Talk:A Serbian Film

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the A Serbian Film article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Film

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

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Serbia

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Pedophilia Article Watch (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Pedophilia Article WatchWikipedia:WikiProject Pedophilia Article WatchTemplate:WikiProject Pedophilia Article WatchPedophilia Article Watch articles

Archives

Archive 1

Rigor Mortis?

Rigor mortis takes hours to develop. So, saying that a character was killed "to induce rigor mortis" seems wrong, since the corpse is never necrophilically used the next day. The voice of the director says (according to the subtitles at least) "the magic of rigor mortis!" as she dies - but this seems more like either using rigor mortis as a term for death, or that he's referring to death spasms instead. DewiMorgan (talk) 19:29, 9 November 2012 (UTC) The term I was looking for was Synecdoche - and since I notice this issue has already been covered above, please feel free to ignore me anyway :) DewiMorgan (talk) 20:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Luka Mijatović

Is Luka Mijatović really "Petar?" In the credits of the movie is Luka Mijatović denoted as the actor of "Stefan." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.17.153.69 (talk) 23:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bias

This is extremely biased presentation. Film is not "erotic", but a sharp social commentary. It also misses most of the positive reviews and cult status that this movie has in some obscure circles in the decadent west. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.198.221.171 (talk) 22:05, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't think the the article is extremely biased, I do agree that "erotic" is not the best description of its genre. I suggest "torture porn" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_porn#Resurgence which in my opinion is not necessarily a pejorative term, but succinctly and objectively describes the viewpoint of the film. If not, then use "Splatter film" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splatter_film instead.74.100.50.142 (talk) 21:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So can we remove the "neutrality" tag now ? The word "erotic" has been removed and if there any so called "positive reviews" , from legitimate critics that are missing ,

the poster can post them . I am going to remove the tag soon unless there is a legitimate objection , thanks . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whatssup22 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dead links

So what is the policy concerning dead links exactly ? Someone just deleted a whole paragraph because the citation link is dead . But when the paragraph was written , the link was not dead and contained legitimate quotes by the authors . Plus the link was up for years . It doesn't seem fair to me that something the author said should be deleted just because the link to his quote is now gone . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whatserbski (talk • contribs) 02:31, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not "banned" in Germany

The film was never "banned" in Germany, as you can see in the German article. There was a consideration to ban it simply based on a list of keywords of themes that the film was said to deal with before any actual examination took place, but then the German rights holder just decided to censor themselves and released a cut version instead that it had no problem of releasing. What was *THEN* banned was the act of importing *ANOTHER* cut version, the similarly un-examined British cut release into the country simply on account that it hadn't been examined and rumored to be controversial, before the entire uncut version was actually examined in 2015 and released without any problem in Germany. Ever since 2015, the fully uncut 104-minutes version (or rather, 100 minutes with PAL speedup on the DVD) is available on Amazon.de, both as DVD, BD, and as a VOD stream. --46.93.158.170 (talk) 17:56, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On the topic of realism

The protagonist penetrates a human skull though the eye socket with his penis. This is not possible. Even if he managed to break the sphenoid bone free and push it out of the way, there would still not be enough room between the maxilla and the zygomatic for a penis of any appreciable girth. Should this be noted in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.68.174 (talk • contribs) 21:58, December 18, 2019 (UTC)

Not unless a reliable published mainstream source is making this observation in the context of criticising the realism of this film. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Information

Looking over this article, I have noticed that there is no information in the film's production. This needs to be added in its own section with proper citations from reliable sources. Information such as the film's Development, Casting, and Filming should all be added into this section and if there is significant enough information on each of them they can have their own sub-section.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:09, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence for ban in Singapore

I could not find any mention of it being officially banned in Singapore. From a quick Google search, all mentions of it being banned in the country appear to be from unreliable blogs and wikis, and the only reliable sources suggesting it was banned in Singapore (the Independent, Metro, etc.) are newer than its first mention here on Wikipedia sometime in 2014, which could be circular sourcing. It is also nowhere to be found on the official Media Classification Database, whilst every other banned film I searched for (Cannibal Holocaust, A Night on the Water, Zahari's 17 Years and others) were all available on the index (granted some film titles were not always in English, which could by the case for A Serbian Film too). If this was ever banned it might have only been a de facto ban or that the film's content (obviously) broke Singapore's Film Classifications Guidelines. However, it was never submitted for classification or to be screened at any film festival in the country to my knowledge, and thus never officially received a ban (neither could I find any news of a copy ever being confiscated or something like that) so saying it was banned could be misleading. I would remove the claim entirely from lead imo, though of course, I may be incorrect, LunaEatsTuna (talk) 12:56, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The same may also be said for its apparent ban in Spain. I have yet to extensively research its apparent ban in Malaysia yet. LunaEatsTuna (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Description says it's a children's movie?

This is described in the article as a "children's fantasy" film. Y'all may want to correct that. 74.14.137.80 (talk) 03:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]