Talk:John Rabe (film)

	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 Chinese cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the German cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the War films task force.

China: Cinema Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Chinese cinema workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Concealed by Germany

Removed this irrelevant section. No need to single out Japan. The film may have been promoted briefly on Goethe-Institute web sites only in countries where it was or is actually shown. No reference can be found now for instance on the site for Korea. And, were there ever references in other third countries? Of greater interest would be if Japanese film distributors would ever carry the film.Alandeus (talk) 07:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to Florian Gallenberger, a Japanese distributor was interested in purchasing the film, but only on the condition that all scenes of the character Prince Asaka be deleted for the Japanese version. Gallenberger was not willing to censor the film so a commercial release in Japan looks unlikely.--Mathew5000 (talk) 23:21, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Panay incident

The ship that Rabe's wife boards in no way represents the Panay. It is a large (black, not white) passenger steamer, is not armed like a gunboat and the name of the ship is not shown. The Panay incident may have inspired the scene, but since this it is not explicitly presented as the Panay in the film, it should not be named that and anything else would be pure speculation. Therefore, it should remain named as a generic passenger steamer. Alandeus (talk) 07:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I own a copy of the movie and I can confirm it is the Panay. A passenger steamer in the movie, yes, but it is based on the actual ship. In short, artistic license. Nonetheless, several characters in the movie mention it as "the Panay." Please note that it's just a movie and is not fully historically accurate. I can't find any proof online, but I've put up quotations from the film mentioning the ship's name:

Dr. Robert O. Wilson talking to committee members of the Safety Zone: This is the passenger list of the Panay. It's the last ship out of Nanjing. Everybody who was anybody, including the great heroes is leaving the city on it.

Prince Yasuhiko Asaka speaking to John Rabe: The attack on the Panay was a tragic misunderstanding. I shall immediately send for news of your wife's fate. Wolcott (talk) 11:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Admittedly, it's a tricky situation with artistic license. Thanks for your research. However, linking the plot to actual historical facts that are rather removed from what is depicted in the film ought to be avoided, in my opinion. As the name and true function of the historical ship is of minor importance of the overall plot (this shouldn't be more than a summary anyway), I'd say we can omit the name and further background of the ship here. Alandeus (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it is unecessary to include the name of the ship in the plot, but at least a link to the incident would help so viewers can understand what the phrase/sentence is referring to. After seeing the movie before reading the written plot on wiki to clarify issues, it left me with the belief that the sinking was entirely fictional when it is not. Take the contest to kill 100 people using a sword for example. Though included in the movie, I feel it is also merely based on the actual contest. From my knowledge, John Rabe never mentioned anything about the contest in his diary and as such he probably wasn't even there. Nonetheless, a link to the contest (which is already in the plot) appears necessary for viewers to read the facts. Wolcott (talk) 14:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do find such cross-references interesting, but they ought to be put into perspective, so as not to cause confusion. Perhaps you can insert a clause in bracket, such as: … (based on the Panay incident). Alandeus (talk) 14:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The attack is more or less portrayed the same way as it is depicted in the movie. The only differences being that it is changed to a passenger liner, it was already underway instead of being anchored and it was attacked by monoplanes instead of biplanes. I still think it is best linked to a phrase than bracketed. Take Band of Brothers (TV miniseries) for example: it draws heavy literary license in various episodes, so perhaps a sentence under the introduction summary such as, "A large amount of narrative/historical/artistic license was taken with the movie" would be necessary to warn viewers. Wolcott (talk) 15:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead! I'm intereseted in what you come up with. Alandeus (talk) 15:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good solution, Wolcott. And a couple producers are still in the box. Alandeus (talk) 17:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'd like to expand the Production section but due to it being a non-Hollywood film, I think it would be much harder finding reliable and/or significant information online. Wolcott (talk) 17:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Rabe (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:18, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]