Talk:The Deer Hunter

	The Deer Hunter was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result May 2, 2012 Good article nominee Not listed

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: War films / Asian / North America / Southeast Asia / United States / Cold War This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  War films task force Asian military history task force North American military history task force Southeast Asian military history task force United States military history task force Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989) Film: Southeast Asian / War / Core / American 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 articles This article is supported by the Southeast Asian cinema task force. This article is supported by the War films task force. This article is on the project's core list. This article is supported by the American cinema task force. United States: Cinema / Washington / West Virginia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject West Virginia (assessed as Low-importance). Library of Congress Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Cleveland Low‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Cleveland, the scope of which includes Cleveland and the Greater Cleveland Area. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.ClevelandWikipedia:WikiProject ClevelandTemplate:WikiProject ClevelandCleveland articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Ohio Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.OhioWikipedia:WikiProject OhioTemplate:WikiProject OhioOhio articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Pennsylvania Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Pittsburgh Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pittsburgh and its metropolitan area on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PittsburghWikipedia:WikiProject PittsburghTemplate:WikiProject PittsburghPittsburgh articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Vietnam Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Thailand Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.ThailandWikipedia:WikiProject ThailandTemplate:WikiProject ThailandThailand articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Albums This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Wikipedia is not IMDB. I'm excising the hilariously comprehensive credits list, which otherwise comprises more than half the page's length. R 17:23, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

in the summary it says the film deals with drug abuse and infedelity, but i cant remeber it doing so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.82.197 (talk) 15:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do see substance abuse, and it's simply just with alcohol. Changing it to alcohol abuse. --Philosophistry (talk) 06:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, yes, that's right, Christopher Walken's character has needle marks on his arm. But I don't believe the movie "deals with drug abuse" or even alcohol abuse for that matter. Going to nix that part entirely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philosophistry (talk • contribs) 07:00, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article lists the hunting of elk as a significant error given the title of the film. This is contentious, as many species of animals are referred to as being part of "the deer family". This rubric covers moose, wapiti, caribou and elk. Colloquially, many American hunters refer to the hunting of elk as a form of deer hunting, especially in the 1970s. Thus, there is no error or discrepancy in the film.

If there is no reasonable objection, then this passage may be edited to remove the erroneous criticism.

Considering how unlikely it is you'd think of her name first when referencing this film, plus that fact that none of the other more prominent actors have their filmographies at the bottom, it seems incongruous that Streep's should be placed at the bottom. Unless someone has a good reason I'm removing it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.106.36.168 (talk) 19:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The Deer Hunter is included in Streep's filmography based on its significance to her career, not her prominence in the movie. She got her first Oscar nomination from her work here, so it should definitely be included. --SHODAN 15:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, there is a band named The Dear Hunter (note the spelling). I understand there also is a band named Deerhunter, but that's not about whom I'm talking. I would like to compose an article, but the phrase "The Dear Hunter" redirects the the user to this page. Is it possible to not have the phrase "The Dear Hunter" redirect to this page? Radar123 03:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should one of them be cleaned out? I'm inclined to take off the part of the intro part, since the 'red llght section of Saigon' becomes clearer if one has read the plot already. --131.207.236.198 12:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why the plot summary is divided into three "acts." Is there any authorial (i.e., Cimino) warrant for it, or is it merely a contributor's whim? In terms of the film's structure, I suggest that Mike's return to Saigon is definitely an "Act four." pmr 11:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the article begin by describing the main characters as Rusyn American (i.e. Carpatho-Rusyn), then later describes them as Russian? These are distinct geographical, linguistic, and cultural groups. Badagnani 01:15, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plus ça change ... Why does the article now begin by describing the main characters as "Russian American", then later describes them as "Ukrainian-American"? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:24, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to Russian American. That is what given sources claim. See also my question below. Svick (talk) 13:51, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The truth of the matter is that the filmmakers themselves have added to the confusion. The movie is in fact about Rusyn Americans, but some of the cultural elements (songs during the wedding) and some of the dialog (mother and the priest) are Russian. My guess is that the filmmakers wanted to present a culture more accessible to the intended audience, or at least one they could more easily identify, i.e. Russian. Fact still remains that it is the Rusyns who emigrated in large numbers into northeastern states (especially Pennsylvania) where they found employ in the mines and steel mills. I hope this clears up confusion and I would like if my editing into Rusyn instead of Russian American stood up. Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vladimir Skala (talk • contribs) 20:05, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the act two summary, it says that Nick thinks Steven to be broken, when really it is Michael who wants to leave Steven (and is trying to encourage Nick to get tough). Someone should change this. 23:37, 6 January 2008

I'd like to point out that at no time does any Viet Cong say di di mau, like every english website on the subject says. Any help in finding what they really say would be appreciated. "Lay sung mau" or "gum su mau" have been suggested by unreliable sources, the only two sources I can find that don't say "di di" mau. "Gum su mau" is the closest sounding to what they actually say.

I don't know if the trivia section will ever be revived, but it's worth mentioning that all sorts of people referencing the movie like the Simpsons got it wrong. 69.220.2.188 (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Deerhunterweddinglc.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) 20:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it should be N-Stage, probably N1 since that is the metastatic stage 08:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

"End-stage" means the final stages of the disease. It doesn't have anything to do with TNM classification; it's also used with liver disease, renal disease, etc. KathL (talk) 21:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would not say "doesn't have anything to do with TNM". Depends on the type of cancer. Some types are staged according to different TNM combinations. Since the article now says "terminal cancer" I think this is a non-issue. Lesion (talk) 00:27, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw pmr's comment on the "act" sections & I'd like to open a discussion on the plot summary itself. The summary is TOO LONG. Needs to be cut down & the POV statements that speculate about theme need to be taken out; this isn't a film class essay on the film. Also, the sects labeled "act" need to be rmvd, they are generally discouraged. Tommyt (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You couldn't be more right. Too long, and too full of POV and OR. Tool2Die4 (talk) 18:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It reads like an 8th grade book report. Just ridiculous. 64.81.54.89 (talk) 11:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article says:

He also berates Stanley for carrying around a small revolver and waving it around, not realizing it is still loaded.

Really? I was under the impression he just didn't care that it was loaded. I don't think it was the case that he was unaware.

Also, grammatically, it should probably say "not *recognizing* it is still loaded." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjkeliher (talk • contribs) 01:17, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following information was copied from the Wiki article on Cimino. I find it very useful to understand the overblown reception the movie recieved at the time of it's release. I am a Vietnam veteran who found the movie to be awfully bogus, yet many critics and audiences at the time seemed to think it was a genuine depiction of the experiences of real veterans.

Age

Cimino has given various dates for his birth, including 3 February 1939, 3 February 1943, and 16 November 1943. The Wiki article on him states that he graduated from Westbury High School on Long Island in 1956 which shows that the later dates are false. Since he was born in 1939 he would have been 29 at the time of the Tet Offensive. It is clear that he never served in Viet Nam, and that his active duty was only a few months in the Army Reserve before the Vietnam war began. The movie was not based on his experience (nor on anyone else's); yet, the reception at the time proclaimed it an authentic story of the Vietnam war. Wiki also informs us that Cimmino did not show up at the Academy Awards ceremony after his request to be there surreptiously wasn't granted.

Military Service

During the production of The Deer Hunter, Cimino had given co-workers (such as cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond and associate producer Joann Carelli) the vague impression that much of the storyline was biographical, somehow related to the director’s own experience and based on the experiences of men he had known during his service in Vietnam. Just as the film was about to open, Cimino gave an interview to The New York Times in which he claimed that he had been “attached to a Green Beret medical unit" at the time of the Tet Offensive of 1968. When the Times reporter, who had not been able to corroborate this, questioned the studio about it, the “suits” panicked and fabricated “evidence” to support the story.[3] (Universal Studios president Thom Mount commented at the time that "I know this guy. He was no more a medic in the Green Berets than I’m a rutabaga.")[citation needed] Four months later, however, Tom Buckley, a veteran Vietnam correspondent for the Times, would corroborate that Cimino had done a stint as an Army medic, but also discovered that the director had never been attached to the Green Berets, and that his active service – just six months in 1962 – had been as a reservist who never deployed to Vietnam.[4] Cimino’s publicist reportedly said that he intended to sue Buckley, but he never did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.212.117.236 (talk) 18:40, 24 December 2009 Tonygumbrell (talk) 01:43, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The Deer Hunter at AllMovie ... plot synopsis, review, cast, production credits, awards

Reference available for citing in the article body. Erik (talk) 20:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems editors can't agree whether the protagonists are Rusyn American, Russian American or Ukrainian American. Can someone clarify this? Both references of that claim say they are Russian American (the third reference to Encarta is a dead link). Is that right? Svick (talk) 20:12, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I dimly remember them being Rusyn and their church being Ruthenian Catholic, but it's been a long time since I've seen the film. The link to the Auster book is also dead, and after reading the remaining source, I'm fairly sure that most reviewers couldn't be bothered to ask if they were Rusyn or Russian, especially since (frankly) your average American isn't aware that the Rusyns even exist. I do recall that an old textbook of mine, which had a section on Vietnam movies, called them some kind of Eastern Catholic, so perhaps it might be better to ditch the sources and call them Rusyns anyway. Lockesdonkey (talk) 15:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RepublicanJacobite deleted nearly all of the IMDb references for this page. The user is correct that IMDb is not a completely reliable source of (especially for notes on the production). However I have found that a lot of what is on the IMDb is accurate, especially since the web editors on IMDb are very good at vetting and authenticating submitted information. I would like to hear from other users.

Al Fecund (talk) 05:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Mike visits Steven, who reveals that someone in Saigon has been mailing large amounts of cash to him, and Mike is convinced that it is Nick...He realizes that Nick thinks he (Michael) and Steven are dead, since he is the only one who made it back on the helicopter."

Someone fix that please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.234.112 (talk) 19:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the following from the article and bring it here for discussion:

In only his second film as a director, Cimino continued to develop the trademarks that would come to define his directorial career:

• Abrupt flashforwards (The cut from the bar to Vietnam)
• Casting of non-professional actors in supporting roles (Chuck Aspegren as Axel)
• Characters who become disillusioned with the American Dream (Mike, Steve, and Nick all come back psychologically and/or physically damaged from the war).
• Controversial subject matter (the aforementioned Russian Roulette sequences).
• Sudden bursts of violence in seemingly tranquil or naturalistic settings (the war fighting in the Vietnam jungle).
• Striking visual style: Painterly compositions, jittery tracking shots, and wide vista establishing shots that emphasize the earth/nature (The wide establishing shots of the steel town, the jungles of Vietnam and Saigon).

This was referenced with a link to the imdb director's page, which is not a reliable source. This amounts to original research, and is written in a style that is more appropriate for a fan page, not an encyclopedia. Without better sources, and a more balanced rewrite, this cannot remain in the article. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would appear there is some discrepancy over the details in this article about the actor who played "Stanley". As per the wiki page on John Cazale, he was dating Meryl Streep, not engaged to her, and he died of lung cancer, not bone cancer. Reference: http://theplaylist.blogspot.com/2010/06/richard-shepard-talks-john-cazale-doc.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.239.105 (talk) 18:53, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've never edited a Wikipedia article before, but I noticed incorrect information. The large buck deer in the movie (both the one Michael shoots and the one he lets get away) are not elk/wapiti - i.e. Cervus canadensis or any other species native to North America. I'm fairly certain that they're red deer, Cervus elaphus, a species native to Eurasia. There was confusion for quite a while about whether or not they were the same species, but recent genetic work was conclusive that they are different. Even when they were considered the same species, most state fish and game agencies treated them as a non-native exotic. I know you have a source for this information, but the source is definitely wrong. As far as I can tell the other deer in the movie are Mule Deer, but there's never a great image of them. 216.14.236.42 (talk) 04:59, 20 November 2010 (UTC)ErinZ[reply]

GREAT SHOT! -- He aimed at a white tail buck in the Appalacian Mountains and hit a

giant stag in a snow capped rocky type mountain somewhere else in the world....! 199.48.94.60 (talk) 14:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The movie is about the trauma suffered by a band of working class former steelers during the Vietnam War. The fact that some or most of them have an ethnic connection to a particular cohort of nineteenth century Slavic migration was not really central to the plot, and I fail to see why it needs to be referred to in the opening para. Kransky (talk) 13:53, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• It's important insofar as they're Ruthenian Catholics, the symbolism of which peppers the film. Lockesdonkey (talk) 23:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence in the lead is not reflected in the body of the article: "The Deer Hunter contemplates the moral and mental consequences of battle as well as the effects of politically-manipulated patriotism upon common values (friendship, honor, family) in a tightly-knit community." I suggest deleting it if adequate sourcing is not added.

The same goes for this sentence in the lead: "The scenes of Russian roulette, while highly controversial on release, have been viewed as a metaphor for the Vietnam War itself." There is no mention of this metaphor in the body of the article. Plot Spoiler (talk) 05:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I support removing the first sentence. As for the second, there is this sentence which is not quite far off: Associated Press reporter Peter Arnett... wrote in the Los Angeles Times, "In its 20 years of war, there was not a single recorded case of Russian roulette... The central metaphor of the movie is simply a bloody lie." Also, this, especially A Voice from the Vietnam War, verifies this metaphor use. Erik (talk | contribs) 12:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright I support that for now but if we don't find something more explicit about the Russian roulette being the central metaphor of the film, I suggest ultimately removing that as well. Plot Spoiler (talk) 15:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since this was nominated it has been tagged with an unreferenced tag. The tag has been there for over a month now. The issue should be resolved soon as it currently meets the quickfail criteria at WP:Reviewing good articles. AIRcorn (talk) 09:19, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Deer Hunter/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 14:27, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am quickfailing this nomination as there are a number of cleanup tags that need addressing, some dating back to December 2011, [Wikipedia articles needing clarification (February 2012), Articles with dead external links (December 2011), Articles needing additional references (March 2012), Articles with unsourced statements (December 2011)]. Sort these out, check against the GA criteria, then renominate. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:27, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reference given for Mark Kermode's comments on the film in the section "Revisionism following Heaven's Gate" point to an article with no attribution to him or any other writer. Is there an alternative reference that can be used here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.223.144 (talk) 17:00, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Canal+ is not one of the original production companies or distributors. Their acquisition of an older company's catalog is irrelevant." So, why articles like The Wizard of Oz and 2001: A Space Odyssey has the category "Category:Warner Bros. films"? Warner Bros. wasn't one of the original production/distribution companies of the movie. In fact, the Warner Bros. films category says: "Please note that a majority of the pre-1950 library is now technically owned by Turner Entertainment, although Time Warner currently owns Turner, and thus, Warner Bros. Entertainment is responsible for sales and distribution.". --186.182.145.201 (talk) 18:10, 26 November 2012 (UTC) P.S.: The Birds and Psycho are in the same situation. --186.182.145.201 (talk) 18:14, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, irrelevant. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 04:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any particular reason the Academy award are listed three times? Infobox, bullet point and table? Surely the triplication - in the same section, is unneccesary. --Falcadore (talk) 17:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly do NOT think so. It's commonly regarded as a cult movie, and there is little reason to remove the long plot description. It can arguably be moved further down though, to simplify reading of the other "chapters". The article served it's purpose perfect for me, I was looking for a thorough run-down of the plot. Beverfar (talk) 23:05, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to explicitly say the article is 'too long' (too long is relative) but I will say that it has a lot more information than is necessary for a Wikipedia article. The whole plot subsection is IMO over-detailed, and I am a big fan of the film. Incidentally, The Deer Hunter is not regarded as a 'cult film' -- cult films by nature have a niche market/following and generally speaking don't win academy awards, let alone 5. This is one of the highest regarded films of the 1970s, is a benchmark in film as one of the first about the Vietnam conflict. It does not fit the bill of a cult film in any sense.Ryecatcher773 (talk) 18:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the listed ethnicity of the characters in The Deer Hunter because it was incorrect. The main characters are Ukrainian not Russian. They attend a Ukrainian American Citizen's Club (the Lemko Club, named after an ethnic group of Ukrainians), get married in a Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and dance traditional Ukrainian dances such as the Hopak and the Kolomeika. The confusion between Ukrainian and Russian culture and peoples is something that has been plaguing the Ukrainians for centuries. If you need more proof, I'd be happy to provide it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BytorsSnowdog (talk • contribs) 01:29, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(pasted here from my own talk page). I don't know enough to decide the issue, and see discussion above, dating back to 2010. Ijon (talk) 02:10, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but no. I will reiterate what I have been reiterating for years. There is nothing in the screenplay to substantiate your claim. In the film they are Russian American. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 03:08, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The main characters of the Deer Hunter are Ukrainian, not Russian. Steven's wedding takes place in a Ukrainian Orthodox Church, with a Ukrainian Orthodox priest, and traditional Ukrainian Orthodox hymns, sung in Ukrainian. The reception takes place in a Ukrainian American Citizens club with a banner stating this clearly on the wall behind the stage on the first floor. In reality this took place in the Lemko Club in Cleveland, so the Director/Set Designers took special precautions to ensure that they were Ukrainian. When the party is dancing, they dance traditional Ukrainian Dances such as the Kolomeika and Hopak. Whenever they drink in the movie, they exclaim "Nazdarovya!", the Ukrainian way of saying "Cheers!". When Steven is pulled out of the bar, the woman (presumably his mother) calls him a "Drurak!" which means fool or idiot in Ukrainian. Ukrainians have been fighting to stop their seemingly never ending confusion with Russians for centuries, and this article is one of thousands of examples of this happening. I simply seek recognition for what is right and true, this is an encyclopedia after all, shouldn't it contain the correct information? BytorsSnowdog (talk) 12:18, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First off, I'm from Cleveland and am aware of all the filming locations in Cleveland that are seen in the movie. Lemko Hall was used mainly because of its close proximity to the church (it's like a 5 minute drive) and other filming locations in the area (and the the writers weren't Ukranian or Russian). Secondly, the church is St. Theodosius Russian Orthodox Church. I've been in it and I've also been in Lemko Hall. Secondly, дурак (durak) is Russian for fool (look it up) -- that doesn't mean Ukranians don't use the word, but your assertion of it being a Ukranian word is incorrect (the Ukranian word is дурень -- which while similar, is pronounced duren'). Also,Наше здоровье (Russian) and наше здоров'я (Ukranian) both pronounced about the same mean 'to our health' (and is basically linguistically similar in meaning and pronunciation to almost every Slavic language from Polish (nasze zdrowie), Slovak (naše zdravie), Czechs (naše zdraví), etc...) In the movie, the doctor asks Nick if his last name (Chevotarevich) is Russian and he says, No it's an American name... which is the salient point of the film anyway (and for the record, his name could be Serbian, Slovak, Croatian, Macedonian, Belorussian, Slovenian, etc., too). This isn't the Crimean peninsula, it's an American film, and a work of fiction at that. But whatever the case, Wikipedia isn't the place to make an argument for Ukrainian culture being confused with Russian culture -- although admittedly they do share a multitude of similar characteristics. To be frank, I'd just as soon not mention their ethnic heritage at all but regardless there isn't anything in your argument or in the film that substantiates your claim. Find a reliable source to substantiate your claim and cite it... and I've looked and been unable to find one. For the record, I have no dog in this fight (in fact, my ancestors were rounded up and driven out of both countries). Ryecatcher773 (talk) 20:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Deer Hunter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060908200137/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041215/COMMENTARY/41215001/1023 to http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041215/COMMENTARY/41215001/1023
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.studiocanaldvd.com/fr/produit_6_scv_53855_acheter_Blu-Ray_Voyage_au_bout_de_l'enfer_en_stock.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:41, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the unverified locations and locations verified with unreliable sources. I'm not sure about movie-locations.com - I don't see any discussion about it, but do see some spam. I'll clean it up and comment on what I find in the process.

