Talk:Donna Deitch

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Donna Deitch. 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/20141018135036/http://donnadeitch.blogspot.com.au/2010/06/donna-deitch-on-desert-hearts-sequel.html to http://donnadeitch.blogspot.com.au/2010/06/donna-deitch-on-desert-hearts-sequel.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708033326/http://donnadeitch.blogspot.com/ to http://donnadeitch.blogspot.com/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708041149/http://gwenwelles.blogspot.com/ to http://gwenwelles.blogspot.com/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:09, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Vincent Canby review (New York Times)
Canby's review was so potentially damaging to the success of Desert Hearts that Donna Deitch created flyers promoting the movie to distribute to art house moviegoers, and solicited them to spread the word about the movie after they saw it. Vito Russo wrote in The Celluloid Closet: "In the New York Times, Vincent Canby complained that we are not given enough information about the quality of Vivian's broken marriage, asking if perhaps her lesbianism was a hysterical reaction to her divorce. This is the point at which many heterosexual critics disqualify themselves from perceptively reviewing gay films." (1987 Revised edition, p.215, ISBN 0060961325)

It doesn't make sense to use it as a source supporting the statement in the introductory section: "The film was one of the first film releases to depict a lesbian love story in a generally mainstream, albeit art house, vein but with positive and respectful themes." I think using the Canby review as a citation should be reconsidered.

There are other citations that can be used instead. I suggest Gene Siskel's as the alternative (see film article's critical response), but there are also other published sources with opinions that weren't as antipathetic as Canby. Pyxis Solitary (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I substituted Canby's harsh review citation with Gene Siskel's from the Chicago Tribune. Pyxis Solitary (talk) 09:26, 21 March 2017 (UTC)