Talk:Easy Rider

	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.

POV detected!

The plot section states: "with two woman SEEMING to...". This is a POV, since it's someone personal opinion instead of proven facts regarding this movie. Needs a rewritting. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 17:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They're not drug dealers

- Wyatt and Billy scored drug money one time only in the entire movie.
- There's no dialogue to assure that they're drug dealers instead of mere couriers to the "connection" (played by Phil Spector).
- Character background story is not provided.
- The goal of both characters was to score money in order of "to retire" in Florida. We could think on retirement from the drug dealing business OR retirement from a previous style of life not described in the movie (not drug-related).
- We can't see the characters dealing with drugs along the movie for profit, instead they offer drugs for free to other characters (Hanson, played by Jack Nicholson, and the hookers). Sharing drugs was "in" with the hippie style of life they have and not necessarily have anything to do with criminal enterprise.
- According to the 60's zeitgeist, they're moving away from The Man, so I decided to rewrite their occupation as "freewheeling hippies" instead of "drug dealers" as previously stated in the article. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 17:30, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changes

I added a link to my blog which has been 2 years of research and visiting movie locations in Easy Rider crossing several states. To my knowledge, it is the only of its kind to show a map, and screenshots from the movie as well as what the sites look like today. MrZip66 (talk) 14:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)--MrZip66 (talk) 14:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok, i made some major - but obvious - changes. i integrated the trivia into a coherent (but incomplete) "production" section, as well as a section on the bikes. most of it is taken verbatim from what was in the trivia, but streamlined where necessary. all of that information is included in either the Easy Riders, Raging Bulls book, or the making-of documentary on the DVD, or both, but the citations should be put into footnotes.

i also got rid of the tracklist, since that's in the soundtrack article, and replaced it with some actual information about the soundtrack, again, from the documentary. i left the trivia that i couldn't do anything with, but it should probably be deleted - there's plenty of trivia on IMDB. overall though, i think this is a big improvement Sebs26 22:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot deeper than it sounds. It both creates and destroys the hippie ideal, all at the same time. Taking a toke versus a bad trip on LSD leading to a death; the intolerance of the Deep South for nonconformists. "Steal This Book" by Abbie Hoffman does the same, but on paper. You've gotta see this. (The great soundtrack helps, too.)

I concur. This is one of the greatest films of all time. It's up there with 2001: A Space Odyssey, Blade Runner, Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope, etc. The Wookieepedian 11:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spinoza1111 05:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)Hmm, why should I have to put up with somebunny who writes "a lot deeper than it sounds" when he so obviously meant, like wow man, to write the reverse. Oh well...[reply]

Spinoza1111 05:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)The above reverted the following passage:[reply]

Despite its "countercultural" ambience, the film had a conservative subtext. No space was given to the idea of social change within viable communities and the "commune" is a joke. Captain America and Billy buy in to the same values of power and control, in the "hippie" register, as the society and for this reason are perceived by the locals (portrayed unflatteringly by real people in a foretaste of modern "reality" shows, and their contempt for reality and the people in it) as in competition and fit for nothing but a drive-by shooting.

Women are treated as sex objects and markers of power and control, and the popularity of this film caused not a little feminist rage in reaction to male hippiedom.

Shortly after this film, and after Altamont and the Manson slayings, the very idea of the hippie became the sickest of jokes at best.

For this reason, it is not at all ironic that Dennis Hopper is today, a Republican and a supporter of President Bush.

Spinoza1111 05:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)I want this back in. What, we're supposed to accept that this film is about two "liberal radicals" versus "conservatives"?? Bullshit.[reply]

Spinoza1111 05:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)Captain America and Billy are fucking thugs. Even the makers of this film are laughing at people who in any way think that Captain America and Billy were heroes, or even anti-heroes. Their Amerikkka is so fucked up that they themselves are fucked up, and, as Captain America says, they blew it.[reply]

Spinoza1111 05:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)To worship this as a great film is nonsense. It was exploitation at worst and healthily realistic at best.[reply]

To answer your question: The contribution you made was both commentary and extreme POV as outlined in the Wikipedia guidlines. If you dispute this, you are welcome to follow the guidlines, and officially dispute the deletion. Rsm99833 09:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems funny that you know "so much" about actors and write about "Nicholas Cage." His name is Nicolas Cage. It's Italian. This is supposed to be accurate, for crying out loud! I changed it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.68.60.129 (talk) 10:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hitchhiker character

Can someone explain how/why the hitchhiker is the leader of the commune? Perhaps this is described in some book, DVD commentary, etc. but it is not at all obvious (at least not to me) when viewing the film itself. Thanx, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 05:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He is. He's a combo of various "communes" of the time, who were a "kinder" version (my words, not his)of Charles Manson. Overall, these guys were the "leaders" of a bunch of women. Any other guys just happened along. It's described in the DvD in more detail. Rsm99833

I believe Luke Askew in the "special feature" portion of the DVD/interview in 1999 indicates the no name guy is not a member of the commune, but a traveling salesmen who supplies drugs to communes. Boondocks Ranch 13:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting theory, Boondocks Ranch, but I don't think a hippie commune have a "leader" nor a "drug supplier". Certainly there are people to provide both a leadership and a supplying of drugs to a 60's commune, but since the movie states nothing about the hitchhiker doing it, we can't take a deep dip on the subjectivity and it's better to think of him as just one more hippie from the commune and not much special character to the main plot. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 17:42, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wyatt & Billy

