Talk:Clueless

	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 American cinema task force.

Comedy Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Romance Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

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

California: Los Angeles / Southern California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Greater Los Angeles portal This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by Southern California task force.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal 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.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Anthropology: Oral tradition

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 February 2019 and 3 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Candles and candy.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2020 and 4 March 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Egbenne1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brianceron.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alicia Silverstone

I've added a link to the synopsis for Clueless at moviecheat.com. This is my site, it's pure content; I've checked the rules and it shouldn't be a problem to add this link as long as it's relevant and informative. I think it absolutely is; anyone who wants a another take at this movie will find it interesting. But if anyone truly has a problem, feel free to revert.Rasi2290

"career breaking role by actress Alicia Silverstone" -- "career breaking"?

I'm not sure what you odn't understand about this comment. This was the role that brought Silverstone to the attention of the world as an actress; it was the first role for which she recieved huge critical acclaim, and it skyrocketed her to popularity. Ergo, it broke her career: it was a career breaking role. user:Easterbradford

A Google search shows only a handful of results for the odd phrase "career-breaking." Where it exists (mostly on a Star Wars board) the term is used in a derogative fashion. The correct word is "breakthrough" as in "breakthrough role."

Or perhaps "career-making." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamandrewssoul (talk • contribs) 08:29, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beverly Hills Teens was not created to capitalize on Clueless

Beverly Hills Teens was a minor cartoon show from the 80s. It has no connection with Clueless.

Pop culture

Is it possible somebody could add a new section to this page concerning all of the pop culture references in this film? (e.g. Ren and Stimpy, Kato, Radiohead) It would come in handy for HSC students (final year of High School in Australia) like myself who are studying this film in their 'transformations' topic. While many of these references are farmaliar to the Amercian and to a lesser extent Aussie) teens of the 90's, there less farmaliar to our generation. This would really, really come in handy :) - [Karade]

Cast section

Did someone copy the cast section in this article off a DVD cover? It's very...advertisey.

Also, there are only two characters listed.

Underorbit 18:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's all kinds of things wrong with this article, I'll see if I can muster up enough initiative to devote some time to cleaning it up. Apparently it's such a "critically-acclaimed" and "highly-regarded" film that it is exempt from the wiki guidelines. :^) Randall00 16:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The link for actor Justin Walker leads to a character by that name in some other work 216.87.77.66 22:06, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! I'm an editor assigned to this page for a class I am taking. I am planning to continue working on the characters section! I feel that it still seems a bit like an advertisement like you all are saying. I'm excited to start. --Candles and candy (talk) 22:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removed trivia section

I removed the trivia section, since it was too long and full of irrelevant stuff. The following items aren't useless, but are in need of integration into the text, and sourcing:

The films that Christian watches on video with Cher - Some Like It Hot (1959) and Spartacus (1960) - provide clues to his sexual orientation. The first movie deals with cross-dressing men. The second includes the famous scene where a Roman master (Laurence Olivier) tries to seduce his male servant (Tony Curtis). Additionally, Cher says Christian brought those movies over because he has a "thing" for Tony Curtis.
Alicia Silverstone never auditioned for the part of Cher; she had coffee with Amy Heckerling and was offered the role.
Sarah Michelle Gellar was offered the role of Cher, but couldn't do it due to a contract on All My Children.

The rest was too tangential to be useful in the article. Mango juice^talk 20:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Music video adaptation of Clueless: Cultural references, Trivia, or just leave out?

Since the trivia section is gone, I am hesitant to add a popular culture reference section: the music video for Iggy Azela's "Fancy" is based on (to the point of recreating scenes) of Clueless. Should this be added, and where? FaulkTest (talk) 19:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Emma parallels

Ought we to draw out the Emma parallels more clearly? E.g. Cher=Emma; Tai=Harriet Smith; Josh=Knightley; Elton=Elton; Christian=Frank Churchill; homosexuality=secret marriage to Jane Fairfax, etc.? john k (talk) 06:52, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--

A good list was in there last year, but someone took it out, so I put it back in. Kalimac (talk) 02:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--

Missing the canadagoose. Isnotidisnotid (talk) 18:05, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

This article is sorely lacking in sources. Much is made of its 'breakthrough' status and its effect on youth culture, none of which is sourced and sounds like the opinion of a fan of the movie. Please supply 3rd party sources that detail its influence to avoid having the sections chopped. Ashmoo (talk) 14:38, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible sources:

Radloff, Jessica. "Clueless Was Released 17 Years Ago Today, So We Visited All the Movie Locations As They Look NOW!" (Archive). Glamor. July 19, 2012.

