Talk:Fiddler on the Roof (film)

No Mention of the Choreography?
If the genius of Isaac Stern's fiddle is worthy of mention, most certainly also is credit and mention of the choreography by Jerome Robbins. The cossack-inspired dance scene in the tavern and the bottle dance in the wedding scene are both as brilliantly staged and executed as "Cool" from West Side Story. Ski mohawk (talk) 08:31, 24 November 2013 (UTC)Ski_Mohawk

Untitled
Nothing more to tell? That's funny...  --80.136.137.243 07:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I vote that the film page be kept separate from the general page about the play. It seems to be the Wikipedia standard to have separate pages for film adaptations, and I vote we do the same here. Daniel J. Mount 01:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Wrong oscars
According to the article in Cineplayers.com the movie got four oscars (photography, sound, art direction and adapted soundtrack) and not three. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fiddler on the roof.jpg
Image:Fiddler on the roof.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Synopsis
Is it necessary to have a full detailed synopsis in this article? It just duplicates material that appears in the article Fiddler on the Roof; the plots of the movie and play don't differ at all. AJD (talk) 17:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I tend to agree. I think the Plot section could be combined with the plot differences, so that it reads something like, "The plot and script are almost identical to the stage musical of the same name. (link to musical plot section). There are, however, some relatively minor differences. (differences section). Magic1million (talk) 18:43, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Is anyone going to fix this?
Someone sabotaged the intro to this page, anyone gonna fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johanthepirate (talk • contribs) 19:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I Just Reverted it to what it was before some guy just did all that wacky stuff

Trevorprella (talk) 21:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Perchik
How do we know that Perchik is "clearly a Marxist" ??

He is clearly a revolutionary. But it seems to me that based upon his comments and actions in Fiddler on the Roof, he could be either a Marxist or an anarchist. When "Perchik addresses the crowd and says that since they love each other it should be left for the couple to decide," that seems to be an expression of anarchistic philosophy.

The anarchists were perhaps not as numerous as the Marxists, but they played a significant role not only in Russian philosophy and history, but also in both revolutions, in 1905 (the period of Fiddler) and 1917.

Raymond Knapp refers to Perchik as a Marxist on page 221 in The American Musical and the Formation of National Identity, Princeton University Press, 2005, ISBN 0691118647, 9780691118642; however, i don't see any justification or explanation for his conclusion, either. Someone could cite this text to justify the Marxist conclusion, but i fear that the tendency to do so may simply inherit a carelessness, as in using the term "Marxist" as a generic expression for "revolutionary."

Is anyone aware of a specific analysis of Perchik's politics, in order to justify the conclusion in the current text? Richard Myers (talk) 03:41, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * In the urban scene where Perchik is arrested, there is a red (i.e., communist) flag that appears prominently. Is one of the men holding it Perchik?  If so, that would mean he was a communist. 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:4C56:A94A:6795:4BE6 (talk) 05:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:4C56:A94A:6795:4BE6 I think it should say he's a communist but not a Marxist since they're not the exact same thing
 * Unrefined Gasoline (talk) 02:57, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Isaac Stern
The music of the fiddler was played by Isaac Stern. I don't really know where this would fit in, but it is a significant detail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.195.50 (talk) 01:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Michele Marsh
I've just reverted a change by Editor Geraldo Perez where he had made an interwiki link for Michele Marsh. To do that he used this markup: Michele Marsh which renders like this in the article: Michele Marsh

The problem is that a reader, seeing the Michele Marsh link expects that the link will lead to a Wikipedia article about Michele Marsh. In fact, what the reader gets is Michele Marsh's IMDb page—clearly an external web site that does not lie within Wikipedia. Editors should not break readers' expectations. Ever.

The use of external links in article text is either prohibited or discouraged: MOS (prohibited) and External_links (discouraged). So, best solution perhaps is to cite Michele Marsh's IMDb page—which of course then raises reliable source questions.

