Talk:Midnight Express (film)

Cultural impact?

Anyone want to consider putting something in here about the cultural impact of the film, i.e. the Turks regard it as the worst catastrophe ever in Turkish-U.S. relations? 209.149.235.254 20:15, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I guess the impact of this film is that people view Turks as how they were potrayed in the movie and for the Turks they became very defensive and nationalist.I guess this film just added to the list of stereotypes and jokes of Turks

Could read better

While an interesting article, it doesn't really read like an encyclopedia entry. Would the person who wrote it, since it looks like a personal piece, like to alter this, or would they like it cleaned up by others?

In fact, may I suggest reverting to the 3rd July form, which still includes many of your points but very briefly, and working on the details you want to add here, on this 'talk' page, where people can advise how to shape it as an encyclopedia-style article? vv

Hi everybody. Feel free to alter the article. But do not simply erase it. In my opinion it is very good, it perfectly shows the difference between the movie and the book.

I would be going to edit it. Think it's a good article, still, arguments should be stated "Some say ..." or "Turkish argue ..." or "Critics say ...", but not "It's obvious that ...". Also would I cut some things like that passage stating that Hayes was a drug user. So what? So many people do, I wouldn't say they're all criminals... anyone strongly disagree? --JensLang 04:33, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

This article is very far from being acceptable in its current state. The book/movie comparisons don't need to be anywhere near so exhaustive, and the personal style (e.g. "No comments here" and "We see that") needs to go. Saforrest 06:31, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

I do strongly disagree with the claim that all drug users are not criminals.--Damifb 14:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio

Did the WP contributor copy from http://www.tetedeturc.com/Midnight-express/intro-ME_anglais.htm#Le%20film or is it the converse? As the en.wp article cites the FR translation of a book, I'm afraid it has been plagiarized from there. Apokrif 21:26, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Evisceration of article

After cleaning up some of the more egregious Turkish rants on this page, the basic summary of the film has now even been taken down. Wikipedia is not an appropriate forum for discussing the substantive merits of the film; the article should contain, at most, a summary of the plot points, and a mention that the film is controversial in Turkey. (A discussion of the Greek colonels' attempt to annex Cyprus, for example, is totally beyond the appropriate scope of this article.) Unfortunately, certain members with axes to grind are making this difficult. I suspect that the article ought to be reduced to "Mostly Harmless" so that everyone is happy.

Yes, I have also noticed this. Thunderlippps (talk) 01:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Valley of the wolves - Iraq

Valley of the Wolves Iraq is now sometimes presented as "return" for Midnight Express. Alex1011 07:53, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Was/Is it? Out of curiosity, I would like to see a source for this.

By the way, a better word for return in this context is payback (in U.S. English, at least). --anon. 71.183.139.60 (talk) 23:58, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Removed the following segment

• In the movie insults are aimed at Turks as a people that do not occur in the book and which the screen writer Oliver Stone later apologized for. They reach a paroxysm when the Hayes character, learning of his life sentence, pronounces violent abuse on the country, shocking many Turks, but understandable in the context of the film.

Uh, have you read the book? Hayes spends much of it bashing the Turks as a whole, calling them animals, filthy, bestial, etc. It is not a positive portrayal and Hayes comes across as a racist, arrogant jackass.

Try spending years in a Turkish prison and see how you turn out!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.149.236.86 (talk) 09:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

Have you?? (Tylose 18:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC))

More to the point, if you attempted to traffic drugs in order to go through that experience, how justified would you be in complaining about being arrested? That is the ultimate failure of the book and the movie; not so much racism, or even a silly, vague nationalism, as much as pure hypocrisy as its core motivation. Luis Dantas (talk) 08:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

