Talk:The Gospel According to St. Matthew (film)

Untitled
Actually, as discussed in the essay available on the Region 2 DVD, Pasolini was rather annoyed at the addition of the 'St.' to the translated title. The translator, IIRC, was a respected Biblical scholar and also, rather inconveniently, a Christian.

A flat-footed translation of the title would be "The gospel according to Matthew". This omission of the word "Saint" from the title has been characterized as "daring". Should this page be moved, or just note this in the article? Ellsworth 00:00, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * OK, forget that. I've just seen the Region 1 DVD. The English main title (not the subtitle but the actual screen credit) includes the "St.", so presumably that's what Pasolini intended the film be known as in English. Ellsworth 14:58, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

See Gospel129.97.58.107 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Whether Pasolini had a preference about the English title I don't know. But I don't think there was anything "daring" about excluding it from the Italian title.  I think that in Italian the book is simply conventionally referred to without "St" (see https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vangelo_secondo_Matteo ).  The "St" isn't there in the Latin Vulgate either ( https://www.vatican.va/archive/bible/nova_vulgata/documents/nova-vulgata_nt_evang-matthaeum_lt.html ).  It's an Anglophone convention to include it.

) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.233.192.41 (talk) 20:32, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Gospel According to St. Matthew.jpg
Image:The Gospel According to St. Matthew.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 04:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Use of non-professional actors
He used non-professional actors in this film, correct? If so, this should be mentioned in the article. Badagnani 06:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Gospel According to St. Matthew (film). 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://archive.is/20040822074947/http://uashome.alaska.edu/~jndfg20/website/stmatthew.htm to http://uashome.alaska.edu/~jndfg20/website/stmatthew.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120422064928/http://old.usccb.org/movies/vaticanfilms.shtml to http://old.usccb.org/movies/vaticanfilms.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:50, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Directly from where?
" The dialogue is taken directly from the Gospel of Matthew". There are many different translations of the Gospels. Which one of them is it taken directly from? -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.255.189.104 (talk) 13:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * An Italian-language translation. AnonMoos (talk) 18:31, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * My point was that there are multiple Italian-language translations and it's weird not to specify which one he was quoting from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:AA1:1627:343D:499A:CA17:6A7E:AA0D (talk) 17:25, 9 October 2022 (UTC)