Talk:Belle de Jour (film)

This film
This film is enormously multi-layered and allusive, and quite an important film in cinema history; it needs a much larger article. -- Karada 12:09, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Go for it, dude! Ellsworth 22:11, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Contrary to what the author says, this film is NOT about a "young woman who is compelled to spend her midweek afternoons as a prostitute." It is, instead, about an affluent young woman who freely chose to spend her midweek afternoons as a prostitute. She wanted to do it. She was quite attractive, and if she simply wanted to have sex with other men, which she certainly did, she didn't have to become a prostitute. There's no suggestion in the film that she was coerced in any way or that she had an uncontrollable urge to be a prostitute, the way an alcoholic has such an urge to drink. In fact, she gets involved in prostitution very reluctantly, and does it just for kicks, like someone who finally tries LSD after almost trying it a few times. She finds she likes it. The film makes an unusual social statement about prostitution, suggesting, quite rightly, that prostitutes may engage in that activity for fun. 70.182.156.197 (talk) 17:05, 8 August 2015 (UTC) The film should be contrasted with, say, Godard's Vivre sa vie, where the woman had a much greater financial need to become involved in prostitution (which she didn't seem to mind doing, all that much, at least in the first half or first 3/4 of the film), and eventually was murdered by people who controlled her.70.182.156.197 (talk) 16:58, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Dreams or actual events of punishment?
When I saw the movie, I interpreted the whipping/rape in the forest, and the scene where the men fling mud on her, as "flash-forwards" - actual events that happen subsequent to the husband discovering his wife's infidelity. glasperlenspiel 19:04, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

My reading of the ending was that Severine retreated back into the fantasy world she had constructed before she started going to the brothel. After her husband is shot and Mr Husson comes to tell him about her activities, I was under the impression that she began to fantasise about her husband punishing her just as she had done at the beginning. Robat 11:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization
Shouldn't this be located at Belle de Jour, in accordance with capitalization conventions and MOS:CL? Waqcku 21:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No, because French capitalization works different than English. In French, titles only have capital letter on the first one unless there is a proper name, e.g. Cyrano de Bergerac.--Nauki (talk) 00:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 02:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Goofs
What about goofs? When she is with the professor, she takes her bra off. Then she leaves the room without it, you can see it on the bed. Then, next scene, she's got it on.--Nauki (talk) 00:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Disambig Question
I would like people's opinions of this disambig. The vast number of links to Belle de jour point to the Luis Buñuel film. Should the disambig page be moved to Belle de Jour (disambiguation) with the film kept at the page Belle de jour? - AKeen (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was move per request to remove overprecision in disambiguator.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 07:04, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Belle de Jour (1967 film) → — This is the only film of this name on Wikipedia. PatGallacher (talk) 16:19, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Support. --   Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   07:25, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support simpler disambiguation; no need for year. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 18:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Changed the description of the ending a bit
I've changed it to point out its ambiguity. The previous version incorrectly classed it as Séverine's daydream. It is well-known that neither Buñuel nor Carrière were really "sure" what was going on and which scenes were "real" and which ones were "dreams". They also changed their opinions over the years regarding particular scenes. The ending can be interpreted in many ways:  an imagined scene, a daydream, reality, and Marcel's wounding of Pierre was her fantasy, reality, Pierre is miraculously healed (the camera suddenly and unexpectedly tilting down to Pierre's hand is an image from Christian iconography symbolising God's intervention; this also agrees with the sound of cowbells associated with extraordinary events in several of Buñuel's films), and so on.  JanBielawski (talk) 06:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC)