Talk:The Getaway (1972 film)

'hindsight'
User:Slightlymad, why would a contemporaneous review be referred to as 'in hindsight'? It makes no sense. Dlabtot (talk) 04:45, 6 October 2017 (UTC) btw, a minor edit, according to WP:MINOR, "is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute".... a revert of another editor is, in itself, a dispute. In the future, please refrain from labelling reverts as minor edits. Dlabtot (talk) 05:05, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * On her critique of MacGraw's performance, Pauline Kael had the impression that Candace Bergen was the worse actress she had ever seen, until she saw The Getaway and made her feel sorry she called Bergen the worse actress, thus "in hindsight". If you're still uncomfortable with this wording, you may paraphrase it with your own - here's a direct quote from Kael : "Last time I saw Bergen, I thought she was the worse actress, than MacGraw, now I think I slandered Bergen."


 * Finally, I may be at fault for marking the revision as minor, but you are certainly wrong about posting a new discussion at the top of the talk page. I thought new discussions are posted below it? SLIGHTLY  mad   06:20, 6 October 2017 (UTC)


 * When I originally posted this using the 'new section' link, it was included in the closed discussion below. . Not sure why. So I moved it here. Based on what you've said, 'hindsight' seems good to me. Cheers. Dlabtot (talk) 16:06, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Getaway211.JPG
Image:Getaway211.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 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 12:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

 * Roger Ebert review of The Getaway
 * Time magazine's review
 * The New York Times review
 * here are some reviews for the film.--J.D. (talk) 16:49, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Plot, cast credits and Beyon's brother
Cully (played by Roy Jenson) is clearly the head goon not the brother of Claude 'Jack' Benyon (played by Ben Johnson). When McCoy meets Jack Benyon on the boat after his release Jack Benyon says "any business with me you handle it with him he's m' brother", gesturing to a sinister looking man with heavy features. We get a clear shot of this man who is mustachioed, wears glasses and obviously is Benyon's brother. (See here at 10.29). This character calls the shots; he even kicks Cully exclaiming "Come on!" when Cully doesn't jump to it.( See here at 7.35). Shortly therefter (9.54) he tells Cully "You just do what I tell you" in a very menacing way. The actor playing Beyon's brother seems to be totally uncredited even though he has a more substantial role than Jensen; this is what may have caused the confusion to arise. Overagainst (talk) 13:22, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Genre
I've changed the genre to thriller because, in accordance with WP:FILMLEDE, several reviews for the movie and its remake have called it such: "A wildly uneven remake of the 1972 Steve McQueen-Ali MacGraw thriller" - Chicago Tribune; "An efficient if somewhat echoing remake of Sam Peckinpah's 1972 thriller" - Time Out; "An exact remake of the 1972 Sam Peckinpah thriller" - Empire; "An effective thriller" - Blu-ray.com; "An above-average thriller" - Reelfilm.com; "A gripping thriller" - Dennis Schwartz. Only two sources say that it's a crime film (Ain't It Cool News and British Film Institute) and an action film (The New York Times and The New Yorker) While others have called it an action thriller (Variety), a "caper thriller" (TV Guide), and a crime thriller (Cinema Crazed), these are considered subgenres of a thriller film, so it makes more sense to call it simply a thriller. Besides, classifying the movie under this genre is less disorienting to readers. Should anyone disagree, I will refer them to this discussion.  You've gone incognito  (talk &sdot; contribs) 10:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)