Talk:Formula for a Murder

Giallo
So we have two points on the giallo genre for this one. Curti's source says the film is not like giallo of the era. However, as stated in Curti's book again the term giallo has different meanings in Italy that basically anything that's a vague mystery there would be called a giallo, even Hitchcock films, but outside of Italy, people don't really refer to Hitch films as giallo in the West. So that leads to my issue of using an Italian source here referring to the film as a giallo, as it may be misleading to English-language readers. Thoughts? Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:24, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * "Giallo" is a broad term and a broad concept, also every critic has his own definition of the genre/concept and their inclusion/exclusion criteria. I am pretty sure that for each and every giallo film there will be at least one critic who disagrees with its inclusion in the genre, so I am not really shocked if a critic notes that the film is "different" from the giallo canon in one aspect or another. BTW here we have at least three sources which discuss the film as a "giallo", the Corriere della Sera review, Howarth who talks about it as a different, anomalous giallo but which still belongs to the genre ( "does not enter into the excessive spirit of the other gialli of the period"), and Curti himself who, even noting the different formula (i.e. the killer identified in the middle of the film, something noted even in the Corriere review) analyzes the film as such, highlighting the multiple giallo elements of the film (the opening, the priest figure who is a topos of the genre, the murder scenes). So what I would do here is following the sources and describing the film as an unusual giallo, different from other gialli of the time but still belonging to the category. --Cavarrone 22:27, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * To clarify, the Italian source calling it a giallo goes against the nature of how the average English reader would use it. If you need to call it that, I wouldn't use that source as the term giallo goes far before the film The Girl Who Knew Too Much in Italy, so I would try to find a source that is more consistent to how an English reader would. As for the elements, I Vampiri also has a black gloved mysterious person at the beginning of it, but I doubt you'll find any contemporary sources calling it as part of the giallo cycle. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:04, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Specifically by the way, Luther Smith and Curti's sources both discuss it being closer to a 1960s British thriller like the ones mentioned in the article, opposed to the Italian gialli of the period. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I see the point and as an Italian I already knew it, but sorry no, in this case the Corriere source (whose removal, by the way, would not bother me, but just because it is superfluous, not because it is unreliable) does not go against the nature of how the average English reader would use it, in this case it is perfectly consistent with what the other English sources say. Ruling out each and every Italian source which talk about gialli because of a general comment in a Curti's book is an exaggeration: most Italian critics know what they are talking about when it comes to gialli, and even when they use the term in a more broad sense (Hitchcock and so on), you can get it from the context. Otherwise, ironically, we should even rule out Curti's writings in his native language. And about Curti, he does not say the film is closer to a 1960s British thriller opposed to the gialli, it says it results being closer to Hammer thrillers than to "a variation on the theme of The Postman Always Rings Twice", in reference to a statement by De Martino. The Curti's inclusion of the film in the giallo genre is apparent. Significantly, he does not discuss another De Martino's film like Miami Golem in spite of its thrilling-mystery elements. In the end the point remains, three sources (over four) identify the film as a giallo, even if unusual or different, so there is really no reason to remove the film from the "Gialli films" category (which is the only thing I care here). Cavarrone  00:21, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Not at all about Curti, who actually makes note of how an Italian would use the term giallo, and is conscious to the terminology of it writing in English. If you read the source, you would know that. Also, he does bring up Miami Golem, he specifically goes through thrillers in the book and says how they do or do not relate to the genre. For example, he also goes into Dagger Eyes which is far closer to being something like Diva than any Arengto styled film. Everything you have told me suggests you have maybe taken the briefest glances at the book, and not actually read them. Again, the two sources state they are closer to British thrillers of the 1960s, and not to any giallo trend as an English reader would know. So no, your newspaper source doesn't really help any English reader, and two sources specifically say it's not like what one might think of gialli of the period. Per WP:STICKTOSOURCE, you aren't really getting it. For the record, I'm not saying that it's not an invalid source, it's that you are taking terms our of context of what any English-reader would understand. You might as well use it as a source to cite North by Northwest as a gialli. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:30, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * First, it's you who you are asking for blindly ruling out each and every Italian source about gialli, not me. If you don't get the irony about Curti, it's not my fault. Second, if you insist on saying that Curti claims the film is "closer to British thrillers of the 1960s, and not to any giallo trend", then I must conclude you are just consciounsly misleading the source, in spite of my literal quotation above. If this is your concept of WP:STICKTOSOURCE, I am genuinely concerned about your contributions to Wikipedia (especially if paired with the previous misread of the Howarth quotation), as you apparently cut and sew sources to make them say what you want them to say. But I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, and just invite to re-read the British thrillers reference there. Finally, I will just ignore the personal attacks and all the implicit insulting bs about you being a genious and me being a naive idiot (you are clearly angry right now, no idea why, but calm down, I'm not going to edit pages about Hitchcock's films to include them in the gialli category). Cavarrone 01:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not blindly ruling it out. I get you are saying that Curti is an Italian-based author, but he is aware of the different between how the term giallo or any variant is used in Italy and in the English language. He mentions it in the first chapter of his 2022 book. If you are genuinely concerned about my interpretation, I'm happy to provide you with more direct quotes, but I've edited for 16 years and have contributed to nearly 50 good articles. Please be careful with claims like how concerned you are with my edits, comment on the contributions, not the editor. I'm not saying you are going to edit Hitchcock articles, I'm just saying the same Italian newspapers would refer to Hitchcock as someone who creates a gialli. In fact, here is La Stampa referring to a Hitchcock film as a giallo here. I don't actually think you'll edit this, but this is why I don't think the source used is valid in a case for English-languge cinema. I apologize if I was confusing. Now to quote Curti directly, in the intro of his book he states the Italian dictionary would refer to a giallo figuratively refers to "crime and detective novels, TV series, stageplays, comics, and radio dramas". and that this is what the term has meant in Italy since roughly 1929. He goes on to state this would mean in Italy, a giallo would be everything from legal thrillers, Mario Bava films, Alfred Hitchcock films and Agatha Christie mysteries. I'd reccomend you read his Introductory chapter of his book before making further claims about what the book is about or what it isn't. In Curti's book, on page 377, Curti refers to the film as a "thriller" and says "Although it features a murderer dressed as a priest, [...] a pre-credit scene in 1970s giallo style plus a couple of nasty murders [..] the result is closer to Jimmy Sangster-scripted Hammer thillers such as Taste of Fear". I don't think I went to off script here, but Luther Smith also does not use the term giallo in his overview of the film, only making vague reference that the score is "more appropriate for a post-apolcalypitc film than a thriller". I have to confess, I was misreading you on Troy Howarth, i thought you were referring to Curti! :) I don't have access to that book at the moment as I once did, but I feel it can be interpreted that Howarth is saying it's not like the other 'gialli'' of the period does not necessarily make it mean it is one, and the two other sources I mentioned strictly refer to it as a thriller, and all three refer to it being more like 1960s thrillers. As I don't feel like we should take that Italian newspaper source as verbatim, I think we'll need more, cause currently my score looks like And I don't really regard the newspaper one as a valid on specifics. Again, I'm genuinely making every effort to stick to sources, but I will admit I do get frustrated when editors make claims like "i doubt your edits now", because it's not encouraging to the discussion. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Curti: thriller
 * Luther Smith: thriller
 * Howarth: unclear, but could go either way
