Talk:Dennis Hopper/Archive 1

Comedy
Under Trivia "Super Mario Bros. is the only film in the comedy film genre he appeared in." This is not correct. There is at least one other. My Science Project (1985) was also comedy. In fact My Science Project shares the same sub-genre of comedy/adventure/science fiction as Super Mario Bros Shane C 05:25, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

"Character irony"
Is this part really necessary?

Actors play characters with different views/personalities to themselves all the time, hence the word character. --81.178.216.91 20:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - that's why it's called "acting". ––86.133.167.10 23:38, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Mugshot
Is it really neccesary to include a mugshot, since it seems of such little relevance (minor traffic charges)? Rune X2 18:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Shuffleboard backlash
Hopper's Ameriprise commercial in fall '06 featured a negative reference to shuffleboard, and the City of St Petersburg Florida(where the game was born) passed a resolution discouraging him from visiting unless he issued an apology. The resolution was really funny, and included references to his checkered past, and whereas 'how even David Crosby would decline a liver from Dennis Hopper.'71.122.59.219 02:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

POV
How do you flag an article up for POV?

Having read the meticulously verified 'Easy Riders, Raging Bulls', this chat-bio of Hopper stinks. Icon as he is, there's plenty of 'material' regarding attributions in 'Rider and 'the rest is history' career path as writ here.

I'll have to get my copy back from my mate to pad this out, Wiki style. --TresRoque 23:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrospective?
whats a retrospective (in his picture caption) ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.161.68.25 (talk) 16:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

More about paintings
In his Daily Show interview, he said that there were big retrospectives of his paintings in (spelling of museums may be wrong) the Stedling Museum in Amsterdam, Mac Museum in Vienna, 5 rooms at the Hermitage St. Petersburg, and in Moscow. He also joked about being "the most famous artist in Russia; nobody knows [me] in the United States". Maybe something should be mentioned in the article? Esn (talk) 08:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Johnny Guitar
Hopper states here that he was never in Johnny Guitar (his supposed debut). I removed this from the film bio section. BeastmasterGeneral 13:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup
The article deserves a careful review as a whole, but parts of section "Film career" are, beyond faulty grammar, simply incoherent. --Jerzy•t 02:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Political information
What is it with every hollywood celebrity having something either bashing bush or promoting Obama? Why is it relevant for a person with 70 years of history to have Obama in their entry? In a term or two Obama will go back to where he was prior to this election, a fart in the wind of no relevance.Woods01 (talk) 06:26, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

wrong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.56.102.146 (talk) 17:31, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Agree Darrenaustralia (talk) 03:56, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Bravo!Lestrade (talk) 05:33, 31 January 2010 (UTC)Lestrade
 * I think it is relevant that he was a long-time Republican voter and supporter who switched allegiances to the Democrats in 2008 after meeting Obama in 2007. Dennis Hopper - Hopper moved by Obama Hence I believe his politics should be included in this article. Lkjhgfdsa 0 (talk) 01:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Terminal
Divorce attorney says Dennis Hopper is dying. 24.189.90.68 (talk) 08:07, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Main photo
TACKY PHOTO. There has to be a photo more representative of his life than this one, taken in his last days. It's his life, but it's not a decent photo representing the Dennis Hopper of note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.45.104 (talk) 03:23, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * it would be good to have a pic of him from the 1960s, 70s or 80s, which the article is lacking. Jim Michael (talk) 21:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Not dead
Earlier this page was edited and cited http://www.mahalo.com/dennis-hopper-dead as proof that he had died. The news site (if you can call it that) is old news from when he went into hospital and people thought he was dying right then, not about now, and doesn't state a date of death so I have no idea where the editor got the date from. I mention this here because the edit hasn't been mentioned and I felt it should. 78.86.230.62 (talk) 21:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Art
I notice that some useful information about Hopper as an artist, has been added to the lead section. The problem is the per WP:LEAD the section should be a summary of the article. Therefore there should be nothing in the lead that is not discussed in the article, however his work as an artist did not exist in the article at all. I created a section to include this information and copied and pasted it without changing or removing anything. My edit is here I left a simple sentence in the lead section to act as a summary. I think the source doesn't really support everything that it is used to support, but I hope the sourcing can be improved or the information reworded somewhat. I'm not quite sure what is meant by the sentence "His photography is known for portraits from the 1960s." I think it needs to be clarified. Rossrs (talk) 09:27, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Disturbing picture
What is up with the main picture? It looks like he has a tissue growing out of his head. Are we sure this is suitable for an encyclopedia? Tinton5 (talk) 03:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Here is the reply I got User talk:Mlpearc. Have to agree with his reason, not a great pic, but recent  Mlpearc  MESSAGE  03:38, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * (the reply from User:Nehrams2020 has been archived and can be found here) Rossrs (talk) 02:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not the perfect picture but it's honest. It shows his features clearly and it's a good quality image.  Would be better without the bandage, but it's otherwise a good image.   The previous image was good too, but in my opinion it was not as suitable.  The dark sunglasses completely change his look, and for an infobox it's good that we can at least see his features.   If we get a better picture, more recent or whatever, obviously we'd go with that, but for now I think this is the right choice. Rossrs (talk) 09:11, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no policy that says that we have to or should use the most recent image. The previous image, File:Dennis Hopper hat.jpg, is just fine for the infobox. This one could be moved down to the health section (or just be removed completely, as we already have an image from the event). Nymf hideliho! 18:05, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Anyone care to comment? Nymf hideliho! 01:06, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I guess it's a matter of taste. To me, the eyes are one of the most noticeable and identifiable attributes of a person, and in File:Dennis Hopper hat.jpg his eyes are obscured by his sunglasses.   Sunglasses are obviously more "appealing" visually than an ugly bandage, but at least his face is completely visible in the bandage photo.   Neither picture is perfect.  I agree that there is nothing to say we must use the most recent picture, and I think the main aim of the infobox image should be to use the picture that most clearly depicts the person and shows what they look/looked like as clearly as possible, for identification only,  bearing in mind that the image is usually shown without context.  By that I mean that although I prefer the "bandage" picture, the "bandage" is unexplained and out of place in the infobox.  On the other hand, it shows more of his face than the sunglasses shot.  My comment previously was mostly about the sunglasses, not which photo is the most recent, which seems to be the main point in your reply.  I agree we don't need two images from the same event, and agree that more comments would be helpful.  This is just a comment of course, and if you want to change it to the sunglasses photo and remove one of the two bandage pics, I wouldn't disagree.  Rossrs (talk) 02:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


 * From WP:NFC: "However, for some retired or disbanded groups, or retired individuals whose notability rests in large part on their earlier visual appearance, a new picture may not serve the same purpose as an image taken during their career, in which case the use would be acceptable."

So bearing in mind the above, why can't we use the image in the article where he's at the Oscars with Jack Nicholson as the main picture? Or use another picture that may or may not be public domain, that shows Dennis' face more clearly without that weird bandage on his head? Because it's not like he looked like a cancer patient his entire career. 24.189.90.68 (talk) 08:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Still a good point, I hope consensus sways that way. I would rather have the Hopper/Nicholson. Actually I rather have the one that was there before, I think he was on a boat.  Mlpearc   pull my chain   Trib's  15:16, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

A picture from "Easy Rider" would be better. (92.13.75.168 (talk) 22:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC))


 * You have one ? Mlpearc   pull my chain   'Tribs  01:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Year of diagnosis
In October 2009, it was revealed to the media that he has prostate cancer. This article Cancer-stricken Easy Rider star files for divorce from his deathbed says he is believed to have been diagnosed in 2002. Does anyone have a ref that is certain of the date of diagnosis? Jim Michael (talk) 22:29, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The article should mention that Hopper was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2002. (92.11.232.81 (talk) 19:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC))

Mention in lead?
I think his cancer is relevant enough to his life to be mentioned in the lead; it appears that he continued to work until he became too ill to continue. I added his diagnosis to the lead, but it was removed. Anyone have any opinion on its inclusion? Jim Michael (talk) 03:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Filmography
Dennis Hopper has two credits for video games in his filmography with no mention for his work in "Grand Theft Auto: Vice City" as the voice of Steve Scott. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_characters_in_Grand_Theft_Auto:_Vice_City -Daniel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.165.146 (talk) 23:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * We don't normally list video game titles in the filmography proper. They should come out and if anything, a separate table for video game appearances created. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:55, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Years active
The infobox says 1955-present. It appears that he was forced to retire last year due to a decline in his health, and that he is too ill to work again. If that is the case, it should be changed to 1955-2009. Two films dated 2010 are on his IMDb profile, but I believe that is their release date. I don't see any evidence that he has worked this year. Jim Michael (talk) 22:04, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed. 24.189.90.68 (talk) 01:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't agree. In the absence of any formal announcement and source that Hopper "retired", due to his health or any other sort of reason, it is inappropriate to change it to retired. That he was ill and perhaps expected to die doesn't particularly mean he wouldn't make an appearance or be considered done. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:51, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * He was terminal and knew he was dying. The effects of his cancer forced him to retire. The only appearance in relation to his career that he seems to have made this year was at the unveiling of his star on the Walk of Fame, which doesn't count as a role or as part of his acting career. As there is no evidence he worked this year, I think we should assume he didn't. Usually, you prove a positive rather than prove a negative. If we can't show he worked this year, and under the circumstances it is unlikely, I think we should assume he didn't. Jim Michael (talk) 02:55, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * And you state that based on what? A discussion with Hopper? Nope, we do not make assumptions. All we can do is include what can be reliably sourced. Otherwise it becomes original research. In the absence of a reliable source that says Hopper "retired", we cannot report it or take it upon our selves to indicate his career ended with "retired" or in 2009. Myriad actors die and if work is still to be debuted, they are considered active in their profession. Factually, making a public appearance to receive an award based on his film work is connected to his acting career. While the circumstances are certainly very different, this is no different than editors coming in and putting an end date to the career of Jamie Lynn Spears because she took a couple years off to have a family. We do not draw a conclusion ourselves to publish in these articles based on personal reasoning. We can only say what is supported. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:34, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Since when do WE determine when an actor retires?  Mike  Allen  03:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) I agree with Wildhartlivie. If there's a source where he announced "I'm not acting anymore", then he retired. In the absence of such a source, we can't just say "he retired". For instance, (I don't even want to think about it, but) if Leonard Nimoy died next year, he would be listed as "active" through this year because he has announced his retirement from acting. Chicken  monkey  03:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've Googled it, but I can't find any source that says Dennis Hopper retired. Plus, he was still doing commercials and voice-overs.  Leonard Nimoy retiring is sad.  Hope he's okay. Malke  2010  13:00, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Does anyone have a reliable source for Hopper having done any commercials or voice work this year? If so, that would show he was active this year. Otherwise, saying he was active this year would be an assumption. Collecting an award is obviously connected to his acting career, but is not acting work. An actor who retired years ago could be given a star on the Walk of Fame or be given a lifetime achievement award, but it wouldn't mean they had come out of retirement and become active again. The same would apply to a retired musician or sportsperson being given an award; they wouldn't be continuing or resuming their career. We can't go by when a subject's last film is released, because sometimes that is the year after their death. We wouldn't say that Heath Ledger continued to be active or continued to act after his death just because two of his films, The Dark Knight and The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus were released after his death. Jim Michael (talk) 17:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The reliable source that is needed is one that says "Dennis Hopper retires" or some variation thereof. You're assuming he retired without attributing that assumption to a reliable source. Gary Coleman hadn't worked since 2009, I guess he retired, too (?). Is it likely that Dennis Hopper's illness resulted in his inability to work? Yes, however, we can't just say anything that's likely; it has to be sourced. Chicken  monkey  18:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Religion
I removed Category:Converts to Christianity as the article doesn't state that he was. Does anyone know what religion he was? Jim Michael (talk) 18:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Hopper often spoke about his "return" to Christianity and his religious views. It was part of the seeming contradictions in his life. A drug-using, alcoholic counterculture figure, who was also deeply conservative (on guns, abortion, immigration, taxes, etc.) and an unapologetic Republican in ultra-liberal Hollywood.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.58.106.139 (talk) 09:29, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Some reliable sources and info about his religion and politics would be an improvement to this article. Jim Michael (talk) 17:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Gorillaz
Dennis hopper will apprear in new Gorillaz CD called "Demon Days". the song: "Fire Coming out of the monkeys head". -nick
 * cited. --Lexein (talk) 07:13, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

