Talk:Duck Soup (1933 film)

Pre Code or not?

In the first sentence of the article the film is described as pre-code, but then later in the 'Other scenes and jokes' section, a joke is described which made fun of the code. According to the [Hays_Code] article the code started in 1930, and this movie is 1933, so that surely means it can't be considered a pre-code movie?

I am WP:BOLD and removing pre-code from the first sentence.

GeneralJohnsonJameson (talk) 14:23, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

@GeneralJohnsonJameson: Someone put the erroneous "Pre-Code" back in, so I deleted it again. Per Pre-Code article, "...the pre-Code era is either dated to the start of the sound film era, or more generally to March 1930..." Acwilson9 (talk) 19:25, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

See Pre-Code Hollywood, which states: "Pre-Code Hollywood was the brief era in the American film industry between the widespread adoption of sound in pictures in 1929 and the enforcement of the Motion Picture Production Code censorship guidelines, popularly known as the 'Hays Code', in mid-1934. Although the Code was adopted in 1930, oversight was poor, and it did not become rigorously enforced until July 1, 1934, with the establishment of the Production Code Administration (PCA)." The Code existed in 1933, but it wasn't taken seriously until the following year. By common understanding, a 1933 film would be Pre-Code -- although not much in the Marx Brothers' pre-1934 films would have required changing had the Code been in place. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:15, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Should we make the assertion that this is the best Marx Bros film here?

Stack ranking a set of works where there are no agreed-upon criteria of what defines "best" or "finest" tends to yield contention over time. Although I personally consider this my favorite Marx Brothers film, and most fans I know agree, I do recall a time when critics lauded "A Night at the Opera" as the best Marx Brothers film. This may change again. For the sake of restraint and objectivity, perhaps we should soften the language slightly. Sterlingjones (talk) 19:20, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

The article says that Duck Soup "is now widely considered to be... the Marx Brothers' finest film," and backs that up in the Reception section with quotes from two recognized critics and Rotten Tomatoes' critical consensus. In my opinion, saying "widely considered" is appropriate in that case, even if there are critics who may disagree now or in the future.

That being said, I'm curious what you have in mind. Is there a specific change that you'd like to see? Toughpigs (talk) 20:02, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast reply. Generally speaking, I think adding "one of" in front of top-ranking adjectives is sufficient to prevent future contention. I don't mean to be nitpicky. I just want to avoid future absolutist arguments, because Wikipedia is prone to them and they are so unpleasant to see. Sterlingjones (talk) 20:24, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I think that would be misrepresenting the sources. The sources in the article say that it's the best, not one of the best. I understand your concern, but I think what we've got is fine. Toughpigs (talk) 21:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, you've hit upon the problem pretty squarely there. The person doing the editing picks the sources. It's trivial to add sources that think other things and then start debating which source is better, which I do not propose to do in the article. This is why I think it's a good rule not to say "best" in an encyclopedia. Note that ANatO has 97% at RT, and Duck Soup 91%. "Best" reviews are easy to find. https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-boston-globe-night-at-the-opera/63570810/ https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-los-angeles-times-night-at-the-opera/63570666/. https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-observer-night-at-the-opera/63571514/. https://www.newspapers.com/article/daily-news-night-at-the-operashow-them/63567245/. Now that I'm thinking of it, it might be worth looking at the ANatO article as well and making the same point over there…although if the curator of that one is heart set on calling it "best", I will probably have a harder time there because of these same sources. That said, Duck Soup is still my personal favorite. Sterlingjones (talk) 22:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree that sentence should be changed. As far as I can tell, we don't have a source saying the film "is now widely considered" the best. We do have one critic saying it's "the best" and one saying it's "probably the best" but it is WP:SYNTH for us to say "widely considered" in WP's voice based on the sources we have, even if it were justified. Based on what we have, we could change "widely" to "sometimes". Station1 (talk) 02:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

The Reception section on the A Night at the Opera page has separate headings for contemporary reviews and retrospective reviews. The contemporary reviews, like the ones that Sterlingjones links to above, say that the film is the Marx Bros' best. But the retrospective reviews section on A Night at the Opera shows quite a few people saying it's not up to the standard of the Paramount films. Is there any evidence of contemporary reviewers specifically saying that Duck Soup is not their best?

It looks like there's a clear story here: at the time, reviewers thought that A Night at the Opera was the best. Since then, it has been reappraised, and modern reviewers say that Duck Soup is the best. In that case, I think the sentence "Duck Soup is now widely considered to be the Marx Brothers' finest film" is accurate and backed up by multiple references, both on the Duck Soup page and the Night at the Opera page. Toughpigs (talk) 03:13, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

It may be true that Duck Soup is "now widely considered" the best, but that's beside the point. We need one or more reliable sources that actually say it is now widely considered the best. As opposed to our original research/synthesis that there are several or even many sources that individually call it the best. "Do not combine material from multiple sources to state or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources." Station1 (talk) 06:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)