Talk:Frida (2002 film)

Untitled
There is some content there, so perhaps VFD if you want, but not speedy deletion. Dori | Talk 05:19, Mar 7, 2004 (UTC)

Why was this undeleted without due process? RickK 05:22, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'd say its deletion was without due process. It's a crappy article, but it can be cleaned up, and there is some info there. If it had gone throgh VFD, and I had undeleted it without voting, I think it would have been without due process. Dori | Talk 05:26, Mar 7, 2004 (UTC)

I haven't seen the movie, but Frida was hit by the bus when she was 17 or 18. That's not childhood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.22.41.151 (talk) 16:24, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

how crap is this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.1.76.239 (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Frida lifes is an example of a human existence.She fuffers to earn what she has.her art is unique is the reality of the world.Her paintings are like an open book where we could transmit our person to feel  her emotions thru her paintins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.47.129.78 (talk) 03:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to add a page about Frida the 80's rock group. What would you guys suggest a fitting title for this page to allow pointers from a disambiguation page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rujholla (talk • contribs) 17:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Salma Hayek - painter?
Who can verify this? "Some of the paintings attributed to Kahlo in the film were actually painted by Salma Hayek." i have seen the movie and read numerous books about Frida and all the paintings in the movie are in these books. Can someone just verify exactly which paintings were painted by Salma Hayek? Weili 16:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It was on an October 2002 episode of The Oprah Winfrey Show. Salma Hayek told Winfrey she painted a portrait featured in the film and she brought it to the Chicago set.  The painting was the first self-portrait Frida Kahlo paints in the movie.  Need to find source to cite. Light Bulb 10:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite!!
This is a terribly written article and it definitly needs a rewrite. I will try my best but please feel free to help me out!Weili 16:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup Tag Removal
I have made several updates to the article that I believe merit the removal of the cleanup tag placed on it. I will continue making improvements and if by Monday no one objects I will take the liberty of removing the tags myself. Light Bulb 05:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Frida ashlejudd.jpg
Image:Frida ashlejudd.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Frida. 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: When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071218195216/http://www.writingstudio.co.za/page80.html to http://www.writingstudio.co.za/page80.html

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:45, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Frida. 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: When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090113181511/http://thebookla.com/s_2000_hayek.html to http://thebookla.com/s_2000_hayek.html

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:29, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Strangely biased wording
In the plot summary, it currently states: "When Rivera proposes to Kahlo, she tells him she expects from him loyalty if not fidelity. ... Throughout the marriage, Rivera cheats on her with a wide array of women, while the bisexual Kahlo takes on male and female lovers, including in one case having an affair with the same woman as Rivera." If she did not expect "fidelity", why is his behavior "cheating", especially when hers is "takes on lovers"? Either it's massively biased as written, or there are crucial subtleties which are being glossed over. 130.101.99.110 (talk) 21:53, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

== The Films Farida, Roma and The Platform as an Illustration of the Way Filmmakers Use Movies to Educate the Public About Society Issues Such as Subjective Violence and Discourse as A Tool to Undermine Power Through Žižek' And Michael Foucault' Theories Introduction == Filmmakers play a crucial role in entertaining people and portraying diverse messages concerning society. They use their expertise to entice the public towards dynamics o lie, especially in the political realm. Contemporary society has seen a disparity between leaders and the public based on the power leaders use to lure public participation. Violence has also been a norm in society, and it varies from subjective to objective. The films Farida, Roma, and the Platform depict the way artists use the entertainment industry to educate the public on the dynamics of life. Consequently, while Farida's, Roma, and The Platform's filmmakers intended to entertain their audience, they have a similarity in depicting the subjective and objective violence people experience in society though they differ in representing discourse as a tool that undermines power. Theory Definition The Theory of Violence According to Zizek Zizek analyses different accounts of violence, including subjective and objective, where he provides readers with daily individual activities that facilitate the act. According to the theorist, people pay more attention to the obvious subjective signals of violence (Žižek 1). Such violent actions include civil unrest, crime, terror, and international conflict, which he claims individuals should deviate from according to the theorist. He defines subjective violence as one performed by a clearly identifiable agent that people should disentangle themselves from (Žižek 1). Contrarily, individuals should understand the contours of the background that facilitates violent outbursts. Stepping back and comprehending the background contours is a necessary tool to identify the violence that prevents people from fighting it to promote tolerance (Žižek 1). Subjective violence appears in two forms, according to Zizek through firstly the symbolic one (Žižek 2). Accordingly, the violence is usually embodied in language, and its structure is work in the obvious. The violence involves incitement cases and social domination that is depicted through habitual speeches. Secondly, subjective violence appears in the form of a system through the catastrophic results of the smooth functioning of an economy and political realms (Žižek 2; Gutierrez 6). Contrary to the subjective violence, the objective one is invisible as it sustains zero-level canons against which people identify violence as subjective (Žižek 2). Thus, the author presents readers with well-defined forms of violence that people experience daily. Michael Foucault analyzes power and discourses that assist in understanding social complexities about power. The central concept about the theorist is the notion of discipline as a mechanism o power that regulates people's behaviors in a society (Hamed et al. 2). Consequently, leaders control the organization of space people's activities and time through power in the discipline. The ideology leads to internalized discipline where people behave as if the individuals in power are continually watching (Hamed et al. 2). Accordingly, the individuals conclude that discourse and language are the central elements that constitute the social processes of contemporary society. Foucault concluded that discourse undermines the power and makes resistance possible (Hamed et al. 2). Consequently, discourse is not only a power instrument but also a factor that facilitates resistance among the ruled. Hence, people can use discipline as a resistance technique in efforts to contest against power. Violence evident in the three films The three films perfectly represent both subjective and objective violence, as described by Zizek in his theoretical definition. For example, the Platform illustrates subjective violence through people's struggle or food or instance when Trimagasi eats violently to save himself a sufficient amount before the next mealtime (Netflix 0:40-0:43). One can clearly identify the struggle for food before the Platform moves to the next level. Additionally, Trimagasi tells Goreng that since the individuals at the zero level cannot access the food, they will decrease (Netflix 0:52). Suddenly, a dead body falls, demonstrating subjective violence through the cruelty and crimes of the powerful individual above them (Netflix 0:56- 1:02). Similarly, Roma's movie illustrates objective violence towards Cleo, where the family does not offer her time to rest and blames her when something goes wrong (Barco). The film indicates the invisible standards o violence that people hardly notice (Žižek 2). Frida also depicts subjective violence through the constant conflict between Frida and her husband at home and in the bar (Miramax 0:59-1:00). The couple regularly disagrees since both have multiple partners influencing criminal acts through fights. As such, the three films represent the subjective and objective violence described by Zizek correctly. Power Differences in The Platform, Farida and Roma Movies While The Platform depicts power manifestation by the leaders or people in power, Roma and Farida depict submission and lack of discourse through obedience to the laid expectation from the powerful parties. The Platform illustrates Foucault's philosophy concerning discipline, discourse, power and resistance comprehensively. According to the theorist, discourse undermines the authority and creates room for resistance. Similarly, The Platform demonstrates the way communication can overcome power and create space or change among the oppressed. Goreng frequently finds ways he can transition the system, although he is powerless, and it makes him angry (Netflix 1:04). After struggling or several months while moving from one level to another, he finally finds a person to communicate the same objective with concerning change. He meets Imohuiri, who tells him that if people ate the only food they needed, the meal would reach the lowest level (Netflix 1:06-1: 19). He also finds Baharat, who helps him to move down to level zero to change the way the system worked (Netflix 1:06-1: 19). Goreng manages to transition The Platform's design, where people at the lowest level can access food. Even though he does not possess power, he changes the system through discourse that makes resistance possible. Contrarily, Farida, and Roma illustrate submission to power through discipline, where both Farida and Cleo accept their miserable lives by obeying their masters. In Roma, Cleo diligently performs her duties or the master, which depriver her happiness (Barco). For example, she only has three seconds to sit and watch the television and sits on the floor without question. She does not engage in any conversation with her employer concerning her situation, which renders her disciplined (Barco). Similarly, Frida also illustrates similar behavior towards the end of the film, where she cannot even move from her bed and is consumed by the fire. Accordingly, the Platform depicts the way discourse can undermine power effectively while the other two do not engage in conversation but instead submit to authority. Conclusion Farida, Roma, and The Platform's movies have a similarity in depicting the subjective and objective violence people experience in society though they differ in describing discourse as a tool that undermines power. The three films demonstrate the subjective violence people participate in the struggle for peace, and food, respectively. However, they contrast in depicting discourse as a tool that undermines power, according to Foucault. While The Platform agrees with the theories, Farida and Roma movies contend through submission to the ruling individuals. Thus, the films are a profound indicator that movies are essential not only in entertainment but also in education. As such, people should pay attention to their more profound meaning and act accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryikigu (talk • contribs) 12:28, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 31 January 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Silikonz 💬  01:31, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

– The film wasn't successful enough to be the primary target. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Frida → Frida (film)
 * Frida (disambiguation) → Frida
 * Support per nom, particularly given that the name of the film is intended to invoke the name of the more famous painter. BD2412  T 01:55, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom In ictu oculi (talk) 09:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Frida isn't particularly convincing as only 239 out of 21.6k views (~2%) went to the hatnote, but the overall views of topics there and the overall views of given name uses indicate that multiple topics that can be mononymously known as 'Frida' are more popular. It seems reasonable to assume that readers can easily distinguish the film from the name and there's likely no need to short-circuit navigation like this. --Joy (talk) 12:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Weak nomination. "The film wasn't successful enough". It made six Oscar nominations, received generally good reviews, and was not a boxoffice failure. What would be succesful enough? I can be convinced this isn't PTOPIC, but I am not convinced by the nomination, since it does not cite anything ... --Quiz shows 12:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree the nomination line is a bit of a flamebait. If we look past that, it seems to be an appeal against WP:Recentism. That seems legit - the film's long-term significance as its claim to WP:PTOPIC status should be assessed now that we're past the time it had been novel and intensely popular. --Joy (talk) 13:04, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination, BD2412 and In ictu oculi. There are 19 entries listed upon the Frida (disambiguation) page, with no indication that the 2002 film continues to manifest a lasting historical impact to the extent of overshadowing the combined notability of the remaining 18 entries. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 22:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. No primary topic here. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:43, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support as I do not think the film is the primary topic, but I agree with Joy that the nomination was poorly phrased and did not present a valid argument. I am still supporting though as I agree with Necrothesp in that this is not the primary topic. Aoba47 (talk) 18:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

post-move
Cf. Talk:Frida. --Joy (talk) 13:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)