As for the section not being trivia, I don't see any sources that demonstrate encyclopedic value. Do GA-quality articles have such lists at all, let alone such poorly sourced ones? --Ronz (talk) 16:44, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One brief discussion about the reliability of movie-locations.com Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film/Archive_44#Reliability.3F. I didn't find anything else, and nothing that suggests bad faith additions of the link. --Ronz (talk) 17:15, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedic value is relevant to one's interpretation. And most of the loctions were cited with valid sources -- 'encyclopedic sources' are not a condition... and your terminoligy in that respect is rather vague in the first place. You're making a one-man crusade out of this, and for what reason I'm unsure. As I stated in the edit box comments, that subsection has been on the article for years. Why are you making an issue out of something (...that doesn't warrant being made an issue of in the first place) now? Ryecatcher773 (talk) 17:51, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, could you please WP:FOC? --Ronz (talk) 17:54, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am focused on content. Content that you're trying to remove. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 04:48, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then you don't mind if You're making a one-man crusade out of this is removed from your comments? --Ronz (talk) 16:16, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone explain why the unsourced entries should be kept in violation of WP:V and the policies that depend upon verification? --Ronz (talk) 16:38, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is now fixed. Citations have been added where missing and/or cited as unreliable.Ryecatcher773 (talk) 18:14, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

The Weirton Daily Times reference only verifies Weirton shooting locations, as far as I can make out. It doesn't verify that any of the footage was actually in the released film, nor that the future locations were even shot as planned. --Ronz (talk) 19:58, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nooksack Falls should be included. --Ronz (talk) 16:47, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It could be, but it might be more concise to just leave it as North Cascades given that the falls are one specific site within the National Park. There are also other scenes shot in that park besides just at the Nooksack Falls site. I don't know whether you've seen the film or not, so you may or may not already know that the hunting scenes utilize a few different sites in the park. The scene where Michael (DeNiro) actually shoots the deer is at the falls.Ryecatcher773 (talk) 19:01, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I left such a short comment. I don't believe Nooksack Falls are in the National Park, but are in Mount Baker National Forest, which are west of the park.

http://www.movie-locations.com/movies/d/deerhunter.html might be of help verifying. --Ronz (talk) 21:20, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. That helped. There's several parks and forests within close proximity of one another. All are in the same mountain range. The ski area where the camp was filmed is in Mt. Baker forest but it appears that Nooksack Falls is in a separate area (also protected by the US government) but the map wasn't exactly clear. I listed both for accuracy.Ryecatcher773 (talk) 22:21, 13 October 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Is the following text really necessary, as a more complete table is given directly below it?