More to the point is the hypocrisy that drugs made it into Turkey, and they arrest an American taking the drugs out of Turkey. Marc S. 206.192.35.125 (talk) 18:10, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I can't imagine a justification for complaining about one's arrest for such a crime when the accused is actually guilty (as you posit) and is not mistreated as he is taken into custody, but he could be justified in complaining about the length or conditions of his pre-conviction confinement or his imprisonment. Let the punishment fit the crime, as the saying goes. In addition, I suppose those who say cannabis should be legal would say he should not be arrested at all, but that's not germane to this particular discussion (which has turned into a discussion about this article's subject and not the article itself, by the way). --anon. 71.183.139.60 (talk) 00:22, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion of arrangement

Interviews, errors etc. could all be merged into a single "Criticisms" title. (Tylose 16:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC))

Whitelisting

In early March, Outrate.net was blacklisted for adding too many links to Wikipedia, which represented a COI according to Wikipedia policies. But this has meant that a number of valid Outrate.net links were automatically removed.

Our lengthy interview with Billy Hayes (Aug 05) was removed from the Interviews and External Links section of your Billy Hayes page. The deep link to the interview is here: outrate.net/billyhayes.html

I believe you are able to replace this link, if you would like to. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.253.33.127 (talk) 23:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC).

Category added

As the introduction to the description properly mentions the movie unnecessarily portrayed Turks in negative picture, and this even came under criticism of Bill Hayes himself. So the new category was added to the movie as it did indeed incite anti-Turkish sentiments. Atabek 23:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Firecom

I deleted some headlines in the article, due to turkish vandalism/ propoganda. This is a page for the midnight express movie -not your own personal views. Exmpl: See the Midnight Express (Book) page's Discussion board. That page have been vandalized by a turkish user.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Firecom (talk • contribs)

Firecom, they are not the Turkish view, they are the author's, director's, producer's views. Please do not arbitrarily accuse people of vandalism. There is one thing true though, removing sourced, relevant content is usually considered vandalism. Please refrain from doing so. Please also read the talk header above. Also, when you make reverts, please mention that. That's a good practise. If you want to revert an edit, you don't need to redo the edits, just use the 'undo' link, it will be time saving, and won't clutter the history page. If you need help, you can ask me, I am not an old editor, but I might be helpful. Since I am on vacation now, I might not be able to respond your queries swiftly though, sorry about that. Deniz^T_C 17:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Deniz, why is 'someone' deleting my writing under the headline 'filming location'. The turkish government did not give license to film the movie in Turkey. That's the true!

-Have a nice holiday, in Turkey! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Firecom (talk • contribs)

Firecom, do you have sources that prove that the crew asked to use locations in Turkey and got rejected. Anyway, please do not remove relevant information any more. Also regarding your comments below, yes the youtube links are relevant because the review is about the movie. Unfortunately these are not the only things that you removed. You are behaving like a single purpose editor, please stop doing that, that is not a good start. Last thing, if you want to sign your comments, you can type 4 tildas (~ ~ ~ ~, no blank spaces). Deniz^T_C 19:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Firecom 23:46, 14 June 2007 (UTC)Okay then. Why do you delete the lines i wrote, about the movie review, from Channel 4 UK? Also, the review's are not OBJECTIVE. Do you really understand, what that line means? OBJECTIVE. Sorry to say, not a thing you explore in Turkey, after my POV.

Deleted headlines

I deleted some external links, they are not relevant for the movie (youtube links). I also deleted the 'Review' section. It's not very objective.

Billy Hayes interviewed. Isn't that a headline in Billy Hayes Biography -not the movie?

Squam 07:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC) I kindly disagree. The interview is about the movie. I put the link back as a reference.