Isn't Hopper, Wyatt and Fonda, Billy? The article has it vice versa Boondocks Ranch 13:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, the article looks correct to me. Check the imdb page also. --David Edgar 11:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is right. Fonda's Wyatt AKA Capt. America, Hopper is Billy. I just re-watched the film plus the documentary and I also watched with the commentary, so believe me, I'm up to my ears in Easy Rider right now, and I can safely tell you the article is right.207.127.128.2 04:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, along the movie Dennis Hopper character states his name as Billy and Peter Fonda character as "Captain America". Hopper is Billy and Fonda is Wyatt, so. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misstatement

There's a howler of a slanderous misstatement in the trivia part of this article: "In the documentary, "Easy Rider: Shaking the Cage", Hopper claims he told the locals that he raped and killed a young girl outside of town in order to elicit the responses he wanted from the local men." I watched the documentary last night (it's on the DVD) and what Hopper says is, he told the local cops in the diner scene to play it AS IF Billy, Wyatt and George had raped a girl outside of town. -- EB

It's actually ambiguous the way Hopper says it. I watched the documentary recently, and what he says is that they can hurl whatever abuse they like, "cuz we just raped and murdered a girl outside of town." I assumed he meant the characters, too, but it is an ambiguous...Snyrt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.192.68.117 (talk) 21:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If Hopper had said to the town sheriff that he had just raped a girl, odds are that the sheriff have arrested him in no time. I saw the documentary and I concluded, by the most obvious interpretation, that Hopper asked the sheriff to treat them AS IF they just raped a girl from outside of town. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 17:50, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Film score

This article states "The score of the film was asked to be done entirely by The Band." Easy Rider Soundtrack states "... Crosby, Stills, and Nash were originally slated to do the soundtrack ..." Which is correct? Or maybe both are in some way? Neither of them appears to be referenced. --David Edgar 11:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone supply citation that Dylan wrote the first verse of "Ballad of Easy Rider"? In the credits, it lists McGuinn as the author, and in the Shaking the Cage documentary, Fonda says that McGuinn wrote the lyrics while the two of them watched the last shot (rising from the wreckage); Fonda says that McGuinn asked him what the shot meant thematically, and Fonda said something about the river being "the road that God built". According to Fonda, McGuinn wrote the lyrics down right then and there. Snyrt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.192.68.117 (talk) 21:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia

I just added a bit of worthless trivia that the title characters are both in Grand Theft Auto games. Therefore, this message of approval isnt necessary.

Fair use rationale for Image:Easyrider76.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Easyrider76.jpg. 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 Wikipedia articles 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. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. 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. GentlemanGhost 19:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

misquote

Didn't the group "Dance for our dinner," rather than sing for supper?Phaedrus420 00:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The line is actually something like "Play for our dinner" User:Snyrt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.192.68.117 (talk) 21:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracy

Though cocaine is implied, it is never stated. This was intentional. (source was an interview on NPR with Fonda, but it seems more important to have sources for the facts, not lack of) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.160.49.163 (talk) 05:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never stated, also, was the possibility of both characters be just couriers instead of dealers of something that appears to be cocaine. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 17:53, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Context?

After reading the article I realized that it's missing something important: cultural/historical context. It comes across as though it's written for people who are already cognizant of that context, which is undoubtedly true for some readers, but it shouldn't be assumed to be the case for everybody. It needs to have some material that lays out that context and explains how the film hooked into the zeitgeist, for readers who weren't around in the U.S. at the time it was made.

Also, I was expecting the Impact section to discuss the critical reaction at the time (not just its award noms), and especially the film's reception among the under-30 generation. There is some material that touches on that -- the lines re Steal This Book and Doonesbury -- but the meaning of Abbie Hoffman's remark is ambiguous as presented here, and in any event, there should be a full paragraph on each of these larger subjects (which would also help in terms of giving readers a sense of the cultural/historical context). Hope this has been helpful! Cgingold 19:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contradict

I marked this because it states that Rip Torn pulled a knife, then later goes on to say Torn won a lawsuit against Hopper for saying that very thing on television. 69.221.158.99 (talk) 19:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:EasyRider.jpg

Image:EasyRider.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 Wikipedia: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 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.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unproduced sequel

Perhaps the article could mention the sequel that was planned, "Biker Heaven"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guano II (talk • contribs) 21:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC) all right!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.252.55.217 (talk) 14:50, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolson as writer???

The first paragraph of the article states that Jack Nicholson is one of the writers of the movie. I have never seen a reference for this anywhere before as either a credited or uncredited writer. And I don't believe he is listed in the WGA as such. Can anyone verify this? Tlatseg (talk) 07:26, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is "CSN"?

The article presently reads toward the bottom:

When CSN viewed a rough cut of the film, they assured Hopper that they could not do any better than he already had.

I assume "CSN" means Crosby, Stills, and Nash, but I don't know this for certain; furthermore, it isn't explained why "CSN" (whatever this means) viewed a rough cut of the film.

Perhaps someone could explain? --Skb8721 (talk) 01:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]