51st Academy Awards

The Deer Hunter won five Oscars at the 51st Academy Awards in 1979:

• Best Picture—Barry Spikings, Michael Deeley, Michael Cimino and John Peverall (John Wayne's final public appearance was to present the award)^[1]
• Best Director—Michael Cimino
• Best Actor in a Supporting Role—Christopher Walken
• Best Film Editing—Peter Zinner
• Best Sound—Richard Portman, William McCaughey, Aaron Rochin and Darin Knight.^[1][2][3]

In addition, the film was nominated in four other categories:

• Best Actor in a Leading Role—Robert De Niro (lost to Jon Voight for Coming Home)
• Best Actress in a Supporting Role—Meryl Streep (lost to Maggie Smith for California Suite)
• Best Cinematography—Vilmos Zsigmond (lost to Néstor Almendros for Days of Heaven)
• Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen—Michael Cimino, Deric Washburn, Louis Garfinkle and Quinn Redeker^[1][2] (lost to Robert C. Jones, Waldo Salt and Nancy Dowd for Coming Home)

Golden Globes

Cimino won the film's only Golden Globe Award for Best Director. Other nominations the film included Best Motion Picture – Drama, De Niro for Best Motion Picture Actor – Drama, Walken for Best Motion Picture Actor in a Supporting Role, Streep for Best Motion Picture Actress in a Supporting Role, and Washburn for Best Screenplay – Motion Picture.

Hayal12 (talk) 16:55, 29 October 2017 (UTC)Hayal12[reply]

The characters are Rusyn as depicted in the screenplay, and the wedding is conducted in the Lemko hall of the Russian Orthodox church of St. Theodosius of Cleveland Ohio. Local extras speak the Rusyn language in the film. But the characters are called Russian in the sense of Little Russian Malorusskiy, which is common enough when dealing with outsider who are unfamiliar with the vagaries of the dialect. This is well documented. See Robert Magocsi, Our People: Carpatho-Rusyns and Their Descendants in North America p 82. I'll get around to correcting this in the text. In the meantime, calling the characters Ukrainian is a political statement nowhere supported, and calling them Russian is an understandable misunderstanding given the director's choice not to use a term which would confuse many film-goers. We are an encyclopedia, and this can be explained and attributed properly, which I will do when I have the time. μηδείς (talk) 02:30, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to debate the minutiae of ethno-cultural divisions of Slavs in the former Soviet Union, but for what it's worth, St. Theodosius in Cleveland is a Russian Orthodox church -- as is stated plainly on the congregation's own website (http://sttheodosius.org/), and the architect who designed the church based on Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow (https://case.edu/ech/articles/s/st-theodosius-russian-orthodox-cathedral/). Also, Lemko Hall while it is also in Tremont (same neighborhood as the cathedral), they aren't connected or related. The two buildings are several blocks away from each other. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 17:39, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting how you say you are not going to debate the minutiae, then do just that. The Byzantine Catholic Church in America underwent a schism in the early 1900's (before the existence of the Soviet Union) when Roman Catholics objected to the married priests of the Austro-Hungarian Ruthenian rite, and the Rusyns, who used the Greek rite (hence "Byzantine") of St. John Chrysostom pushed back against Latinizing elements that diluted their traditions. Those Rusyns who decided to align themselves with the Orthodox, rather than the Catholic patriarchate subsumed themselves under the Russian Orthodox church of Moscow; hence the association with St. Theodosius Church, which owned the Lemko hall. That the hall was several blocks away has to be one of the oddest objections I have ever read at WP. It's a building. In any case, it is clear that what was depicted is Ruthenes of the Pittsburgh area (but shot in Cleveland), and referred to as "Russian" at the director's choice for reasons of economy. There was a huge Rusyn presence in Pittsburgh, and the first Byzantine eparchy in the US (the Ruthenian Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh) was founded there.

I am reminded of an episode of the early X-Files about the Jersey Devil which depicts the creature as inhabiting the "mountains" outside Atlantic City. Southern New Jersey is, of course, an extremely flat coastal plain, with its highest points about 200 feet above sea-level. The creature lives in the "mountains" of South Jersey because the episode was filmed in British Columbia. As an encyclopedia, we can be a bit more accurate than treating convenient narrative shortcuts as reflecting underlying realities. μηδείς (talk) 18:16, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't debate minutiae. I simply cited the facts about the church used in the film. And I'm well aware of where the film was shot and where it was supposed to be set. But conflating the real life (factual) setting versus the fictionalized screenplay is erroneous. So if you want to debate the minutiae, we can.

Until Russia invaded the Ukraine around the time of the Sochi Olympic games ended, no one had ever even brought up the notion in this article that Rusyns or Ukrainians were what the characters actually were in the film. I grew up in a Cleveland neighborhood with a strong Russian presence and am quite aware there are deep seated rivalries between the various Slavic peoples of the region. And I also studied Byzantine history (and Modern Greek) at the university level so I am also aware of the various schisms in the Eastern church over the centuries since Constantine essentially Christianized the Roman Empire -- but that has little if anything to do with the fact of the matter: St. Theodosius was built as a Russian Orthodox Cathedral. The congregation itself states that. And I don't know where you're getting your info on Lemko Hall being part of any congregation, because (besides being from Cleveland and never having heard anything remotely like that) there is nothing that corroborates your claim that I can find online.