William Hopper
Someone told me (or I might have read) years ago that Dennis Hopper was the younger brother of William Hopper, who played Paul Drake on the Perry Mason TV series, and that both were sons of Hedda Hopper. I repeated that to other people right up until yesterday but I see now that it's not true. Does anyone know how widespread that myth was? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Midstream (talk • contribs) 18:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * William Hopper was the only child of Hedda Hopper. Dennis' parents are named in the Early life section of this article. Jim Michael (talk) 21:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Siblings
Did Hopper have any siblings? Jim Michael (talk) 22:44, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Filmography split
Is anyone opposed to the creation of Dennis Hopper filmography, as I have done in my sandbox? Chicken monkey  10:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC) There was one errant "not" in my post. My point is that the article itself does not include content coverage of every film that Hopper has made. When you spin off the filmography, you are effectively removing any coverage in the article of what is in the filmography but not otherwise covered. The content in the filmography includes the name of the film, links to the film article, and any other pertinent content listed in the "other" column. The filmography is a "shrunk" version of the entire body of the actor's work. Spinning it off takes away the coverage of what isn't written up. How hard is that to understand? Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Go for it. Looks good. Nymf hideliho! 10:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, and you forgot Crash (2008 TV series). Nymf hideliho! 10:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, yes I am. Spinning off filmographies removes much content from the main article. Not every single film someone made is not going to be mentioned and covered in the text of the article and thus, it is removed from access from the article page. Not to mention the loss of the roles played and other incidental content in the notes section. Wildhartlivie (talk) 14:58, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Wildhartlivie, I've read this comment about a dozen times and I'm sorry, I can't understand what you mean. Spinning off filmographies makes sense when including the filmography in the main article would substantially grow it, as the current filmography in this article is doing. I don't understand what you mean by "Not every single film someone made is not going to be mentioned and covered in the text of the article and thus, it is removed from access from the article page" or "Not to mention the loss of the roles played and other incidental content in the notes section." Could you explain, please?
 * Nymf, actually, due to the amount of television work he did, I thought it would be best to separate that into another table, on the same filmography article, but I didn't get around to that yet. Chicken  monkey  19:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well since he's dead, his credits won't be increasing. Are these films/television that he's already done and has never been added to the article?   Also, I find it peculiar when someone's article doesn't improve until after they die.  That's when people start working on it.  Lol.   Mike   Allen  20:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why some articles seem to not improve until after the subject dies. It's the nature Wikipedia, I guess. Though, since the traffic is likely to increase when someone dies, it's a good thing to make sure the article is in good quality, without any unreliably sourced information and that sort of thing. With that process, I suppose the article's quality inherently improves. Chicken  monkey  20:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, now I understand what you're saying and I completely disagree. I don't see it as "removing" coverage of the lesser known films, but rather "moving" it. The information is still there, it's just in it's own article because including it in this article would be too bulky. I think splitting the filmography makes sense for someone like Hopper, who has over 200 credits in his career. Chicken  monkey  05:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Support split, but prefer retention of the bulleted list format currently in use. It's proper per WP:Filmographies, which is a guideline, as opposed to the personal preference of the WP:ACTOR-crowd. Cheers, Jack Merridew 20:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Jack, you don't have to take every opportunity to have a dig at "the WP:ACTOR-crowd", especially as you've added your name as a project participant.  "It's proper per WP:Filmographies" is enough and doesn't push any buttons.   Having said that, I agree the bulleted format of the filmography section is fine as is, but that it a table would be equally suitable.  I support the split. Rossrs (talk) 22:46, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * However, the whole "it takes too much room" falls by the wayside if the stark list with no other information is added, like roles played or awards won. At that point, it becomes just a page of stark listing. And yes, Rossrs, I agree, Jack Merridew and his POV is becoming excessively tiresome being posted wherever he finds a blank spot. In fact, stark listings are his personal preference and pushing it the way he does by denigrating the opinions of others has become harassing. Everything is someone's personal preference, even Jack Merridew's. Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * yes, on either side personal preference is a key element. If the list was merely going to be copied over, a bulleted list would suffice.  If there is a desire to expand it, a table would be more suitable (ie Chickenmonkey's proposal, which I think looks quite good).  Going back to the discussion at WP:ACTOR and removing the personal opinion on either side, from the equation, the main objections to the table seemed to be related to coding and ease of use for editors who may wish to update. As Hopper is deceased, there should be no need to tinker with Chickenmonkey's table to any extent. It will quickly become static.  Hopper had a lengthy and notable career, so I think a table would be appropriate. Rossrs (talk) 05:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Anti-Agitprop
Originally the article stated that:


 * In 2008, Hopper starred in An American Carol, an anti-agitprop comedy, with Jon Voight, Kelsey Grammer and James Woods.

I later changed it to:


 * In 2008, Hopper starred in An American Carol, a parody of A Christmas Carol, with Jon Voight, Kelsey Grammer and James Woods.

Agitprop specifically refers to Soviet era propaganda which you can read about at Agitprop

It's no secret that An American Carol has conservative leanings so agitprop here is used as an insult towards liberalism because the movie itself shows no anti-communist or anti-agitprop message. --Thisispain (talk) 05:50, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, in fact, the description was not contained "originally", it was added on May 31, 2010 and then you removed it, claiming it was a weasel word and changed its description as a parody, without citing that description, which was requested. You failed to do that, posted your complaint on this page, and again removed it without giving a source at all, either against the use of the word, or supportin the A Christmas Carol comparison. Massive fail. Don't worry, the description, both of them, were removed and the bit was placed in a more appropriate place. Thanks Chickenmonkey. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:23, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

The fact that it is "A Christmas Carol" parody is evident on "An American Carol"'s page. There's no need to write "massive fail" when I was simply replacing a word used completely out of context.--Thisispain (talk) 09:07, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree; I would not classify it as a "massive fail", or really a fail at all. It seems to have been a good faith attempt to clarify a perceived misleading word. Any description of An American Carol would be of supplemental value in this article, anyway; so, it was best just to remove any. If, however, in the future, Mr. Hopper's political endeavors were expanded upon -- perhaps in a dedicated section -- then, the addition of some indication of An American Carols political stance might warrant inclusion. For now, I don't believe it does. Obviously, I understand the fact that An American Carol is based on A Christmas Carol is not of a political nature, but I'm speaking more to the "agitprop" statement. I think the A Christmas Carol statement is best left to the An American Carol article and adds very little to this article. Chicken  monkey'  09:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Art history
If it is true that Hopper still seems himself as an artist first, has had work published about him, and actually has produced a fairly weighty body of works, this article should really stop being a compendium of his film work and personal life and branch out into his artistic accomplishments more explicitly. There is at least one book out about Hopper's art and the lack of inclusion here is telling.
 * Also, Hopper was an important collector of pop art even before he made some money through Easy Rider (Google "Dennis Hopper art collection" for more info). How did he get the money to buy these works, and how did he become friends with artists like Andy Warhol? Lexaxis7 (talk) 23:17, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Illness and death
"According to papers filed in his divorce court case, Hopper was terminally ill and was unable to undergo chemotherapy to treat his prostate cancer."

