Talk:Behind the Green Door
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Behind the Green Door article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Availability
[edit]I want to see this movie. is it available anywhere?
- Yes, absolutely. Unlike many porn movies of its era it has been kept 'in-print'. Try Amazon or e-bay. ike9898 20:55, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
Hush!
[edit]Is it true that Chambers never says a word throughout this film? -User:Ud terrorist
- Yes. Unless you consider "Urngh!" a word. Maikel 15:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Probably the first copyright sex film in the USA
[edit]I think "Behind the Green Door" is a landmark mark film in the USA, because, organizied crime tried to force the producers to give them a share of the profits and if they refused, the criminals threatened to make illegal copies of the movie and make money thru "bootlegs". The Mitchell Brothers went to court to get the film copyright, and obtain legal protection. The court agreed with the Mitchell Brothers, and "Behind the Green Door" was granted a copyright, (probably the first "hardcore sex film" to be issued one), and the mob was forced to go elsewhere for money.24.195.51.232 19:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Bennett Turk
- Where's your source? How could it be copyrighted if it was obscene? Then again, this was pre-Miller (after Miller, it was banned in New York, California, Georgia and Colorado).Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 18:08, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
- As early as 1959, the US Attorney General issued an opinion that the obscenity of a work was not a bar to the registration of it copyright. On this film in particular:
- "Plaintiffs-appellants owned a properly registered copyright on a motion picture titled 'Behind the Green Door,' issued under the [Copyright Act of 1909].... We hold that the district court erred in permitting the assertion of obscenity as an affirmative defense to the claim of infringement, and, accordingly, reverse without reaching the question whether the film is obscene." Mitchell Bros. Film Group v. Cinema Adult Theater, 604 F. 2d 852 (5th Cir. 1979). TJRC (talk) 00:23, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
- Where's your source? How could it be copyrighted if it was obscene? Then again, this was pre-Miller (after Miller, it was banned in New York, California, Georgia and Colorado).Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 18:08, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Dissapointed
[edit]No outline of the plot, notable scenes nor what happens to the poor girl in the end. Snif. But the photo looks nice. Fergananim 19:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Original Short Story
[edit]Any reference? Is it still available? Maikel 15:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Hey I heard that it was alover the news that they were looking for the movie and I need to find out the number to call if someone can help me let me know
thanks Tmunday —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.36.222.186 (talk) 20:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Google "The Abduction of Gloria" to find the rumored original story. Someone is selling a mimeograph of it on ebay currently for $200. It may be a fake. Hard to tell.
50.21.206.241 (talk) 16:37, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
It is "Behind the Green Door" by H.G. Wells. Grassynoel (talk) 14:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Referenced in Infinite Jest
[edit]I think it should be noted here that this film is referenced in Infinite Jest as well, in an important part of the book.
Adam205.178.98.229 (talk) 18:26, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
- The actual film is The Green Door (on p955-p956), D.F.W. says it's "a film where sex was presented as nothing more than organs going in and out of other organs, emotionless, terribly lonely."
QuentinUK (talk) 07:35, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
First porn movie widely distributed in US? NOT!
[edit]Off by two years. That's Bill Osco's Mona. This should be struck.Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 18:09, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
MPAA Rating?
[edit]The Mitchell Bros. weren't signatories to the MPAA, and Jack Valenti would not allow an MPAA signatory to make pornography. Why would they pay to have their film rated (even where they couldn't)??? The X-rating was not copyrighted and pornographers self-imposed it. This is a NO GO. The X on the poster isn't the MPAA's X.(Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 04:01, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
This article is full of errors and uses suspect sources
[edit]This movie was NOT the 4th highest grossing film of 1972. The source this article uses is highly suspect. The film was heavily pirated, as the Mitchell Bros. said. In 1973, it was banned in New York, California, and Texas, the three biggest markets in America.Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 04:21, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- C-Class film articles
- C-Class American cinema articles
- American cinema task force articles
- WikiProject Film articles
- C-Class Pornography articles
- High-importance Pornography articles
- C-Class High-importance Pornography articles
- WikiProject Pornography articles
- C-Class California articles
- Low-importance California articles
- C-Class San Francisco Bay Area articles
- Low-importance San Francisco Bay Area articles
- San Francisco Bay Area task force articles
- WikiProject California articles