Talk:Four Weddings and a Funeral

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Four Weddings and a Funeral article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Film: British

	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 articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.

Romance High‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romance, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional romance in literature and romantic fiction writers. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.RomanceWikipedia:WikiProject RomanceTemplate:WikiProject Romanceromance articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBT studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Success[edit]

I seem to remember that this film is notable for being the first sizeable success, in commercial terms, that a British film had gained for some time. Some figures on this would be useful - the entry has more detail on the Wet Wet Wet song, which detracts from the significance of the film itself somewhat.

Synopsis[edit]

I wrote a more detailed synopsis, but my memory was vague on some points, so it could do with double-checking. (Weird, the film was so funny back in 1994 but now the thought of watching it again makes me nauseous .. not sure why!) Cop 633 03:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need more details on the impact/reception of the film and on the supporting characters[edit]

Today while poking around for analysis of the representation of Gareth and Matthew, I've noted that there are not only many reviews, but serious analyses of the characters, writing, production, casting and themes. The article presently omits any mention of the mixed (but largely negative) response to Macdowell's performance, British controversy over the BBC's share in the proceeds when the film proved profitable, commentaries on what is and isn't shown about the gay characters or about British society in general, and so on. Given these analyses, it also would be appropriate to include a bit more detail -- perhaps in a separate section of the synopsis -- about the characters of Fiona, Tom, David and Serena, Scarlett, and Gareth and Matthew.

I'm aware of the be bold policy, and it's not that I don't realize I can do this without anyone's permission; I simply am too busy during the U.S. school year, now just starting, and wanted to put out the challenge to others. Whether one likes or loathes the film, it must be acknowledged that it has a bigger place in contemporary film than is suggested by the current article. Lawikitejana (talk) 19:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I completely agree - I've been disappointed by this page for years, and always meant to try to get it to GA standard at some point, but have sortof given up putting lots of time into WP articles at the moment. Given its importance to the British film industry, it might be a good one to put forward to the British films taskforce part of Wikiproject films, perhaps? Bob talk 21:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a help, if you come accross a good internet source in the meantime, I don't suppose you'd mind just putting a link to it on this page, please? It would be a good starting point for improvements. Thanks. Bob talk 21:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poster[edit]

I know that the current poster is technically the original theatrical poster (as it was released in the U.S first), but I can't help thinking that the UK/European poster style might be a bit more useful (it shows all of the characters, for one thing). Anyway, I'm proposing to swap it. Any objections? Bob talk 12:08, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thank you very much? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.74.126.51 (talk) 14:36, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Garett and Matthew[edit]

I am pretty sure that nobody in the clique knew that Garett and Matthew had been a couple until Gareth’s funeral. Did I miss something earlier in the film? The friends seemed surprised, after the funeral. This was in 1994; I think the reveal was meant to catch us off-guard, as well. —Bertrc (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC) Bertrc (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure if you're looking for it, it's apparent, with one of them straightening the other's tie before one of the weddings, among other things. It's underplayed, but I suspect the friends all knew even if they don't talk about it...but then, why would they if they all know and they're all fine with it? DonIago (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Remember, this was back in 1994 when being gay was subject to a lot more discrimination than now (Yeah, even more than now) so, even among friends, people often were not out. I'll have to check the movie, again, but I thought the group is together after the funeral and expresses surprise. Yes they would have been fine with it, but they (and viewers with mediocre gaydar) were not aware until then. --Bertrc (talk) 13:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, I'm not sure what changes you're suggesting we make to the article, but if you want to make the argument that the group of friends is surprised, you'll need a source that backs up that claim. DonIago (talk) 13:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the line being referred to is:

Charles: All these years we've been single and proud of it and never noticed that two of us were, in effect, married all this time.

It's the sort of thing Richard Curtis may have discussed in something like the commentary or an interview I imagine. Bob talk 09:24, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]