Fair use rationale for Image:Midnight express.jpg

Image:Midnight express.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) 06:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Lead of article

Oliver Stone's apology definitely belongs in the article, but I question whether it belongs in the lead. Stetsonharry (talk) 14:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Anti-Midnight Express

This article is currently full of quotes, links and a tone slamming this film as anti-turkish. I never noticed any turkish hate in this film. It is a frightening film about being locked up in a third world foreign prison. But I still dont see it as racist even after reading this article and looking for it. This is a really great, really shocking movie who's quality as withstood the test of time and is still considered a great movie by many people. Its also some of Oliver Stone's and Alan Parker's best work IMO. And judging from random reviews available anywhere on the internet, I would assume in the opinion of many others also. But the tone of this article frames the movie like it was some kind of shameful, racist catastrophe. Thats extremely POV by who ever is doing it. Thunderlippps (talk) 01:11, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

you may not notice any Anti-Turkish tone. but it is a movie highly Anti-Turkish film. it's even an example of it. the Anti-Turkish sentiment is referenced to reputed sources. Even Oliver Stone apologized for it's Anti-Turkish agenda. Thus, it's not POV. it's a universally acknowledged fact. it should stay as it is. please don't blank well sourced material. --Polysynaptic (talk) 17:27, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Racism is difficult to notice when one lacks contact with the culture being disfavored. It doesn't help that we are in a time of renewed nationalism. Although, to be fair, I guess the movie could only stray so far from the book that sources it, and which apparently takes refuge into a nationalist-racist mindset to flee from the obvious hypocrisy of complaining from being arrested for drug traffic and being surprised for a lack of leniency. Luis Dantas (talk) 08:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• In addition, I think what some people tend to forget is that articles on Wikipedia do not have to agree with what they themselves think about the topic, nor do articles have to exclude all viewpoints that are not widely agreed upon by the general pubic. For example, if some prominent people viewed this movie as racist, that is perfectly fine to include. It is not ok to simply say "this film is racist", but it is ok (and some might argue, important) to say things like "so and so wrote a paper about how he perceived parts of this movie as having racist undertones, for the reasons x, y and z". Opinions are fine to include in Wikipedia articles, particularly articles about books/movies/etc, as long as they are properly sourced and properly attributed - see WP:RSOPINION. Neutrality is important, but there is no good reason not to discuss reviews and controversies surrounding a film, as long as opinions are stated as such.

However, I don't think responses such as Polysynaptic's are helpful: it is (obviously) not a "a universally acknowledged fact" that this film is "Anti-Turkish", or we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Opinion itself is not fact - what is a fact is that someone had a given opinion. I have not gone through the article's history and checked exactly what the article looked like back when Thunderlippps posted his/her complaint, but if he/she was complaining about the article being written in POV style, with statements similar to, "Midnight Express is a racist anti-Turkish film," then that is a legitimate complaint. If, on the other hand, someone is/was upset by inclusion of properly-attributed critisicm of the film, along the lines of "Midnight Express has been widely criticized by scholars, reviewers and even the film-makers themselves for it's portrayal of the Turks in the film", it is inappropriate to remove such sentences from the article - it is not POV to say that someone said something. An article may be regarded as POV if reliable sources contain contradicting viewpoints on a topic but only one viewpoint is covered in the article. What one should do in such cases is add the missing viewpoint, not remove all viewpoints. If someone notable (such as a relevant expert, a well-known movie reviewer, someone involved with the film, etc) has made statements that they feel the film was not anti-Turkish and why, then by all means edit the article to include that.

When talking about issues such as this, it is much more helpful to bring up pertinent Wikipedia policy as opposed to just arguing one's own opinion about whether or not the film was racist. It doesn't get us anywhere and does nothing to prove why specific statements should or shouldn't be included in an article. Sorry my explanation was so long :-) --MsBatfish (talk) 03:28, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm surprised there isn't much mention that the Turkish people in the film are all prisoners and guards, surely at some point there were people pointing this context out. Since when is prison representative of an entire Nations people and culture? Czarnibog (talk) 10:22, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Blanking

some users are blanking the article in a specific way to hide obvious anti-Turkish sentiment in the film.

anti-Turkish sentiment in this film is justified through references to respectful sources. MGM's and Kirk Kerkorian's moves are historically critical and thus required to make the article complete. please don't blank the article.

