Jump to content

Talk:Empire Falls (miniseries)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Split

[edit]

Why is this page mostly about the mini-series vs. the book? The latter after all is the Pulitizer prize winning masterpiece.... Do we need two pages? Dcyprian 13:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised no one has agreed to this since this question was first posed. I definitely agree that they should be split into mini-series and novel; otherwise it's just messy and misleading. Maria 21:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done! Empire Falls (miniseries) and Empire Falls. Fixing all of the links as of now. Maria 21:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"still a priest"?

[edit]

I've only read the book, not seen the movie, but ... what does the second sentence here mean exactly?

A priest whose mind is decaying into a state where he says nasty things to people. Despite helping steal money from the church, he's still a priest who serves God.

I don't remember Father Tom doing much in the way of service in the book... --Jfruh 23:34, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it means that he's still officially a Roman Catholic priest although he is no longer capable of acting in that capacity. --Facedogg 00:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tables

[edit]

I just organized the cast and charactors into tables. I think it looms OK but not sure. Any thoughts? Much thanks.--RobNS 04:18, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it looks fine, but I'm not sure about the character's description in italics; it makes it somewhat difficult to read large blocks of text in italics, I find. Other than that, nice job. :) María (críticame) 15:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've struck out my previous comment, I'm sorry; I didn't remember seeing a large table like this on a film before, so I checked Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines and it seems they discourage such extensive formatting. I'm sorry, but I've reverted it. Guideline takes precedence over looks. María (críticame) 15:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]