Talk:Spanglish (film)

Plot

Whoever wrote the plot summary is seriously stupid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.117.144.182 (talk) 20:26, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I just rewrote it. - Shaheenjim (talk) 23:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

The English in the plot section of the article is not very good. Grammar mistakes, awkward phrasing, formatting errors... It should really be copy-edited or re-written by an English speaker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.36.52.31 (talk) 12:11, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Controversy

The movie was GRRRReat! My question is why is it controversial for a Spanish woman to play Mexican? I though Mexicans spoke Spanish. I didn't see any controversy because Tracey Ullman portrayed a Russian and she's British. DonMEGA⁶⁰⁶⁴⁵ 17:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

The language that most Mexicans speak is Spanish as they do in Spain (albeit Castillian). However, that simple observation indicates some naiveté on your part. The issue is not language but that most of the population of Mexico is Mestizo (70% - people of Spanish and Native American origin) and Paz Vega clearly has more European features. It goes without saying that there is profound racism in Mexico and those of more Spanish-European descent are not ones that come here to be housekeepers. Watch Mexican television for an idea of what I am talking about. Mexico is far more class-oriented (de facto caste system) based on race to a far more substantial degree than in the U.S. where you are guaranteed an education to grade 12 simply for the asking. The movie therefore represented someone atypical in appearance relative to most Mexicans.

The cynic in me would think this was an attempt to make the illegal alien crisis more palatable to America at large due to Hollywood's preoccupation with multiculturalism and hyphenated Americanism. However, it misses the point (of course). The vast majority of Americans simply believe it to be a rule of law issue and not of nationality/ethnic origin. Are Mexicans entitled to come here illegally en masse over everyone else in the world that wants to come here just because we share a common border? Such a largely homogenous group of immigrants (language and culture) coming here illegally is unprecedented and damages the prospect of measured assimilation and our tradition of Americanization of immigrants (common identity as Americans). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.14.148.51 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 2006 August 31

The anonymous poster above did a fine job of explaining why it was idiotic to cast a white Spanish person as an undocumented Mexican housekeeper in America, so I'm only going to add some additional comments. Casting Spanish white actress Paz Vega as a Mexican servant in the US illegally was NOT like casting British actress Tracy Ullman as a Russian. It was more akin to casting Samuel L. Jackson, Cheech Marin or Lucy Liu as a Russian. There are white Mexicans, but as the above poster has already said, they're generally well-off and have much less reason to come to America (let alone illegally) than non-white Mexicans.

--drumwolf – 71.139.167.228 (Talk/Contribs) 2006 Dec. 16 and 72.1.150.252 (Talk/Contribs) 2006 Dec. 29

The most important reason why it is crazy to cast a European in that specific role, is because Flor's daughter sayd to Tea Leoni's character "You are the nicest white woman I've ever met". This rules out the possibility that Flor is a white Mexican. Americans would have laughed if someone like Sandra Bullock played Flor, so why is it acceptable for Paz Vega who is far less ethnic looking that Sandra Bullock, for instance, to play this ethnic character? Because American media has grouped all spanish-speaking peopl into one ridiculous group "Latino", "Hispanic" and more, but the fact is that placing a European and a person of mostly Aztec decect, like most Mexicans are, in one Group is like calling Samuel L. ackson white simply because he speaks english and has an Englisg surname. Does this make him and Jude Law of the same ethnic background? NO!!! 93.133.252.212 (talk) 04:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Just relax guys: It´s a MOVIE, not a documentary!!

And remember: Movies are NOT reality and never want to be the reality.

So if you have a problem with the fictitious live and fictitious characters in movies: Don´t watch movies, stay in real-life!

Just FYI, writing a college personal statement on the life of your mother is not a good idea, unless you are applying to the college for her. ---makuta —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.135.70 (talk) 04:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Plot

I edited the apostrophes out of the summary header and the "trivia", if you could call it that, which simply said "Some fans think this is Adam Sandlers worst movie", no citation, pure opinion. I think the plot summary probably contains a negative slant though i haven't read it through... (don't worry i didn't edit it) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.215.133.69 (talk • contribs) 15:19, 2006 July 12

Flor’s name

With regards to the pronunciation of Flor, I can hear the differences in the scene, but cannot make the correct sound myself. Are there any English words with the same “r”/“or” sound? —MJBurrage • TALK • 22:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Spanglish poster.jpg

Image:Spanglish poster.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) 05:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Critical Reception?

The "Critical Reception" section says "Its proponents champion the film as a seminal, revolutionary masterpiece, breaking new ground in the areas of visual composition and sound/light resonance..." Is there a citation for this? I've never heard anyone refer to this film as a "revolutionary masterpiece," and frankly I find it a little hard to believe that anyone would. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.44.29 (talk) 12:47, 9 June 2013 (UTC)