WhisperToMe (talk) 10:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Character list

I have rewritten many of the entries in the List of characters in Clueless page, having previously created this by moving some content across from the Characters section of the film's page (this article). Whilst it has been suggested that the character list page be moved back into this page, I feel I should point out that the list page includes characters and information relevant to both the film and TV show, and is in line with other pages which provide extensive lists of characters from fictional works and universes, including those which have existed in multiple media. Today's rewrite of the character list page provides clearer, more comprehensive information about the characters, in a setting (separate page) which can go into more detail (compared to a small section within a larger page on a broader related topic). I did reduce the size of the character bio's on this article as part of the creation of the list page, and further changes to the bio's on this page may make the list page more relevant, with the main page providing a brief summary ('pen pictures') of the characters and the list page providing more comprehensive information.Crowdman555 (talk) 10:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! I am assigned to this Wiki page for a class that I am taking. I am so happy for the edits that you made in 2009 on this page. I still think that the characters section can be changed at the sentence level. The tone does not seem to be neutral or as professional as other film articles. --Candles and candy (talk) 22:53, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Added for Justin Walker/Frank Churchill Comparison in "Cast" Section

The following line about Justin Walker needed a citation: " He is based on the Emma character Frank Churchill (who was not gay, but was secretly engaged to another)". I found a first edition of Austen's "Emma" and the relevant evidence is the following quotation in Volume III, page 195: as Knightley recounted in his conversation with Mr. Weston to Emma, "Oh! he told me all about it; that Jane Fairfax and Mr. Frank Churchill are to be married, and that they have been privately engaged to each other this long while". This statement proves that Frank and Jane were privately engaged through Volumes I and II, and it is only once Frank's aunt dies that he is able to reveal their engagement to his father, Mr. Weston, who tells Knightley. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JulieD27 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article Tone & Organization

Howdy! I've been assigned this Wiki page for a course that I am enrolled in. I'm hoping to make this page even better by making the tone more appropriate and professional at the sentence level, specifically in the plot and characters sections. I'm also wanting to simplify the adaptations section and wanting to make the lead section fit the film manual format. Additionally, a table for the soundtrack information may be beneficial. Also, does anyone have any information or sources concerning the remake? I think that there needs to be more content about this. Please let me know if you have any other ideas or suggestions. I'm excited to contribute! I will be posting changes on my sandbox first. --Candles and candy (talk) 05:07, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I found that many "good articles" formatted the characters by putting breaks in between the character names and the descriptions. Is this change okay? I also added headings in the "legacy" section because the legacy of Clueless is multifaceted and now future editors can come in and add information. Please let me know what you think. I am also going to work on the tone of the article this week. Please check out my sandbox before I post future edits! My Clueless Sandbox--Candles and candy (talk) 15:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I've worked on this article for a few weeks now. Here is a summary of the most important changes that I have made:

I added images to this Wiki page. Previously, the only image was the movie poster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Candles and candy (talk • contribs) 16:29, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I edited the tone to be encyclopedic. The original tone was immature and opinionated. See the plot section for how the style/tone was changed.
I deleted the descriptions of the characters. An overhwhelming majority of the Good Articles that I have seen simply list the names of the characters. ""Clueless"" even has its own character Wiki page so I feel that listing descriptions of the characters is repetitive and unnecessary, although it was a bold edit.
I created a "Popular Culture" section. I think that the Wiki article can really continue to grow by the addition of content in this section because the film continues to impact society today.
I deleted many of the references to the Emma novel. I felt that such references read like trivia.
I created a Soundtrack chart.

What still needs to be done:

Information needs to be added about the Remake. There is a section to add content about it.
New material can be added to the popular culture and production sections of the wiki page.
The sentence structure could still be edited as it still is a bit convoluted.
More citations and references should be added throughout the article.

--Candles and candy (talk) 04:12, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Faithfulness to the Text

'Faithfulness to the Text' seems like the wrong section heading for what the content is (I will correct the capitalization). This is not a straight adaptation of 'Emma' to start with, so has no need to be faithful to the text. Furthermore, this isn't what the section is about, anyway! I'm also removing the empty header 'Plot Similarities/ Differences'. Any information on this matter should be merged into 'Faithfulness to the text' when someone gets that far. Renard Migrant (talk) 16:35, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Emma in Credits

When I saw the movie on the big screen, I distinctly remember it saying in the credits that it was based on Emma, by Jane Austin. But in the streaming version available on Netflix, it doesn't say that. Is my memory failing me? Does anybody know what happened? I know that movies on DVD are often slightly different from the big-screen versions, but I don't know why. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 04:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 July 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:16, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clueless (film) → Clueless
Clueless → Clueless (disambiguation)

– The film is undoubtedly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC with respect to long-term significance, usage (spawning many of the other topics with the same title), and reader interest. The film has received an average of 119,000 views (!) per month over the last year, whereas the other articles have a comparatively minuscule amount. As page views demonstrate the PRIMARYTOPIC here, a hatnote to the disambiguation page should suffice. -- Wikipedical (talk) 17:19, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Calidum 17:39, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clear primary topic. Disambiguation is meant to aid readers, and we have clear evidence that the best way to do get them what they are looking for would be to make this move.--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:09, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Looking over the DAB page, the film is clearly the primary topic. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:31, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support only because "clueless" as a straightforward definition does not have an encyclopedic scope to warrant a standalone article. Same situation as Inception. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 19:03, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - although it would be better if a franchise summary were primary (as per WP:NCFILM#Media franchise), in the absence of that, then the film should be. -- Netoholic @ 01:33, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support As if! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:37, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.