Talk:The Eiger Sanction (film)

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 13:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

sorry...signé Arapaima, no tildes on my old iMac ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arapaima (talk • contribs) 16:20, 11 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

These don't make much sense as is. The talk says they were 'blundered' the first time, but they've been sitting as is since April. Can we correct or remove them? Venividiwplwiki (talk) 21:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Don't know if any of the editors who have worked on this page still have it on their watchlist but just in case you do I have a question. Do either of the books used to write this article mention when the Monument Valley and Zion N.P. scenes were filmed. I am curious whether they were filmed before or after the Switzerland sequences. Since they make up the first half of the film (the theater I saw it in actually had an intermission before the Swiss scenes) I think that merit mention in the production section. My thanks ahead of time to any editor who might be able to help with this. MarnetteD | Talk 17:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

You guys do realize that the photo on Filming section of this page shows the far back corner of the Eiger (specifically, its Mittellegi ridge)? Like photographing the back side of the Matterhorn or the back side of Mount Rushmore, it makes the mountain totally unrecognizable. Because this film is about a climb of the mountain's north side wall, wouldn't a photo of that famous face of the mountain make sense?

Besides, the text of this article is far from meeting Wikipedia's objectivity standards. For examples: "Stanley, who later managed to complete filming after a delay under pressure from an unsympathetic Eastwood, would later blame Eastwood for the accident due to a lack of preparation, describing him both as a director and an actor as 'a very impatient man who doesn't really plan his pictures or do any homework. He figures he can go right in and sail through these things'. Stanley was never hired by Eastwood or Malpaso Productions again." Or "Once again Eastwood would blame the production company for the poor earnings and publicity of the film and departed from Universal Studios." Not only does the article contain such cant, but never attempts to get sides of the claims it raises. [[User:vcrosbie|vcrosbie} | Talk 03:38, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi, vcrosbie! I replaced the Eiger picture with the main one from its own article. In addition, it looks like Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) added the passages you mentioned. Do you want to contact him to see if there's anything more to the reference used to clarify the sides' claims? Erik (talk | contribs) 14:15, 14 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

I saw the film (again) last night, and added some missing plot details accordingly. TC 203.122.223.121 (talk) 10:37, 13 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

"The film was a commercial failure, taking $23.8 million at the box office." How is 23.8 domestic and foreign "a commercial failure" with a $9M budget? I thought the rule of thumb was the theater kept 50%, so for 9M, you need to generate $18M at the box office. That leaves $5.8M for advertising and prints to break even. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Pretty much entirely sourced from one book. Needs more.128.151.71.7 (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply