Talk:She's Gotta Have It
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Plot
The last two paragraphs of the plot summary contain some pretty wild interpretations of the events. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pdlla (talk • contribs) 17:18, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Current Availability
Since the DVD was released in North America today, this section should be removed or altered to match that. RMThompson (talk) 20:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Laserdisc
The term "ill-fated laserdisc format" is a weasel phrase. The LD format was around for 22 years as well as pioneered letterboxing, commentary tracks, director's cuts, and pristine transfers of film elements. It wasn't betamax.
Background
I've shifted the focus slightly, particularly regarding the word depictions. Depictions of African-Americans had already shifted in films such as
Fair use rationale for Image:She's Gotta Have It (movie).jpg
Please go to
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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Nola Darling a real or fictional character? Spike Lee's comments about Nola Darling becoming a Jehovah's Witness
I don't know much about Nola Darling, but this interview seems to speak of her as a real character. Spike Lee says she became a Jehovah's Witness. They have a picture of her with a Watchtower. http://theurbandaily.com/1932891/spike-lee-nola-darling-mookie-redhook-summer/ Comments??? Thanks. Natural (talk) 12:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)natural
Remove the "Themes" section?
The "Themes" section reads like a poorly constructed undergraduate college essay. It is someone's literary analysis, not objective information. If the commentary is to be included, it should be attributed to the critics responsible for the commentary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.24.153 (talk) 19:43, 3 November 2012 (UTC)