Furthermore, nowhere in the film is any of this mentioned. The only mention of ethnicity is when Nick is asked by an attending physician at the hospital if his name is Russian and he says no, it's American. The wedding depicts them dancing to Katyusha and also Fr. Stephen speaks Russian to a woman in the film (he was the actual priest at St. Theodosius at the time). Bottom line: there is a serious conflation between fact and fiction rampant throughout your argument. And little, if any of it, it can be cited as factually accurate since the screenwriter and director didn't write it as a thesis on the differences between Eastern European ethnic groups. And ultimately, this whole debate, which has permeated this article the past few years, ignores the simple fact: all of it's main characters are unequivocally American. Which is why the mention of their ethnicity in the lead or elsewhere is basically irrelevant in the first place. Were they Protestant or Catholic, none of this would even be mentioned. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 19:27, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What in the world does the Sochi olympics have to do with this? The only implication here is that you have some sort of Russia/Ukraine POV thing going on, and that's totally irrelevant. The Rusyn's came to the US before the Soviet annexation of Carpathia at the end of WWII. Magocsi's book was written in 1984, with revised editions in '85, '93, and 2005. The fact that the characters are Rusyn is also mentioned in Magocsi's encyclopedia, written with Pop, in 2002. What matters is what encyclopedic (especially tertiary) sources say, not your opinion or mine. I have Magocsi, and you have your POV. μηδείς (talk) 20:33, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you read what I wrote, the invasion of Ukraine by Russia happened right around the Sochi Olympic's (temporal reference). That's when all the current wave of Ukraine vs. Russian cultural rhetoric saw a resurgence. And it's happened in multiple articles, though this is the one I pay attention to on my watchlist. I don't have a POV based opinion on the matter as I'm not any strain of Eastern European ethnicity in my gene pool. Given that it is a work of fiction, the film is the only context for any analysis that is permissible in this article. And nowhere in the film or screenplay does the debate about Rusyns, Ukrainians or any other European cultural distinctions take place. Russian is the only thing mentioned in the film itself -- via words, references and the church scenes. It's not my point of view, it's the material actually presented in the film. Argue whatever you want. There is no factual study done on it that takes place in the film. And in the context of the film itself, that is the only relevant point. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 20:48, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I am glad you have laid your cards out on the table. You instantly jump to a bizarre conspiracy theory about the Sochi Olympics and editors here at Wikipedia, you automatically assume bad faith on my part, and you believe that some sort of "study" needs to be done to prove I don't even know what, exactly. But I have nothing to do with Ukraine or Russia, no dog in any fight, and plenty of sources showing that the story is set in a steel mill town settled by Ruthenians, not Russians, and not Ukrainians, and references by one of the most renowned Canadian scholars on the topic, as well as various other academic scholars. I know how to write neutrally, and how to use WP:ATTRIBUTE, and I will do so in my own good time while thanking you to refrains from attributing my motives to events that happened dozens of years after my interest in the film and the Rusyn subtext in it. μηδείς (talk) 02:19, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Never said a thing about your motivation. I honestly couldn't care less what your motivations are. But feel free to jump to whatever conclusions you like. Bottom line remains: this article is about a film, and that film itself is a work of fiction. And the entire story is about a group of American friends and their experiences before, during and after a war. Not eastern European social studies. Your sources you are citing are outside the actual framework of the film itself. Real-world accurate or not, the film itself never mentions any ethnic group except for a passing remark made by a doctor about a 'Russian name'. It's secondary and tertiary research you're pointing to for making an argument that is not relevant to the plot of the film, nor is it intended by the filmmakers themselves. You clearly have an issue with separating fiction from the real world.

Have a nice day. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 16:54, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ryecatcher773

- the first user asking for correction of Rusyn ethnicity did so at least in 2007 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AThe_Deer_Hunter#c-Badagnani-2007-09-24T01%3A15%3A00.000Z-Rusyn_or_Russian%3F and you know why this topic is now really important.

- when having drinks на здоровье is really unusual in Russian, like наше здоровье, and this really annoys Russian to no end that this movie did put this myth in westerners' heads. You'd say at least за наше здоровье but it's more polite to say за ваше здоровье, and you just never say на здоровье.

- westerners get easily confused about Russians, Ruthenians, Rusyn, and everything connected (land, language, ethnicity, citizenship) that's why most of the time the adjective "Russian" is used, incorrectly, as an approximation, and that's why it may have been marketed as such.

