was so influential to Lynch's mindset when creating the movie.
      It's in California; Philadelphia is where Lynch had lived before moving there (and where he had studied fine art). I've added a mention of the AFI's location though that really strengthens my belief that calling either the film or Lynch "American" might be redundant to having specified it was produced in America by the AFI.
    • "in a strange industrial landscape" needs to be changed. "Strange" is a very POV word; what one person considers strange might be perfectly normal to another. Perhaps replace with "unnamed industrial landscape" or something of that nature ?
      That was meant to imply the surrealism of the film; would just using "surreal" work instead? GRAPPLE X 13:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The word "surreal" could be used, but again, I don't think everyone would necessarily concur that the industrial landscape was particularly "surreal" seeing as how there are parts of the world that genuinely look rather like this; instead, it is the events and characters of the film that are more "surreal". It would also be problematic because we already use the word "surrealism" in the opening sentence, and it fits nicely there. We could use something like "anonymous industrial landscape" perhaps, to emphasise that the location of the film is left a mystery ? Midnightblueowl (talk)
I've gone with "desolate". It might seem a little strong but the actual exteriors in the film are generally devoid of anyone but the immediate focus of the scenes (mostly just Spencer but there's the kid who finds his head too). It covers the emptiness that "anonymous" would suggest while also suggesting the off-putting nature of it. GRAPPLE X 15:51, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:01, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think that this single sentence on the film's plot could be extended or complemented by a second sentence, discussing some of the other activities that Henry gets up to in Eraserhead.
      Added a second sentence mentioning the dream vision stuff, and naming the Lady in the Radiator. GRAPPLE X 13:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • "locations owned by the AFI" -- who are the AFI ? I assume that they are the American Film Institute, but you have not mentioned this acronym previously in the introduction.
      Got it. GRAPPLE X 13:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Perhaps you could mention that this was Lynch's first full-length feature in the introduction ? Not essential, but could be of benefit.
      Added, along with the below point. GRAPPLE X 13:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Perhaps mention that the film is in black-and-white (although I assume that there is a better technical term for this) ?
  • I'll go through the rest of the page when I get the chance. All the best from a fellow Lynch-lover, Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:10, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your comments, I look forward to anything else you have to offer. GRAPPLE X 13:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding the "Pre-production" section:

Regarding the "Filming" section:

Regarding the "Post-production" section:

The Soundtrack section seems fine to me.

Regarding the Themes section:


The "Release" section seems fine as it is, but I wonder if it could be extended with a short discussion of the midnight movie scene of the 1970s, perhaps with reference to the likes of El Topo and Pink Flamingos. Eraserhead was, after all, a key part of this scene.

There's mention in the "Legacy" section of a documentary that covers this scene; I could expand it there by a sentence to mention that the doc also covers those two films (as well as Night of the Living Dead, The Rocky Horror Picture Show and The Harder They Come). GRAPPLE X 15:51, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd definately include a sentence or two on the role Eraserhead played in the midnight movie scene, and perhaps explain what that scene was to start with. Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:17, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the "Reception" section:

Regarding the "Legacy" section:

I think that that's about it from me, Grapple X. I've thoroughly enjoyed reading your article and heartily congratulate you for it. It has my support for going on to achieve FA status, and feel free to gimme a message if you ever need someone to help you in achieving that or reviewing any other Lynch-based articles. Best Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:22, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot; your comments have been really helpful. My next FAC's definitely going to be Lynch-based; either this or another Twin Peaks episode, so I'll keep you posted if you'd like. Thanks again! GRAPPLE X 15:51, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments:
  • What does "The film was produced through the American Film Institute (AFI) during the director's time studying there." this mean, specifically that "film was produced through the American Film Institute". Mark Arsten (talk) 20:36, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The conservatory would have supplied the cameras, microphones, lighting etc, some limited funding, and that kind of thing. I haven't seen any specifics but given the equipment that, for example, Alan Splet had access to despite the budget problems, it's safe to say that the AFI, like any university's film school, was the one handing out the gear. GRAPPLE X 22:48, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Gardenback was a surrealist script about adultery, which featured an continually growing insect representing one man's lust for his neighbor. Gardenback..." Is there a way to avoid starting consecutive sentences with the same word here? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:00, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Changed it. GRAPPLE X 17:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes "Stewart, Mark Allyn (2007). David Lynch Decoded. AuthorHouse. ISBN 1434349853." a reliable source? AuthorHouse is a Self-publishing company. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Nothing really stands out but the sole use of the book is to cite his own interpretation of the film's themes, which is directly attributed to him in-text; it seemed an interesting interpretation which added something to proceedings rather than repeating them. I could find something else instead but the source isn't being used to ascribe words, actions or facts beyond what the author's own opinion is. GRAPPLE X 17:07, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, use your best judgment then, but it might come up at FAC too. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. A book with a similar publishing history (Michelle Bush's Myth-X) was used for my last FAC (Deep Throat (The X-Files episode)) for a similar purpose so I'm confident it should be okay; I doubt I'd consider using the source if it wasn't just to cite its author's opinion. GRAPPLE X 17:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet, but I'll keep my eyes open. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:57, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Eraserhead/archive1&oldid=791876795"