In this instance, I have forsaken boldness and simply reverted Editor Geraldo Perez's change but did leave the wrong Michele Marsh html comment in §Cast.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:49, 1 August 2012 (UTC)Talk


 * The link is a valid interwiki link as listed in Interwiki map to a wiki equivelent. More at m:Help:Interwiki linking. It is not being used as a WP:IMDB or WP:RS/IMDB reference for article information – it is being used solely for identification of an ambiguously named person with no wiki article and the same name as a person with a wiki article to prevent confusion. Since there is no article for this person and people who would click on a linked name would like at least identifying information about this person, I believe that it is in the best interests of the project and this article to WP:Ignore all rules and give them something useful. This is basically equivelent to wikilinking to a stub article with the IMDb article as an external link. With the limited investigation I did, I don't believe this actor meets wp:NACTOR to even have a stub so see the interwiki link as a more useful solution for now. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:04, 1 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I created a disambiguation page at Michele Marsh and a stub article at Michele Marsh (actress). Still might get deleted as iffy on WP:NACTOR but will see what happens. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:49, 1 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I like this solution. It keeps everything correct and the reader isn't surprised.


 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 18:06, 1 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I figured it would be easier to try it the correct way than to try to gain concensus for a wp:IAR exception. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:26, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Jews leaving Anatevka
At the end of the film, all the Jews of Anatevka are forced to leave their town. At the end of the section about the plot of Act II, could somebody explain why the government forced them out? I would do that if I knew the answer, but I do not. Thank you! Taram (talk) 03:27, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

The Jews were persecuted by the Russians. Didn't you ever see the movie or the play? 173.86.39.179 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:53, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Balance in the "differences" section
The last paragraph or so casts the differences between the film and stage productions in an interesting light, but when all is said and done, this is one scholar's thesis given from a very particular viewpoint. Do we have some evidence as to how widely accepted her views are, or whether others from other schools of thought have different ideas which may be more widely accepted? Mangoe (talk) 22:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Jan Lisa Huttner here: It fascinates me that you think I have "a very particular viewpoint" that can only be valid if my views are "widely accepted." For the record, I have not posted in Wikipedia for ~ 5 years (when I tried to organize a project with the Association of Women Journalists = AWJ Chicago to encourage more women to post in Wikipedia). However, I have done a great deal of lecturing on "Fiddler on the Roof" in the past decade, primarily at programs organized by the Chicago YIVO Society, ORT, and/or various Hadassah chapters. So I can only assume that the "very particular viewpoint" that you are questioning--which does in fact capture the essence of my research--was posted in Wikipedia by people who presumably heard--and were impressed by--one or more of my lectures. You will find specific evidence of the differences between the stage & screen version of "Fiddler on the Roof" here http://ff2media.com/secondcitytzivi/2014/09/11/my-kinda-town/. The PPT files for all of my lectures have been posted on my Blog year-by-year. Most of my lectures have also been summarized--by me or by others--in the Chicago YIVO Society newsletter and/or the JUF News (www.juf.org) for which I have worked for almost ten years now. May I gently suggest that you do some homework before calling posts about my work "unbalanced." After all, I'm not exactly hard to find via Google, Facebook, etc. All best, Jan — Preceding unsigned comment added by JanLisaHuttner (talk • contribs) 22:25, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the OP of this section that the paragraph might not meet the guidelines for inclusion or, at the very least, is probably longer and more detailed than appropriate.Magic1million (talk) 22:32, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

unclear text
"Differences from the Broadway musical" section - text : "contained some of these omissions" - so, were the omissions in the film also omitted from the soundtrack record? Or were the omitted pieces contained on the record ? 84.92.56.32 (talk) 12:46, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Reorganize Page?
It seems that the sections of the page might be somewhat out of order, although I am not sure what the best practices are for section order in movie musicals. Still, I would propose something like the page for Camelot, with the following proposed order: Plot; Differences b/t Movie and Musical (this could be trimmed); Cast; Production; Release; Awards; Musical Numbers. Anyway, just my two cents. Magic1million (talk) 22:39, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Why is the first music called tradition
The law is to follow tradition 212.127.141.62 (talk) 17:55, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Tevye's Dream not Mentioned
In the plot section, the scene where Tevye lies about having a nightmare where Lazar's deceased past wife says that his daughter can't marry him seems to be missing. I'd add it myself but I don't think I could explain it properly so if someone else could that would be great Unrefined Gasoline (talk) 03:01, 26 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Done. AJD (talk) 07:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC)