Talk:Little Red Riding Hood (1997 film)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2019 and 7 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Csoda1 (article contribs).

Film: American Start‑class

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Plot

Why was there a mention of the voice of the narrator when that has nothing to do with the plot itself? Aguil2 (talk)Aguil2

I agree with you that the mention of this does not contribute to the plot, at least how it is written in this article. However, the fact that the only speaking in this film is done by a narrator is important to the over all film itself. I believe this needs to be expressed more and maybe in a different way that way it doesn't throw readers off when viewing this article. Cferg33 (talk) 21:34, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why say she is warned by the cat when the cat is really speaking in a way that is difficult to understand what is said? Mihall5 (talk) 17:47, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! The addition of this information is a form of analysis, rather than a neutral summary. Lili813 (talk) 17:09, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The plot gives a very vague description of the story, saying how the wolf ate the grandmother and Little Red escaped on time. Then, it outwardly states how Little Red is shown as not so innocent. There should be examples of the behavior of Little Red so that the reader could make their own claim on the behavior of Little Red. --AshleyM18 (talk) 17:24, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you completely! This article does very little in the in-depth descriptions and just gives a vague overview. I think it would be useful to go into more description of this story, talking about the meanings behind the way characters are portrayed, giving examples, and talking about why the creators chose to portray the story the way they did. There are so many versions of this story so it would be useful to readers to come and see the personal twists that each creator made in their version of the story and why they did that. Cferg33 (talk) 21:41, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All the information has no citation--Ekrop1 (talk) 18:16, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

the plot section is written in a way that is confusing and not chronological. this should be fixed. it also doesn't make since to bring up the huntsman in this section when it isn't relevant to the plot. this should be under a comparison section if deemed necessary to keep. Cquag1 (talk) 15:40, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, Cquag1. I also found that there was a lot of analysis in the plot section that needs to be removed. -Mpavlik20 (talk) 17:08, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Cquag1 I thought the plot section need some revision. It seemed to include a viewpoint on Little Red Riding Hood's behavior and it was difficult to read at certain points.--Poryfruit (talk) 17:16, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why was there mention of LRRH being "less than innocent"? That sounds like it isn't entirely neutral, and could lead the reader to form a similar opinion to the writer when they might not have otherwise. Cstev5 (talk) 16:44, 17 February 2021 (UTC)Cstev5[reply]

I agree Cstev5 . I thought that there was some bias in this section of the article. I feel like this interpretation should be taken out of the article. Jciri3-19 (talk) 17:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree Cstev5. I also thought this also may have happened a bit when it was mentioned that she was very clever. --Ndani06 (talk) 17:19, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree Jciri3-19. I think that the lack of innocence is essential to the film. It does come across as interpretation, so potentially a new section describing reviews to the film could be added to include this information in a better way. Mpavlik20 (talk) 17:23, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Manual of Style page for Films suggests a possible Themes section. This could do for tracking the idea of innocence without placing it under the Plot. --End2657 (talk) 19:43, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence " She is thus portrayed, in another contrast to traditional depictions of the story, as being less than innocent" can be seen as an interpretation of a part of the film and not direct fact, this claim can make readers view the film differently, making the argument red is less innocent is an interpretive claim. Daniel Thompson326 (talk) 17:06, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this claim is more of an opinion than factual. The claim that she is portrayed as less than innocent should either be in a separate section for reviews of the film or left out completely.Rzell02 (talk) 04:52, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should all of the cast be mentioned when their character is mentioned in this section? Mvill6 (talk) 17:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The hyperlink when you click on Timour Bourtasenkov's name is rather confusing. It brings you to a ballet company's website rather than to a page actually about him. Maybe this should be removed? Irhin1 (talk) 17:12, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the addition of this link to his name only gives context to his ballet company and not to him directly, it seems unnecessary. -J.mer22 (talk) 17:29, 17 February 2021 (UTC

Timour Bourtasenkov's link isnt the only one like this on the page, if you click huntsman it brings your to information about what type of character he is which really has nothing to do with the story. I think it should be like a hunter.

The introduction mentions that the film was based on the early versions of the fairy tale, specifically mentioning the Italian adaptation of the story. However, the short film is more directly inspired by the French story titled "The Grandmother". Instead of mentioning the Italian version, it would be more informative for the reader to mention the French version, and describe what the film does differently from the original French story in the plot section of the article. Sbaek20 (talk) 17:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There some spelling and grammar mistakes within the article such as the sentence "She is clever enough manage without being rescued" the article should be reread and grammatical errors should be corrected. Daniel Thompson326 (talk) 17:15, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible to make a section describing only the plot and create another section for cinematography. According to the Manual of Style for film, plot summaries describe the important plot points of a film. Including details like the cinematography of the film is outside the range of this description. They do, however, fall under the Themes section. Dayal24 (talk) 17:21, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you completely! There definitely should be a separate section to talk about the cinematography of the film. There definetely is enough information to add tha would create a whole section.Ckirb2 (talk) 02:55, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

There should be more sources explaining possible interpretations of the film to prevent editors from making connections themselves. --Kbrad41 (talk) 15:41, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should remove the second source, as the page no longer exists -- Lsand345 (talk) 17:17, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Historical Background- New section

This section would include and expand on information regarding the other versions of the folktale that the director and writers of the film chose to base the film from. Such information may include : -differences and similarities between renditions -authors/publishers of past versions -Sources of other renditions Joshn49 (talk) 15:44, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea Joshn49. We would need to find published sources making those connections before adding them.Amateur0 0editor (talk) 16:37, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. A lot of the information on this page like the references to the huntsman and The False Grandmother belong in a section involving the historical background of the fairy tale instead of being put inside the plot and lead section. --Fgorm1 (talk) 17:14, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]