 * The issue I have with your quote of Curti is that you cut and sew two different sentences to get one, i.e. you use too many "[..]" operating a synthesis. The first part of the quote ends with "the film exposes the villain's (rather obvious) identity after half an hour", period. The second sentence starts with "De Martino labeled it as a variation on the theme of The Postman Always Rings Twice", and then makes the Sangster/Hammer film comparison. This way the meaning is totally different, as actually in the first sentence he is analyzing the film's giallo elements, noting similarities with the giallo canon as well as the oddity of having the murderer revealed in the middle of the film, in the second one he is commenting the plot theme's influences, as he does with many other films across the book. Having plot-references to non-giallo foreign films and literature is not strange nor rare, eg. the same Curti acknolowges that Blood and Black Lace "borrow from Strangers on a Train and Dial M for Murder, with a little bit of Les Diaboliques", has plenty of gothic elements similar to some German "krimi" films of the time and even mentions a comedy like L'impiegato as a possible character's inspiration, but I would not say all this equals to meaning it is not a giallo (even if I should go to the Blood and Black Lace talk page and starting a massive discussion if I had to use the same method used here). You'll find this kind of cross-genre references, even written in the same style, in almost every film Curti analyzes in his book (as arguably one of the core points of the book is to enlight influences, similarities and models of the genre), I can provide tons of examples if necessary. Howarth, I can read it one thousand time, I think the sentence clearly speaks about an inclusion in the genre (similarly to the page I was just creating when you pinged me hours ago, Napoli Centrale, for which a source writes that the band was different in terms of style from all the other Italian bands who were successful at the time, which obviously implies they still are an Italian band). If I say "you are different from other editors", I am actually implying you are certainly an editor, otherwise I would had used a different wording. Luther Smith, I cannot really comment as I have no access so I trust your words, but I just note it is not rare having English-language sources (and even famous critics) referring to gialli just as thrillers or using the two words interchangeably, the same way some Italian sources do the opposite. So even ignoring the Corriere review, even over the English sources we have to agree we disagree. The very few additional English reviews I've just found (looking for "Formula for a Murder" review on Google and excluding blogspots, user reviews from vendor sites and wordpress web domains) all significantly refer to the film as a giallo, but even not ruling out their reliability (for which I should look more indepht) they are not the type of sources I'd like to use. I don't think we are left with too much to discuss here given the obscurity of the film and the very few English-language sources which analyze it, we are just bludgeoning at this point. Cavarrone 08:51, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Curti makes no mention of the film specifically being a giallo. Yes he mentions a gory murder and an intro sequence, but says generally that the film is closer Sangster-scripted films. As does Luther Smith in his overview. I think you are going a bit overboard with the comparison to Bava's film, as that's not what we are discussing here (and I wrote most of that article, so I don't know where you are even pulling that information from). Your comparison to a band is different as genre is subjective, where a band is from is not quite so much. The fact that you are reaching out for sources such as blogs and fan pages isn't really helping your case when I'd really just be happy if you can find one to three sources specifically calling it a giallo. You haven't, so the WP:ONUS is on you to find content here. Andrzejbanas (talk) 09:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * First point, I have already analyzed what Curti says in my replies above even providing literal citations, and your insisting on presenting a manifacturated sentence is frankly unacceptable and pure bludgeoning (those are two different sentences, you CANNOT forging sources to support your views, stop it and stick to what the source actually says, i.e. the film plot is closer to Sangsten's Hammer scripts than to The Postman Always Rings Twice, which is a piece of information which has very little to do with the "giallo" issue we are discussing here). I am appalled you keep on using these arguments. And again, Curti treats this film as every other giallo film in the book, including Blood and Black Lace: you write "I don't know where you are even pulling that information from", as I have written above I took it from Curti's book itself (pp. 79-80), and that's the point, Curti mentions dozens of crossgenre plot models, inspirations and similarities of giallo films, like in the case of Blood and Black Lace that "borrows from Strangers on a Train and Dial M for Murder, with a little bit of Les Diaboliques", "enhanced the Gothic mood that characterized the Wallace cycle" in film like "Der Rächer and Abbot in Der Schwarze Abt", and even has "a construction [that] can be compared to the documentari sexy of the period", but your reply shows you misses the point or prefer to not acknowledge it. Second, I really have no idea what you have figured out but there you've (spectacularly) misunderstood again, the musical group example was the last (desperate) attempt to make you understand the meaning of phrases like "different from the other...", but once again you don't seem to get it. Assuming good faith, you probably have some language barrier that prevents you from understanding a sentence like this, probably in your native language you don't have this kind of sentence construction, but again it's frustating you always refuse to get the point. Third, I specified that I "excluded" from my search of English-language reviews blogspots and fan sites, and I even specified I do not want to use nor add those sources to the page, so your attack does not make it sense. Those sources were not even the point of my sentence, but again you missed the point. Fourth, as already said Curti, Howarth and Corriere all identify the film as a giallo, so this point is really moot. Obviously, if there really was a sentence saying that the film is "closer to British thrillers of the 1960s, and not to any giallo trend" (which was your original point in denying the genre association) you had a point, but this sentence does not exist. Cavarrone  16:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Regardless of my own personal interpretation, neither Curti or Luther Smith refer to the film as a giallo. And yes, it would make sense that early in a cycle Curti would cite the origins of the development of a genre. I've already stated why Corriere shouldn't be used due to the difference between how English and Italian-language sources would use the term giallo. If you must use Howarth, find a quote and source where he calls it a giallo and use that. If i misquoted a source, let's correct it, i'm getting a bit of tired of nit-picking and arguing when I'm trying to state you require a more specific source than the Italian newspaper at the moment. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * As usual you are cherrypicking minor parts of my reply while ignoring 99% of it. Also you should stop making "own personal interpretations", stick on sources, and you'll find the word "giallo" you're looking for. Cavarrone  21:42, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Not sure what I missed but the WP:ONUS is on you to find sources to include material you feel needs to be added. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Sure, and we're round in circles. Howart and Corriere directly refer to it as a giallo, Curti analyzes it in a chapter titled The Changing Face of the Giallo in the 1980s, in a book titled Italian Giallo in Film and Television, and as per common sense it should up to you to explain, based on Curti's text, how he does not consider it a giallo (which has so far been shown to be impossible without distorting the source). About Luther Smith, you made some very bold claims such as "Luther Smith and Curti's sources both discuss it being closer to a 1960s British thriller opposed to the Italian gialli of the period" and "Luther Smith and Curti's sources both discuss it being closer to a 1960s British thriller like the ones mentioned in the article, opposed to the Italian gialli of the period". Given that Curti as has been proven never made this comparison, we have three sources which identify it as a giallo minus Luther Smith, who apparently said something like "It's closer to British thrillers than to gialli". As long in Howart and Curti precedents you misread the sources, could you please clear away doubt and provide here the quotation in which he does this direct comparison? And sorry for being doubtful, but the whole discussion is so full of sources distortions, omissions and cut and sews that it would be worthy of an ANI thread. Cavarrone  23:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * A chapter title, or a title of a book does would not be Curti saying one film is or isn't part of a genre per WP:STICKTOSOURCE. Even Luther Smiths' introductory chapter of his book says it's about going over giallo films but also says he includes films (without specifically mentioning which ones) that bend the rules. I've re-checked the Curti book and don't think i'm going out of line. Perhaps I'm going a bit out of line as Curti states on page 377 ""De Martino's next thriller was released domestically as 7, Hyden Park - La casa maledetta (1985), as if it were an out and out horror film in the vein of The Evil Dead, distributed in Italy as La casa. Although if features a murderer dressed as a priest (and who is also a priest killer), a pre-credit scene in 1970s giallo style plus a couple of nasty murders, the film exposes the villain's (rather obvious) identity after half an hour. De Martino labeled it as "a variation on the theme of The Postman Always Rings Twice" but the result owes more to the Jimmy Sangster-scripted Hammer thrillers such as Taste of Fear (1961, Seth Holt), dealing with a scheming husband concocting a bizarre plan to dispatch his wife (who has left crippled as a child after trying to escape a rapist dressed as a priest) and inherit her wealth." Following this, Curti just goes into detail about the two actresses." So there, he specifically calls the film a "thriller". Perhaps it's not absolutely direct, but I think anyone reading the above would not think there is anything directly misleading here with what I put in the article, If i have, please clarify. As for Luther-Smith's he has the credits, the