Talk:The Mission (1986 film)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

Could someone who understands the workings of Infobox_Film better than me sort out the "Awards" sub-section thereof? TIA HAND --Phil | Talk 09:03, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

That sufficient? Cburnett 19:31, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanx, that was a good start...the weekend break allowed me to take another look at it :-) --Phil | Talk 13:56, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

Untitled

"They founded twenty missions or Reductions and developed a kind of evangelisation that was possibly unique in Christian history."

Ok I kind of take issue with this statement. This was not unusual with Christian history, in fact it is Christian history. The actual work of missionaries is self sacrifice. There is a long history of missionaries helping idengenous tribes. Some well recieved, some not. But his is not unique. Look at the work of Jim Elliot in the film Beyond the Gates of Splendor.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.95.219.15 (talk) 19:11, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Untitled

Seems like most of this entry is copied from the entry on Reductions. Most of this background info could be moved to Reductions and replaced with information on the actual movie Davidfraser 10:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I've added a little about the actual plotline. Bronzey 05:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Untitled

Wikipedia has an overly broad view of "vandalizing." So I won't touch anything here. However, in the first paragraph, Indian should be capitalized and priest should be in lower case.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.231.249.141 (talk) 13:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Symbolism

Would everybody be okay if a symbolism section was added? This is a movie choking with symbolism, and even the music played plays a major role... Wikiwikiwakoo 21:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

It can only be added if you can provide outside, verifiable sources to back up whatever claims you make about the symbolism. Anything else will be considered WP:OR and/or a WP:POV entry. Blogs or chat rooms are always great for this sort of thing encyclopedias are not. MarnetteD | Talk 01:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The mission.jpg

Image:The mission.jpg 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 02:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.202.57.190 (talk) 01:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

120 years!

• _by watching this marvellous film yesterday in tele germany, I didn#t recognize the 120 years time axes in.

Storylining is so reasonable, out of the church's might interesses and the education of a bastard to a christ [Rodrigo], that I think it#s nearly built up to Don Carlos, who addites different historical events either. A so called historical melting pott in a nature like paradise, doesn't really contradict but synthesise. Thank's! How he's bearing his bundle!--88.77.219.32 (talk) 17:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Untitled

There were a few run-on sentences I broke up for ease of reading. Also, some pronouns were not clearly identified. Rodrigo didn't specifically take a vow of non-violence, but the traditional monastic vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. Actually, the issue of obedience figures greatly in the plot. One other thing - cardinals don't make papal decrees. The cardinal was sent to make a policy decision. Even the whole College of Cardinals can't make a papal decree - just the Pope. LTC David J. Cormier (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Commercial Failure?

In both articles on Absolute Beginners and Revolution it asserts that the commercial failure of The Mission and these two films led to the collapse of Goldcrest Films. My own memory of this was that The Mission was quite successful and the amount of awards would tend to support that. Can anyone clarify? --Gramscis cousin^Talk_Stalk 15:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, does anyone know more about the budget of this movie? --82.171.70.54 (talk) 13:23, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Period sources say that The Mission cost £17m but only made back £8.5m. Variety's review mentions a budget of $23m, and it seems that the cost of the film was newsworthy in itse.f The figures given today in dollars are $18.5m for production with a $17m gross. To be fair that's a pretty good take for a long arty film about Jesuit missionaries. My recollection is that the underperformance of The Mission plus the failure of Revolution and Absolute Beginners destroyed Goldcrest. The fundamental problem is that they concentrated exclusively on unappealing, long-shot Oscar bait films, without making the popular comedies, horror, and action films needed to pay for them. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 18:34, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Acquittal of Rodrigo

The text mentions that Rodrigo killed his brother in a duel, enraged after learning he and his wife were in love. Later, when Father Gabriel visits Rodrigo in prison, he informs him that he'll be acquitted NOT because it was a "legal duel," but because his brother had converted to Judaism. The text misses a particularly telling and honest detail of mid-18th Century church law, and a bit of contemporary social attitudes that seem rather galling by today's standards.24.162.122.172 (talk) 04:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.16.28.206 (talk)

SUPER MARIO BROS

the article incorrectly states the film "Super Mario Brothers" is a part of Joffé's filmography. It is not. Possible Vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.68.100.16 (talk) 23:21, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

If you look closer it is not the article that states this it is the Roland Joffe navbox at the bottom of the article. A little research shows that he was a producer on the film and he did do some directing on it although he did not receive an onscreen credit. If you have further concerns over this please raise them at this Template talk:RolandJofféFilms talk page. MarnetteD | Talk 00:13, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

References to use

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.

• Weaver, John; Kreitzer, Larry (2005). "The Mission: Some Missiological Dilemmas Portrayed". In Fiddes, Paul; Clarke, Anthony (eds.). Flickering Images: Theology and Film in Dialogue. Regent's Study Guides. Smyth & Helwys Publishing. ISBN 1573124583.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Erik (talk • contribs) 21:42, 29 October 2010 (UTC)