There is no effective chemotherapy for prostate cancer so it would have mattered little if he was too ill to undergo it. Metastatic prostate cancer can be slowed somewhat, depending on aggressiveness, with anti-androgen treatment (chemical castration, so called) but there is no cure or even effective treatment for it beyond this.

Rdavis184 (talk) 17:00, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

T Southern profile
I find one in an Aug 1965 Vogue instead

robotwisdom (talk) 10:42, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Venice Film Festival Award for Last Movie - Never Happened!
After reading Peter L. Winkler's biography, entitled DENNIS HOPPER: THE WILD RIDE OF A HOLLYWOOD REBEL, I have some doubt about the article's statement that the Hopper written, directed and edited film THE LAST MOVIE won first place at the Venice Film Festival - even though it's a claim that Hopper made to many people over many years. On page 175 of the paperback edition, Hopper is quoted as saying: "When it won a prize at Venice, they couldn't believe it...an executive said to me, 'We must have bought the prize for you.' But that prize was the only award given at Venice, and I won it, in competition with Kurosawa, Bergman, and lots of others." However, the author states in a footnote on the same page: "Hopper was wrong. The LAST MOVIE was entered out of competition. The festival assigned no awards to films from 1969-1979."

This was a little jarring to read - as the author didn't make a big deal out if - just stated that Hopper was "wrong." Hopper is also quoted in the book as having complained years later that the film wasn't marketed well, and that he had to go around reminding interviewers at the time that it had won a prize at Venice.

Circumstantially, it seems as if this story could be (or is even likely to be) a confabulation by Hopper. The statement is currently not cited by wiki. However, there's a list of links in the Venice Film Festival wiki that purports to be all of the awards given by the festival, and - going by this list - it looks like the author was right - the movie didn't get an award there.

I don't want to remove the statement if it IS true. Does anyone have additional information? I'll wait a while and see.

Oldsmobile (talk) 22:24, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

More information: A website called dennishopper.com, which apparently has been established for purposes of marketing his image posthumously, includes a "Life" section with a Biography. Part of the biography states: "Though The Last Movie won the prestigious C.I.D.A.L.C. Award at the Venice Film Festival in 1971, the result was never announced, and Universal Pictures refused to distribute the film unless Hopper would agree to re-edit it."

I haven't been able to determine what C.I.D.A.L.C. stands for, although a similarly named award (according to some sources) also has been given at the Berlin Film Festival, In any case, the wiki entry for "32nd Venice International Film Festival" is contradictory - it states that "There was no jury because from 1969 to 1979 the festival was not competitive," but it also shows THE LAST MOVIE as the winner of the C.I.D.A.L.C. Award.

It is clear from a historical account I've read that the first statement is true - the festival presented no award to THE LAST MOVIE. The official website of the Venice Filn Festival states in a history of the festival that "As an effect of the dissent, (NOTE: This refers to controversy over the fact that the award being given was identical to the one given during the Fascist regime in Italy, when the Festival was influenced by the dictatorial political regime) prize-giving was abolished in '68. From 1969 to 1972 the Festival was non-competitive (the first two were directed by Ernesto G. Laura, and the successive one by Gian Luigi Rondi), and numerous parallel festivals were organised. In 1971 John Ford and Charlie Chaplin the following year, received the Golden Lion for Career Achievement assigned by the Festival. 1971 was also the year in which festival audiences saw a Chinese film screened for the first time: Hung sik laung dje ching."

To summarize - the only two awards given from 1969 to 1972 at the Venice Internationakl Filn Festival were career achievement awards for John Ford and Charlie Chaplin. It appears that Hopper's personal account, amplified through IMDB and Wikipedia, has created an incredibly widespread perception that he won an award that did not even exist when his movie was screened at the Festival.

