Talk:Cold Mountain (film)

Cast

I think Donald Sutherland played Nicole Kidman's father. Could someone check that and add him to the cast? Therin83 12:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Who was the blond guy, part of the home guard, who Inman fights at the end? --67.172.13.176 (talk) 22:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Link to article on 'Battle of the crater' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.169.67.73 (talk) 22:56, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

SFX

Since it was strongly asserted in the edit notes that the specific software used to edit the film is especially interesting, I'd like someone to add something to that paragraph that illuminates the special circumstances. Bevo 20:17, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Novelization

Shouldn't someone make a page about the novel, then keep this one as a disambig page? -Beelzebubs 23:02, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

I agree. First and foremost, Cold Mountain is a novel, and a wonderful, literate one at that. I think this article should focus on the style and sinuous plotlines of Charles Frazier's work, rather than the derivative, simplified screenplay. --TGV 06:17, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Has this not gone anywhere? We definitely need to keep the movie and novel as separate articles, as the novel stood out by itself, winning numerous awards, and having achieved status as a modern masterpiece. --128.103.29.10 02:54, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Disambiguation

That disambiguation should also link to the T'ang era poet, Cold Mountain (Han-Shan) -marudubshinki 06:18 PM Friday, 18 February 2005

I'll do it

Gimme a little while I'll write a stub article for the novel + a disambig page. --Ben Tibbetts 22:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Done

Skipped on the disambig and rather just created Cold Mountain (novel) - just a stub, but it's a start! Please edit and add what you can to make the article on the modern classic worthy of its subject. --Ben Tibbetts 01:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 07:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

• Cold Mountain → Cold Mountain (film) … Rationale: There is absolutely no reason why the article on the film should take the main "Cold Mountain" article. There is also the poet Hanshan. I would like to turn "Cold Mountain" into a dab page to link the novel, movie, and poet onto one single dabpage. Hbdragon88 23:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC) copied from the entry on the WP:RM page

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support as the nominator. Hbdragon88 23:18, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support 132.205.45.148 01:17, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support - I can't think of much reason to keep it other than film marketing. —204.42.20.62 20:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Although it seems to me like the movie and book entries can be merged. Dab header or CM (dab) page for Hanshan ~ trialsanderrors 06:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

North Carolina statement

"This caused some controversy in North Carolina, although in fact an estimated 95 percent of feature films and television shows made in the state since the 1980s were set somewhere else."

Can we have a source for this estimate? Seems like it should be the other way around, i.e. 95% of features & TV shows set in the state since the 1980s were made somewhere else. Dforest 23:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Legacy?

isnt the movie a little young to have a legacy section?.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 19:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

"Retarded"

I removed a reference to Ruby's supposed mental defect from the plot summary. Neither in the book nor the movie is Ruby portrayed as mentally deficient. She is certainly coarse and lacks the refinement of education but she is not in any way handicapped.

PS: If I messed up editing protocol here, I apologize. I'm not a regular wikipedia user.

Don't worry. If the person who created the page doesn't like what you've done, it will be summarily removed without even discussing it with you. You might even receive a comment informing you how stupid and ignorant you are. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 11:41, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Ruby

Thanks for editing-out Ruby's purportedly being mentally retarded. I noticed this error last night, but you fixed it before I had a chance to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.117.144 (talk) 01:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Questionable evisceration

In November 2011, an editor with minimal history eviscerated this page for no good reason. The reason given was, "I made the summary much more brief and removed all the plot spoilers and excessive detail." I intend to restore most of the deleted content over the next few days, absent objection. Spoilers are not an issue if a movie is more than a few months old. Wikipedia articles are meant to be encyclopedic descriptions, not just promotional teasers. Eleuther (talk) 01:11, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

The only colonel on this movie,GAVRILA CRISTIAN 30 yers died in a car accident on 23.07.2012  youtube:ACCIDENT BALTATI 23072012  god forgive my brother...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.13.41.18 (talk) 03:53, 16 August 2012 (UTC) 

The only colonel on this movie,GAVRILA CRISTIAN 30 yers died in a car accident on 23.07.2012  youtube:ACCIDENT BALTATI 23072012  god forgive my brother...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.13.41.18 (talk) 03:56, 16 August 2012 (UTC) 

Historical Scholarship

I'm another fan of the movie and book, and I just wanted to point out that several Appalachian Studies scholars gave both favorable reviews for their accurate representations of studies on the subject. So, I thought that in the next few days I'd add a section on what historians thought, but anybody is welcome to help.Silas Robertson (talk) 20:41, 7 May 2013 (UTC)Silas Robertson; May 7, 2013

Hi, Silas! That would be a great addition. There are some article guidelines at WP:FILMHIST that you can check out. Let me know if you'll need any help with setting up referencing! Erik (talk | contribs) 21:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Eric. I will definitely need help with referencing, because I'm new to Wikipedia. The articles I'm using are hard copies, but they can be found through JSTOR. Silas Robertson (talk) 22:52, 8 May 2013 (UTC)Silas Robertson, May 8, 2013.

differences from the novel

Anthony Minghella made significant changes, removing or altering the unbelievable -- and let's face it -- downright stupid elements (such as Inman's impossible escapes from the Home Guard, and a bear stumbling over the side of a cliff). Someone should at least briefly list the changes. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 11:45, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Closing scene Question

As the family enjoys their Easter dinner, they show close ups of all the surviving individuals, with two additions: Edmom and Ida's daughter and Ruby and Georgia's new baby. But as they close the scene there is another child in a red garment. Who did that child represent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.140.160 (talk) 22:05, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Changes to 'Historical Accuracy' section?

The second paragraph of the "Historical Accuracy" section is very convoluted and its meaning is obscure:

"Several scholars reviewed the movie for its representation of historical studies on North Carolina during the Civil War, especially the state's mountainous western region." The movie doesn't in any sense "[represent]...studies." I assume what is meant is that scholars reviewed the movie to determine its historical accuracy.

"Their justification is the effect popular media has on national and worldwide perceptions of Appalachian people, particularly southern Appalachians in this case." Their justification for what? What is being justified in this sentence? Are the aforementioned scholars "justifying" their discussion? Why should they need to justify that?

"The opinions vary, but the consensus among them is the historical context of the movie is close to the scholarship. Although these scholars disagree about the accuracy of particular elements of the movie, they agree that the story gets at least some things right." Which "scholarship" is the movie "close to?"

The wording is just very odd, and doesn't make sense. I'd suggest a brief paragraph like this: "Several scholars with an interest in the effect popular media has on perceptions of Appalachian people reviewed the movie for its historical accuracy based on what we know of North Carolina during the Civil War. Opinions varied, and while these scholars disagree about the accuracy of particular elements of the movie, they agree that the story gets some things right."

I haven't read the APPALJ Roundtable Discussion though, so I'll leave it to someone who has. 182.239.139.90 (talk) 12:51, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I found a link to the Roundtable Discussion, which turns out to be freely available with registration, and added it to the article. I encourage you to take a look and make improvements to this section as appropriate! Ibadibam (talk) 22:43, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Veasy's slave 'lover?'

Vesey impregnated a black slave woman. There's no reason to think they are lovers, as is described. nikelous 14:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)