film's plot, and goes into commentary declaring "The Fulvia production stamp, the presence of David Warbeck, the Big Apple locations and Frencesco De Masi's self referential New York Ripper score all point to Lucio Fulci as the culprit, but this well-paced psycho tale is the work of Alberto De Martino, the Man behind Blood Link. The main plot twist is a genuine surprise - because it has no logical basis - and from then on the film becomes an enjoyably over-the-top exercise in grand guignol. It's a shame that De Masi's cheap-sounding synth score which would be more appropriate roaming the aural wasteland of post-Apocalypse atrocity rather than a thriller - is allowed to periodically intrude because the for mentioned snatches of his memorable Ripper theme remind the viewer that he is capable of much better. Although Formula of Murder was conceived from a tried and tested... er, formula (Hammer's Taste of Fear wheels into mind), Luigi Russo's ineffectual Dangerous Women demonstrates how similar themed material can be ruined by a static attitude. De Martino is reportedly unhappy with Formula for a Murder because he was constrained by an eighteen day shooting schedule but the resulting movie is certainly nothing to be ashamed about (unlike his next collaboration with Warbeck, the dreadful Miami Golem)." My main note is he doesn't describe it as a giallo, but I wouldn't lump it into directly being a thriller either (as that's a bit cloy, but Curti's reference is direct). The items in bold are an emphasis within the book itself. "

"Overviewing De Martino's later career, on page 88 of his 1960s Italian gothic book, Curti also states "[De Martino]'s last films in the 1980s belonged to the thriller and fantasy genre as well: Extrasensorial, a.k.a. Blood Link (1982) starring Michael Moriarty in a dual role as surgically separated Siamese twins, one of whom is a serial killer: the weird Florida-based sci-fi Mimai Golem (1985); and Formula for a Murder (7 Hyden Park: la casa maledetta, 1985), the latter two starring David Warbeck." Now I'm happy to play ball, here is a quote the magazine HorrorHound'' (the JulyAugust 2008 issue), in Aaron Crowell and Kenny Nelson's article "Defining Giallo", they states "One theme that did seem to govern the volution of the Giallo genre was the ever rising excess of gore and sleaze found in films, a progression which led to the birth of the slasher subgenre in the US in the late '70s." [take a gap here where they discuss other films that aren't the film in question] "In the early '80s directors like Mario Bava's son Lamberto Bava (A Blade in the Dark), Ruggero Deodato (Phantom of Death), and Alberto De Martino (Formula for a Murder) dabbled in [giallo] if only briefly keeping it alive." (the genre being giallo here)." So i've gone through a few, there are a few leaning more towards a thriller and only that last one sort of covering it as a giallo. If this absolutely has to say giallo, feel free to tag use that last source, but I've done your work for you and dug out the sources. Before I add things, I'll be happy to discuss further with you. Andrzejbanas (talk) 06:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, I am fine with the last source (googling the text I can't find anything, but I trust the direct quotation). About Luther Smith quotation above, I hope you acknowlege it, there is literally nothing of the claimed "discuss it being closer to a 1960s British thriller opposed to the Italian gialli of the period", actually there is no such discussion at all. "Discuss it being closer to a 1960s British thriller opposed to the Italian gialli of the period" has a very specific meaning, which is way different from "he doesn't describe it as a giallo, but I wouldn't lump it into directly being a thriller either". Apart from the question of giallo yes or no, what really bothers me in this discussion is the constant misuse of sources, especially in the case of offline sources, who the other editor(s) could not immediately check. You cannot link WP:STICKTOSOURCE when you costantly make your "own personal interpretations" on what an author says. And that is why I edited the page in the first place, when I noted from the edit summary you had turned the meaning of "does not enter into the excessive spirit of the other gialli of the period" to "does not enter into the excessive spirit of the gialli of the period", removing the key word other and turning the sense of the sentence into a totally different (and opposite) one. So let's close this painful discussion and let's return to use our time in a more fruitful way but consider it as a warning. You know perfectly well that on Wikipedia there is nothing worst than distorting a source to fit a narrative, and here it happened at least three times. Cavarrone 08:50, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I must have been confusing them when I was going through a few sources and juggling sources. It was an honest mistake, and us discussing that has brought it forward. So if it's good, I can swap your newspaper source (re-using it for the review (and thank you for that by the way!) and will add it as a genre in the lead. Sound okay? Andrzejbanas (talk) 09:44, 14 March 2023 (UTC)