The only question in my mind is whether to simply remove the mention of it in Wikipedia or - based on the pervasiveness of the myth - actually point out that Hopper claimed to receive an award that was never given.

Opinions?

Oldsmobile (talk) 16:37, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Politics
Was Dennis Hopper was a Republican and why — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.100.127.41 (talk) 12:58, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

San Diego vs. La Mesa
As a graduate of Helix, he almost assuredly lived in La Mesa and not San Diego, where he would have gone to one of the schools in the S. D. City school district. Wschart (talk) 18:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Related to William and Hedda Hopper or not?
Currently, article says he was a cousin of William Hopper (somewhat well-known actor of the 1950s, Paul Drake in the Perry Mason show, and son of very powerful and well-known Hollywood columnist Hedda Hopper). But the Wikipedia article on William Hopper says that while often claimed, there was no family relationship. One of these articles is wrong and should be fixed.

Which one? Hard to guess. William Hopper's entire life seems to have been mightily shaped by his mother's influence, or the threat of it. But "cousin" can be a very distant relationship indeed, perhaps out of La Hopper's orbit. Still, if there had been a relationship with Hedda Hopper when Dennis was a rising star, I'd think it would be more commented upon. It makes slightly more sense that there either was no family relationship or one so tenuous no one knew it at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandrakos (talk • contribs) 04:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Dennis Hopper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100602031132/http://news.yahoo.com:80/s/nm/20100529/en_nm/us_hopper to http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100529/en_nm/us_hopper/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:38, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Dennis Hopper. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081207033043/http://www.filmcatcher.com:80/interview_detail/141/620/ to http://www.filmcatcher.com/interview_detail/141/620/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:25, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Dennis Hopper's FBI File Declassified -- Black Panther Party Connection
I thought editors here would be interested in the FBI File I got declassified on Hopper, which I archived at: http://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/fbi-files-celebrities/ --- Specifically, the PDF is at: http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/fbifiles/celebrities/dennishopper-fbi1.pdf

Let me know if anyone finds it of use. --Avidresearcher9999 (talk) 01:16, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Dennis Hopper. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081203122236/http://www.avclub.com/content/feature/random_roles_dennis_hopper to http://www.avclub.com/content/feature/random_roles_dennis_hopper
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100608221033/http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/7142 to http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/7142
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091231160308/http://newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Dennis_Hopper.php to http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Dennis_Hopper.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081015231035/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j5EWRC22Nx_phjXpenOArhNeOUew to http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j5EWRC22Nx_phjXpenOArhNeOUew
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721203650/http://www.themoneytimes.com/featured/20100212/dennis-hopper-gets-restraining-order-against-wife-id-10100264.html to http://www.themoneytimes.com/featured/20100212/dennis-hopper-gets-restraining-order-against-wife-id-10100264.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110711163434/http://story.heraldglobe.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/b8de8e630faf3631/id/549835/cs/1 to http://story.heraldglobe.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/b8de8e630faf3631/id/549835/cs/1
 * Added tag to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/DisplayMain.jsp?curTime=1461541200273
 * Added tag to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/DisplayMain.jsp?curTime=1461546130313

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:02, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dennis Hopper. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100504093655/http://www.nmmagazine.com/outings_mdlhouse_feb10.php to http://www.nmmagazine.com/outings_mdlhouse_feb10.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100409123310/http://www.inentertainment.co.uk/20100406/dennis-hopper-divorce-case-key-issues-settled-by-judge/ to http://www.inentertainment.co.uk/20100406/dennis-hopper-divorce-case-key-issues-settled-by-judge/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120531152952/http://www.pr-inside.com/hopper-to-be-honored-on-hollywood-r1783445.htm to http://www.pr-inside.com/hopper-to-be-honored-on-hollywood-r1783445.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:56, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Young
nothing on his friendship and film with neil young?

Speed 3?
What is this Speed 3 nonsense? Is it just me, or is this pure gossip?