Talk:Zoolander/Archive 1

Cameos
Could you put the cameos of the famous people in chronological order of when they appear?- B-101 15:52, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yes, you could. DickK 8 July 2005 00:53 (UTC)

Alternate Versions?
I saw this movie again recently but I had seen it about 5 years ago, and I think I remember that the villain dude fired a gun at Zoolander and he used "Magnum" to stop the bullet. This time however it was a "throwing star". Am I mistaken about the bullet or was there an alternate version? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.179.221 (talk) 16:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Winona Ryder?
Could someone confirm whether or not Winona Ryder had an uncredited cameo in the movie?

~ Yes, she was uncredited in the movie, so is Vince Vaughn as Derek's brother. I wonder why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.25.162.145 (talk) 14:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Weird hyperlink
Noticed a weird hyperlink in this page. The line "below-average intelligence" linked to the page of US President George W. Bush. However the link is now gone, and not found in any revision of the Zoolander page. This must have something to do with the Wikipedia software I think. Haha i think someones just having a joke.

Maybe someone with a more comprehensive grip of the plot could do a re-write? This synopsis kind of jumps around, and the grammar is not so good. Artwu 07:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Magnum
The pose which has gained much more of a cult following is Blue Steel, maybe it would be better to alter this section a little with that in mind

Yeah I did that, and sort of rewrote that portion of the article as it contained some inaccuracies.

Appalachian State University
A current construction project on the campus has been grafiti-labled "the Derek Zoolander Center for Kids who can't read good." It is quite noticable and has not been painted over. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.246.192.6 (talk • contribs).


 * Funny, but not really notable enough to be mentioned in the article. --Conti|&#9993; 18:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Interesting Fact
From the department of obsessive-compulsive movie minutae...

Has anyone else noticed the fact that the picture of 'China' during the hypnosis scene where child labor is being discussed includes Mongolia? Hidden political agenda, or careless use of an old ROC map of China?... 129.170.202.3


 * Not sure where in the movie the scene occurs, but was it in a Chinese or Malaysian facility? Maybe its foreshadowing Zoolander 2 ;) Ghen55 (talk) 00:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Zoolander is a spoof of The Manchurian Candidate
How an article could not mention the obvious parallels between the plot of the Manchurian Candidate and Zoolander is beyond me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.249.152.15 (talk) 16:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

thats because no one has seen or even heard of tha movie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.69.162 (talk) 17:46, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Plagiarism?
Author Bret Easton Ellis has claimed that the plot of Zoolander was stolen from his novel Glamorama''. Ellis has ironically stated both that he attempted to take legal action against the producers of Zoolander for plagarizing his story and that he reached an out-of-court settlement with the producers. He refuses to discuss the subject due to the conditions of this fictitious out of court settlement '' Without going into the attached documentation, this item is confusing. The overall tone is a claim of plagerism yet the closing sentence refers to a fictitious out-of-court settlement. Was there plagiarism or not? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Redknight (talk • contribs) 19:31, 23 December 2006 (UTC).

Someone removed the "ironically" and changed "fictious" to "alleged", which changes the meaning and make the information false. Going to the "source" (a blog?), it looks that there have been no intent to sue, nor any settlements "'No, really I didn't.' Another pause. 'But I wanted to. Calls were made, but in the end there wasn't a whole lot I could do.'" It just looks that Ellis was pissed off, but couldn't do anything (rightfully so, IMHO, as saying that Zoolander plagiarise Glamorama is a bit over-the-top) 82.230.65.68 01:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

This entry has no citation, and is thus unjustified and irrelevent. Without knowing where it came from it's meaningless, for all the reader knows it's a case of sour grapes. I keep removing it but someone keeps putting it back, if you can't cite a reference for it then leave it off, it has no place being in an encyclopedia, save it for Entertainment Tonight. 65.120.75.6 15:21, 27 September 2007 (UTC)Tim

Dr. Evil
Dr. Evil first appeared in International Man of Mystery, which was released four years before Zoolander. I have removed the claim that he was invented "long after" Mugatu because this just looks wrong, and makes us look amateur, unless it can be independently verified. Rje 16:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, that was a mistake of mine. I thought the film came out before Austin Powers but I later discovered it actually out long afterwards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.143.100 (talk) 19:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Parody of Trading Places
Is this a parody or just a coincidence- during the final Derilicte fashion show, before zoolander goes on you briefly see someone without legs wheeling themselves on a platform down the runway (in Trading Places Billy Ray Valentine does the same thing) Xcfrommars 23:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Good question, but lepers and other afflicted people do indeed wheel themselves around. So, I would guess it represented a "derelict" poor person. Billy Ray Valentine was also trying to act as a poor leper person so I don't see a strong parody connection. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.179.221 (talk) 16:09, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Thierry Mugler and Poor Editing
I added the following twice to the section on Mugatu:

Mugatu is also a parodic reference to Thierry Mugler, an influential Parisian designer from the eighties and nineties, known for outlandish outfits featuring striking silhouettes and unusual materials such as PVC and metal. Mugatu, Katinka and the rest of his posse all wear clothing that clearly alludes to Mugler's aesthetic.

Carl.bunderson undid the edit twice, apparently without noticing that none of the other parodies or allusions are referenced. Nor should they be, parody is meant to be self-evident. I will not be getting into a pointless edit-war with an overzealous and unskilled editor. If anyone cares enough they can add it back in if he reverts it again. You can also see a lengthier discussion of my rationale on his talk page User_talk:Carl.bunderson

--Jsterron (talk) 01:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry if it seemed like I was attacking your contribution while turning a blind eye to the others. It's not that at all; rather, I feel it is too big of a task to fix all the OR problems on here, so I just try to stem the tide. I still think that unreferenced parody, while I believe you that it is obvious, is unreferenced and as such should not be in here. Why don't we just delete the entire section, seeing as how it is all OR? OR is not justifiable--people can make claims that no one can counter or ask for references on. Carl.bunderson (talk) 01:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No need to apologize as I did not feel attacked. However, you are still missing the point: parody and allusion don't need to be referenced through a secondary source -- the primary source material is the reference. Which is why all the mentions of parody in the article (and most articles on literature and film) simply have a link pointing to the work, person, situation, etc. being alluded to or parodied. This is not just common practice in wikipedia; it is standard across the board in peer-reviewed scholarly publications in literary criticism and media studies. You don't need to take my word on it as a scholar in both fields; hopefully, the argument stands on its own.


 * Deleting the entire section will not accomplish anything, save removing pertinent and valid information about the movie's source material.--Jsterron (talk) 01:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * So how do you avoid the OR aspect of this? Is parody considered too obvious to be argued about? It just seems that one could say X film is an homage to Y film, because they have similarities, and use the argument of "just look at them, it's obvious", to defend the inclusion of such content.For example, look above. A user questioned if it has a scene parodying Trading Places; this would suggest that parody isn't always obvious. It seems like parody must be intended by the film's director (or whomever), so how is it verifiable unless intention has been stated somewhere by that person? Carl.bunderson (talk) 02:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)