Midnight Express is not "just a movie". it produced a cultural impact. the social, cultural and political aspects of the issue should be there in the article. Polysynaptic (talk) 01:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

• See my comments on this matter above (in the previous section). I know it this was posted some time ago, but in case the issue comes up again I felt it was relevant, (also someone else posted a recent reply). Thanks. --MsBatfish (talk) 03:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

The Flotilla murders by Israel and heavy airing of this film

Straight away following the murder of many Turkish nationals by Israel, this film has all of a sudden been aired on many European television stations and has been made available on digital downloads such as on Virgin on demand and re-appeared on shop shelfs as a dvd, perhaps to give turkish people a bad image. How can this be added to the article? This move is similar to the western media airing anti-arab films such as true lies 3 weeks prior to the invasion of Iraq. --94.195.194.144 (talk) 06:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

• This question was posted last year, but in case anyone is still interested in including that info: I don't see why it couldn't be included provided there are published sources stating that that happened, for example was there, say, a newspaper article discussing the increase in the film's presence immediately after the murder of the Turkish nationals? If not, and you just noticed this on your own, I would be very careful about if and how you present it in the article and make sure that you have proof, (for example sources that show that the movie was aired, say, 10 times a month after this happened and only once every 2 months beforehand), and do not include any of your own conclusions about the reason why this was done. --MsBatfish (talk) 03:40, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

The Danny Boyle connection

At the end of this article are lists of "Films directed by Alan Parker" and "Films by Oliver Stone" both of which I accept as valid. Yet there is also a template for "Films directed by Danny Boyle" even though there is no mention of him anywhere else in the article and he appears to have no connection to this film. Am I missing something? MikeEagling (talk) 01:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Underlying reason: Cyprus War. Should we include?

Both in the beginning and in the end of the movie we can hear a recording of some kind. A woman talks about Cyprus War in Turkish. Considering this is a British movie, which was, infact still is the guarantor of christian population in the island. It raises the question: maybe only or primary driving force of creating this movie was Cyprus War. Well, actually, for many Turk, this was the only reason. Considering movie was released in 1978, just after Cyprus War, this couldn't be anything else. Nonetheless, I feel like we should be including this information to the article. It will provide a different perspective to reader. Although haven't really researched this thought thoroughly. I have to leave this to you. Have a nice day. --Bluetogreens (talk) 03:30, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

A claim such as this

needs to be referenced, so I have removed it until such time as it is. No blogs please.
:" Giorgio Moroder used the six notes corresponding to "now you say you love me" from the song "Cry Me a River" to create part of the soundtrack ."
Carptrash (talk) 17:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Midnight Express (film). 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/20150623142710/http://global-travel-info.com/midnight-express-prison-malta.html/ to http://global-travel-info.com/midnight-express-prison-malta.html/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100703114615/http://www.manolith.com/2010/06/30/billy-hayes-and-the-real-midnight-express/ to http://www.manolith.com/2010/06/30/billy-hayes-and-the-real-midnight-express/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 00:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Plot Description

Can someone explain why the plot section says that when Billy pointed out the cabbie to the cops it was apparent that they werent going to keep up their end of the deal and so that's why he ran? I never got that impression and the scene doesn't make that clear at all. I just saw it as his using that time they were distracted talkng to the cabbie as a chance for him to escape. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.55.181.5 (talk) 07:47, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I've also deleted the bits saying that he had been raped, there was nothing in the movie to imply that. The chief guard "only" beat him that first nigth, and he definitely didn't reject Erich's advances. 2A04:241A:AA01:9E80:65D4:63D1:14F9:C3D9 (talk) 01:37, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Another item for the legacy section

In The Simpsons Season 3 Episode 6 Treehouse of Horror II, Homer is searched before bording his airplane from Morocco to Springfield and discovered to be smuggling various tchotchkes taped to his body in a similar manner as Billy did the blocks of hashish. Held at gunpoint by the customs guards just like in the film, he is fined $2 US and then the episode continues uninterrupted. Deliusfan (talk) 00:33, 30 October 2023 (UTC)