Also please don't be rude to people. Falep (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I cut the film list in the legacy section by half. First, there's no reason to list every film that is related to Vietnam – Forrest Gump, in particular, did not seem appropriate, as it's intent is far different than the previously named films. In general, though, the point is made by simply listing four films, which indicate The Deer Hunter's influence. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 12:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this fits the category Grijalvo --79.159.88.139 (talk) 15:25, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Archiving a talk page says to seek consensus before setting up automated archiving on a talk page. There are 38 sections here going back to 2005. Any objections? Largoplazo (talk) 02:11, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The word "revisionism" in the title of the section The Deer Hunter#Revisionism following Heaven's Gate isn't an accurate characterization of the negative views expressed by critics that the section brings to our attention.

• Vincent Canby isn't expressing a view at odds with his original view of The Deer Hunter. He's saying that for someone who could have created a disaster like Heaven's Gate to have been able to make a movie as good as Canby considered The Deer Hunter to be, the quality of the former film must have cost Cimino his soul.
• Andrew Sarris's original review of The Deer Hunter had been negative. Therefore, there is no revisionism in his also-negative remarks after seeing Heaven's Gate.
• The quote by Steven Bach doesn't imply that critics who had praised The Deer Hunter were changing their minds. He could just as well have meant that they were striving to explain how the films could have been of such different quality that they fawned over the former and panned the latter. It could be either, but we aren't told here which it is.
• The Deer Hunter was released in 1978, so it's highly unlikely that Mark Kermode (born in 1963) had had a widely published positive review in 1978 against which his caustic remarks reported here represent an about-face.
• We are told that David Thomson and A. O. Scott continue to hold The Deer Hunter in esteem, so they aren't contributing to the alleged spate of revisionism. (For what it's worth, A. O. Scott was born in 1966 and, therefore, like Kermode, almost certainly hadn't published a review in 1978 that he could either stick to or turn his back on.)

"Revisionism" is an incorrect description of the reviews presented. Maybe the selection of that word was a poor choice attributable to WP:OR. Perhaps "Retrospective commentary following Heaven's Gate". What do you all think? Largoplazo (talk) 02:36, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Man, are those stealth edits ([recent example) to insert "Russian American" or "Ukrainian American" annoying. There are already two long discussions about this above and they don't settle anything because the movie isn't about that and never named an ethnicity. (In fact, Cimino had Nick pointedly answer about his name, "No, it's American.")

So, as a pissed-off reader, I'm going to edit it with three scholarly sources, to "Slavic-American steelworkers" in the lead and to "(They seem to be Slavic Americans and could be Russian Americans, Ukrainian Americans, Rusyn Americans, etc.)" in the article, so help me Wiki. 77.147.79.62 (talk) 18:26, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have to be honest I find it to be a little over-analytical and a bit of more info than is necessary given the subject of ethnic heritage is not even really broached in the movie (aside from the one line about being American that Nick gives to the doctor while in the hospital and asked about his last name), nor is it in any way shape or form important to the storyline.

But as a party to this argument over the last 5-6 years (maybe more?) I'll concede that just for the simple fact that it covers all the bases, hopefully it will stem the tide of the 'stealth editors' as your refer to them and maybe they'll leave it alone. Seems like every time there is a flare-up in international relations between Russia and the Ukraine this edit war happens. In any case, we should all Pray for peace in Eastern Europe. Anyway that's my two cents. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 00:07, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The term "airborne green berets" would never be used in the community of SF. All Green Berets are required to be airborne. There is no such thing as a "leg" Green Beret. Leg equals non airborne. Special Forces is the correct term though Green Beret, the headgear we wear, is often used by the public. PhilKnoxUSArmy (talk) 08:31, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I should've added that all soldiers that wish to join the Special Forces will go to Airborne School, before assessment and selection to join the Q "qualification" Course. The person that wrote "airborne Green Beret" seems to be unfamiliar with that topic.

In addition, I didn't make changes to this because Deer Hunter is fiction, but it would be impossible to enlist in late 1968 and be a member of Special Forces by early 1969. The fastest I have seen was a 2 year program offered to highly qualified enlistees. SF usually wants soldiers to be a veteran of at least their firet enlistment. To go to assessment they need to be at least and E-4. PhilKnoxUSArmy (talk) 08:39, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are many potential errors of fact here. But I again will refrain from changes since I haven't seen the movie in quite awhile. Cimino may have called the river Kwai, in his movie.

But the river is in Thailand, and not in Cambodia, Laos or Vietnam. Thus making it impossible for the Viet Cong to have any presence along that river. PhilKnoxUSArmy (talk) 08:44, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]