Talk:Mrs. Lovett

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mrs. Lovett 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

(Cannibals?)

Should she be placed under "Fictional cannibals", like Sweeney Todd? Not050 (talk) 03:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, she has never been shown to have eaten anyone. Todd, on the other hand, (in some versions in which he drank the blood of his victims) should be. Although she makes his victims into meat pies, she does not eat them. --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 23:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a little simplistic, for at least two reasons:

She's established herself as an unreliable narrator when she contrasted herself to a competitor who puts cat flesh into meat pies: after implying something to the effect that she is herself no such lowlife, she has followed up with a "throw-away" line that "Them kittens sure is quick!", insinuating that most of the time she forgets that her real reason for forgoing that source of meat is that she is not quick enuf to make it an efficient source.
The sense of "cannibal" in the Categ or SIA reasonably could be explicitly broadened with language like "including promoters of undercutting visceral food taboos, and those they dupe", which covers Rhea and Cronus et al. -- and Mrs. Lovett's competitor, whom she essentially condemns as a monster for making unwitting food-boundary-violators of the competitor's customers. (The purpose of article and Cat titles is arguably not to accurately define words, but -- occasionally -- instead to provide terse and vivid labels for broad memes that don't have efficient dictdefs.)

--Jerzy•t 16:26, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WTH?

The "Legend" section seems to mostly be summarizing the events of the 2008 movie - I would hardly call that "legend". It needs to be modified to more closely represent the common traditions of the character, with possible notes on variations.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 05:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See my note in the "Sweeney Todd Wikia" section. Best, --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 23:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Furthermore, why is the picture of her a screenshot from the movie? Why not Patti LuPone, or Angela Lansbury? </bias> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.104.217.226 (talk) 01:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Here http://media.kino-govno.com/images/sweeneytodd/sweeneytodd_40.jpg the same screenshot is available in higher resolution, don't know how to replace an image and have no rights to upload new one though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slider88slider (talk • contribs) 21:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lovers????????

Will somebody PLEASE tell me how she and Sweeney Todd were ever lovers???????????? He kills people, and she makes them into pies and sells them. He never liked her like that!!!! So, why does the article say they were bloody lovers???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Lover of the sand (talk) 15:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe in some versions, Todd and Lovett were. Can you please show where this is stated in the article? --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 00:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC).[reply]

It says

{{Office character box | spouse = Albert Lovett (deceased) <br> [[Sweeney Todd]] (lover) }}

p

Also, the stage/movie states that she fancies Benjamin Barker/Sweeney Todd. It's a major plot point. Whether you can go so far to call them lovers, I don't know, but lovers will suffice, seeing as how in a few other versions they ARE lovers. :< —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.104.217.226 (talk) 01:33, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sweeney Todd Wikia

The contents of this article and Mrs. Lovett at Sweeney Todd Wikia appear to be very similar (near identical). Either this is a copy of Mrs. Lovett's Sweeney Todd Wikia, or it is a copy of this page. Because (if I'm correct) both Wikipedia and Wikia are free-content encyclopaedias, there's little to worry about in terms of copyvios, but this page needs much cleanup to avoid fancruft. Any thoughts?

Cheers, --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 23:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Mr. Lovett ?

Is there ever any mention of what happenned to Mr. Lovett - or even if he "existed" ? (Yes, I realise they were all fictional anyway.) -- Beardo (talk) 13:24, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The whole Sweeney Todd story is an urban myth. See the main Sweeney Todd article ("Peter Haining argued that Sweeney Todd was a historical figure who committed his crimes around 1800. Nevertheless, other researchers who have tried to verify his citations find nothing in these sources to back Haining's claims." - cites in the Sweeney Todd article).

The main proponent for a historical basis for the story is notoriously untrustworthy and nobody has been able to find cites for his claims.

12.40.5.69 (talk) 17:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

in the 2007 remake, ms lovett talks about ALBERT her former husband, that he loved his pies —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.122.108 (talk) 02:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable Article

This article has many problems. The biggest problem is the placement of the account of the "real" Mrs. Lovett beneath the references section. It appears as if this was done to hide the fact that there are no reliable sources to verify the statements, and should be removed. The sources themselves only lead to a article talking about the much debated Peter Haining book. The whole article reads like a fan page for the musical, instead of giving information on the character. I'm posting this in order to get feedback from other editors, before diving in and making people mad. Natt the Hatt (talk) 00:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mrs. Lovett. 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) 12:35, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]