Talk:40 Days and 40 Nights

Film: British / Canadian / French / American

	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 articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Canadian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the French cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Eastwood

Who is Morgan Eastwood? What is his significance?Jarfingle 07:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poster

the poster shows the title and related text in a vertical shaft, very much insinuating an erect penis, i think this should be noted Qrc2006 23:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that needs verification? They make it pretty obvious. --KittyCollier 19:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with KittyCollier. Jarfingle 21:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The screenshot needs a fair use rationale or may be deleted later. --Nehrams2020 05:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All images should have an alternative description and the has a description of what can be seen.
The image is not the Theatrical poster as previously noted but the Teaser poster, the words "coming soon" can be clearly seen on the poster. The guidelines recommend we use the theatrical release poster. The actual Theatrical release poster for Forty Days and Forty Nights can be found on the IMPAwards website if anyone cares to change it but as the current image is good enough I'm not going to force the change, but I'm providing the information in case anyone else wants to do it. -- Horkana (talk) 20:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trivialization of Rape

This seems to be a pretty clear-cut POV statement, so I'm removing it. Anyone disagree? Twin Bird 13:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC) I disagree. Since thats what they did.. He got raped then punished for it and nothing happened to the woman. How can anyone see a movie with a man doing the same and not having it criticized.[reply]

Disagree, the film is controversial in that the sex was not consensual, and it's fair to point out that attitudes would have been different if the victim had been female or the attacker had been another male. Gomez2002 09:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have to prove that it was controversial. Find reliable sources complaining about it. While you're right it would have been different if the roles were reversed, you still need to prove it was controversial. DurinsBane87 03:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the way it is written here ("but rather makes the victim appear to be the one at fault") sounds a bit confusing. Not the viewer but Erica thinks Matt is the one to blame. "makes the victim appear..." means to me "makes the victim appear to the viewer".

Besides; is it even possible to "rape" a man in the traditional way? I mean he is the one whose tool only works if he wants it to, so there has to be a certain agreement coming from his side. But I've never been in such a situation so probably I'm talking bullsh*t. (Of course in this case, he was sleeping, so this doesn't apply here anyways)

Yes it is. Erections can be involuntary. (Most men have morning wood, an involuntary erection each morning) A man could get an erection by being drugged. A man could be coerced into sex. There is also the possibility of something else arousing the man and then the man gets raped. It is also possible to be aroused but not consent to sex. Just because you are horny doesn't mean you want sex with any person. Just because someone is hot and arouses you doesn't mean you want to have sex with that person. There are other factors that matter besides the question of whether you have an erection or not.Leprecon (talk) 22:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, men can be raped. Leprecon explained it quite well. Rape means sex without consent. I would also like to add that there are thousands of cases of men being raped by other men, every year. Until recently, the FBI refused to admit that a male federal prisoner being sexually assaulted by another male prisoner is actually rape. This movie demonstrates an example of a man being raped by a woman. He made it clear to her that he did not want to have sex with her. He did not consent, and she knew it. That's why she snuck in. That's why she didn't want to wake him up. What she did was a crime. They should have called the police.Sbunny8 (talk) 23:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Um, so you're a girl right? and obviously one who's never been with a guy, or spoken to one. Yes you are talking bullshit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.194.83.124 (talk) 12:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and you are clearly a 14 year old virgin who knows nothing. Go away, the grown ups are talking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.75.61.245 (talk) 07:27, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article included a statement "The rape scene near the end of the film has been criticized by many reviewers." but this claim did not include any references to support it.[1] -- 109.77.198.5 (talk) 23:29, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems there had been one source (two if you count Roger Ebert's criticism of the ending), but the article was vandalized by User:David_Gerard [2] -- 109.77.198.5 (talk) 23:30, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since there were no sources I've removed the claims from the article and reverted to an earlier wording.

I did some research and found some sources[3][4][5] but the sources might not be reliable enough, and the sources might only be tangentially relevant to this film.[6][7][8][9] -- 109.77.198.5 (talk) 00:11, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Writer Rob Perez did an Ask Me Anything (AMA) on Reddit, October 22, 2015. When asked about the rape scene, he replied:

um, this is awkward. i wrote that so i take full responsibility. i didnt shoot it so thats the director but its pretty much what was on the page. -the scene was in no way a statement about women abusing men (isnt that category called kathy bates?), its a natural, if dark, end of act two for a sex comedy. - we had a lot of very intelligent people, writers, producers, directors, studio folk, etc. - think of different solutions to the problem and this was what we all determined was the best. im sorry if you didnt like it.[10]

Please note WP:RSPS#Reddit, it may not be appropriate to use Reddit as source in the article. -- 109.77.198.5 (talk) 01:15, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor did not make the connection between sex without consent and the word rape and removed the word rape from the Plot section.[11] The previous discussion above is clear, this scene has been described as the rape scene, I restored the wording in plot section to not trivialize the issue. -- 109.76.130.189 (talk) 12:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]