Talk:David O. Russell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to actors and filmmakers on Wikipedia.
Maintenance An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.

Contents

[edit] Expand

I'm trying to flesh out this article. What I've added so far amounts to a couple lists. Thinking of doing a short film by film examination of his works. What do you think? Nscheffey 00:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The article is fine, aside from the fact that you've not elaborated on what a douchebag this guy is. --142.167.182.57 23:52, 19 March 2007
Hey, I know how you feel about David O. Russell. That's why I just editted the page to have quotes/links to examples of what a d-bag that guy is. So please, don't vandalize the page. Practically anyone with a sense on right knows what a jerk he is. Who the heck pisses off Lily Tomlin and George Clooney to the point of alienating him? But if you do find any more articles or examples of his insane behavior, please feel free to share. If you're not clear on how to add them to the article, just post them in the talk page and I'll help out. SpyMagician 00:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
As much as anyone thinks Russell is a douchebag, you've got to make sure the information in the article is presented in a neutral manner. The controversy section should definitely be in here, but be conscious that the entire article doesn't become one big attack on the guy. Pele Merengue 20:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Nolan Incident

I've added it, as well as restored to the page to its original format. I'm going to request that this article be locked up for a while. Lastanzabianca 12:07 AM, 20 March 2007 (CST)

Thanks for the addition! But I disagree about locking the page up. Nobody has abused or vandalized the page and people have simply added to the content and expanded on the facts that exist. Which is pretty impressive considering the YouTube videos are gone. Unless someone starts posting 1337 CODE, then I think that a lockup is excessive. SpyMagician 05:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

This dude is psycho.



[edit] The Tomlin Incident

Based on my understanding of the Tomlin incident, it is wrong and unfair to Russell to portray him as the lone aggressor in the incident. Surely it is understood that his conduct was unacceptable to most, but Tomlin did little to avert or calm the situation. I am not sure how to, but I would dispute the neutrality of the "Tomlin v. Russell" portion of the entry.

Uh, I hardly think it's "non-neutral" to assume that this director, who is known for being a gigantic, temper-tantrum-throwing ass, was the instigator here. It's quite likely she was frustrated with his behavior. This is a guy who put Christopher Nolan in a headlock because he wanted his star back and got into a fistfight with George Clooney (who's well-known for being quite calm and composed on set). While I'll agree she didn't diffuse the situation, I certainly don't think it's wrong to assume that he was the source of the friction. Magicflyinlemur 22:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
The thing is, though, you've formed your opinions on all of those incidents from secondary sources. By assuming blame on either party, you're forfeiting neutrality. Pele Merengue 02:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Controversy

It seems that this article needs to be fleshed out more, with attention paid to things other than his confrontations with other celebrities. If nothing else, his filmography (or a "career" section) needs to come before the "Controversy," section. Remember, he is a person, then a filmmaker, then a person with a few controversial incidents under his belt. While it is important that these things be included, only focusing on these incidents could make one interpret this page as not NPOV. 70.116.139.13 05:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spanking the Monkey

Is it true that this early (1994) Russell film was autobiographical? If so, it would explain his personality and his treatment of women. Whatever the case, moviegoers are free to express their support or opposition of Russell's directorial style and his movies at the box office (or video store). As a moviegoer I tend to judge a movie on its artistic merit, but, this time, my disdain for workplace bullies may make me boycott Russell's movies.

71.132.228.252 08:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)The Last Gentleman

[edit] Article Composition

It seems to me that an excessive amount of space in the article is dedicated to various controversies concerning Russell. I think the article would have a more encyclopedic finish if these bits were either trimmed substantially or given appropriate context through his life and career. --Aioth 12:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. As the article looks right now, it's definitely "wikipedia at its worst". Cd52x 19:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. Everything stated in this article is backed up with facts and citations. If someone wants to contribute more positive things to the article, they're more than welcome to. No one here is trying to smear this director. We're only presenting the facts which we have been given. If someone would like to post more unbiased accounts on his contributions to film, they should immediately do so. Until then, the article should remain as it is. Lastanzabianca 1:40, 7 May 2007 (CST)
Citations doesn't make something encyclopedic, though. Wikipedia at its worst. Cd52x 09:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
And even if everything stated in the article is backed up with citations, the only information included seems to be information regarding Russell's negative behavior. I've read much on the Three Kings debaucle and Waxman's book paints much more of a two-sided argument in which Clooney is also acting quite childish. I'd argue that someone here is trying to smear this director.Pele Merengue 17:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I understand Wikipedia's striving for neutrality, but the fact remains that more of his behavior and history is negative than positive. And the general reaction in industry circles is not anyone crying out towards this guy being "smeared" but more of "Thank goodness someone's being honest about his behavior..." Very few people have defended him, and even Lily Tomlin's reaction in Waxman's article seems to be more of an actress in an upcoming movie downplaying an incident to protect the project more than speaking truth. Also, note that with other "leaked" tapes such as David Hasselhoff's drunken video and Alec Baldwin chewing out his daughter, they both spoke out immediately and had others provide context to what happened. David O'Rusell. I know it's not Wiki style to comment on what has not been said, but very few people truly disagree with the painting of him as an abusive lunatic. To me, that truly speaks volumes. It should also be noted that these videos are "new" as far as Internet awareness goes, but in industry circles copies have been quitely passed a long since the incident happened on the set. I'd say that the best way to balance this story is to add anything new and not related to the old controversy if that ever happens. --SpyMagician 00:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Add James Caan

Start searching for the confirmation, because production of his latest film just got put on hold because of a blow up between him and James Caan on the set of Nailed (film). RoyBatty42 (talk) 17:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)