Talk:Labyrinth (1986 film)

Labyrinth (1986 film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 13, 2012	Peer review	Reviewed
January 29, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

Film: British / American

	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.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

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.

Disambiguation[edit]

Should there be a link to a page just about Labyrinths for people interested in mazes...

No need; People looking for mazes would go to Labyrinth straight away and not to Labyrinth (film). --Fritz S. 14:27, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Writing credits[edit]

The other version listed the writer as Dennis Lee. Anyone resolve this? Meelar 23:11, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Story by Lee and Henson, screenplay by Jones, according to the credits. --Paul A 03:38, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I am shocked and appalled that in a wiki article on the labyrinth there is not one mention of the legendary, yet frightening, bowie bulge. It just pokes out of the screen at you; one time it was the only thing in focus on the camera as if it was drawing the cosmic energy of the film unto itself.

Who is the joker claiming there was a deleted song?[edit]

This makes me sick to my stomach. Some joker claimed there was a song called First Kiss in which Jennifer Connelly got kissed by Bowie as Jareth but it was cut because of test audience reactions. There are three versions of Magick Dance, and four versions of Underground, two versions of As the World Falls Down, and two versions of Chilly Down but there is NO song called First Kiss. I am horrified that this is being passed off as fact.

David Bowie was thirty nine. Jennifer was not legally of age. There are very strict child actor laws in England (where most of Labyrinth was filmed). Jim Henson would have been arrested just for filming the scene intended in a PG movie with an actual under age actress and adult man regardless of if the scene was used or not.

All of Bowie's unreleased recordings have been listed. Bowie never lets a song go to waste. If it's not used for it's original purpose (like the Rugrats song he wrote) it's used elsewhere. There was never a First Kiss song in this film.

Furthermore, the supposed "interview" citation (#4) links to a German interview in which Bowie doesn't mention Labyrinth or anything related to it.

I can't comment on the First Kiss thing (although it does seem mentioned on other sites), but the idea that a kiss between Bowie and Jennifer would be "illegal" or some such nonsense is absurd. Kissing someone under the age of 18 is not illegal on or off film, in any country that I know of. Would you like me to list some of the 100,000 movies in which an actor over 18 kissed an actress under 18 on camera? Have you ever seen, oh I don't know, every teen comedy or drama ever filmed? :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.20.144.229 (talk) 10:22, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly off topic, so sorry. When this was filmed, no, there wouldn't have been any laws prohibiting a minor being kissed by an adult. I'm pretty sure it was quite common for an element of it to go on anyway (although, without tongues...). But it IS now illegal for under 16s, in England and Wales, to kiss ANYONE in a perceived 'sexual' way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.77.221 (talk) 16:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The source is wrong, and without any source this information should remain deleted. Provide an actual source, or we're going to have to bring in a mod. Promontoriumispromontorium (talk) 21:13, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link to changeling?[edit]

I was going to be bold and remove the link, but I figured I'd ask here before I do so: why does the text "take away her screaming baby brother" link to changeling? Is it a reference to what Jareth plans to do with her brother? Thanks, D e ath phoenix 15:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think it should stay. Sometimes, for example, there is a phrase in another article that goes: "and she was [[xenophobia|afraid of strangers]]". And other examples, too. I think it shows that there is a page on Wikipedia devoted to that subject. Hope it helps. ^KILO-_LIMA 23:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree-it should stay, the kidnapping of her brother resembles the changeling myth, but perhaps it should be referenced in a better way. Seavv 04:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Influences[edit]

The "two people, one who always lies and one who always tells the truth" scenario didn't originate with Labyrinth. Is there any reason to think that their Powerpuff Girls appearance was specifically inspired by their Labyrinth appearance? Sailorptah 20:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same with the new Samurai Jack addition. It's likely these were inspired by Labyrinth, because creator Genndy Tartakovsky is a nerd, but unless there's some citation to back this up, I propose the "spoofs" of this classic riddle be removed. However, the Order of the Stick reference appears to be spoofing Labyrinth somewhat, as they use the line "certain doom." —Ragdoll 20:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "knights & knaves" puzzle in which one person tells only the truth & another tells only lies was created by Raymond Smullyan, not by this film. Frankly, I'm surprised they were invented as recently as they were. I've removed the "Influence..." section not because the header isn't valid, but because all the information contained therein was based on the logic puzzle. -mordicai. 02:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something to consider. Paying real close attention reveals that both doors were lying. Confirming that the Labyrinth is not fair. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zerothis (talk • contribs) 08:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

The Knights and Knaves puzzle has appeared in popular culture long before Labyrinth such as in the 1975 Doctor Who serial, Pyramids_of_Mars. In fact, it appears in a more pure form in the Doctor Who episode than in Labyrinth. So it should not be automatically assumed that latter iterations of the puzzle are necessarily homages to any one particular source.IanThal 13:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nor were they invented by Smullyan. Smullyan's very first knights and knaves problem (What is the Name of this Book?, problem 26) is described by Smullyan as "old", and problem 27 begins "When I first came upon the above problem", implying that he did not originate it. Unless there is proof that Labyrinth was specifically influenced by Smullyan (as opposed to both using similar puzzles) there is no reason for Smullyan to be mentioned in this article. 91.107.183.159 (talk) 23:03, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Influences shown in objects in the film[edit]

I don't think it's noted well enough that influences for the film are shown in objects in many scenes. Especially about 6 minutes into the film, the camera slowly pans across in Sarah's room the following objects:

a Puppet
a Music Box with a Doll
a copy of the book "Where the Wild Things Are"
a Stuffed Animal that somewhat resembles Sir Didymus
a Labyrinth game
a copy of the book "Alice in Wonderland"
a copy of the book "The Wizard of Oz"
a copy of the book "Outside Over There"
a copy of the book "His Classic Fairy Tales" by Hans Andersen
a copy of the book "Grimm's Fairy Tales"
a copy of the book "Walt Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs"
a copy of the book "Through the Looking Glass"
a Statue of what appears to be a goblin that resembles Hoggle
a Statue resembling the Goblin King

And in other instances you see:

a poster of "Relativity" (it is a rotated and cropped version of Escher's original)
a poster for "Cats"
a "King Kong" figure

I'd make changes to the article myself, but I'm pretty sure someone would just undo them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeroeon (talk • contribs) 02:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is actually one of my favorate shots in the film, for those very reasons. I don't think it's notable enough to be included in the article, though, but it's definitely a treat for the eagle-eyed viewer. If you want a real treat, look on Sarah's mirror to see a photograph of a woman, we can assume that it's her birth mother (as opposed to her stepmother seen in the previous scene), who appears to be an actress. And the man beside her in the photo, could it be? Yeah, I love this moment in the film. Justin.Parallax (talk) 13:25, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Author of book[edit]

Please update this article to a link to the author of the book http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._C._H._Smith thistlechick 18:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has done this Adrian J. Hunter 13:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My bad- I added the reference without mentioning here that I had done. -mordicai. 20:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that Labyrinth is BASED on the book by A.C.H. Smith. This is not correct. A.C.H. Smith wrote the novelization of the movie; the movie came first then the book, so the movie is not BASED on the book. Can someone please fix that?

Someone's listed the author of the novelization as C.A. Williams. I've changed it to A.C.H. Smith. No objects? Good! //F. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Finnicky (talk • contribs) 02:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bowie does gurgling[edit]

David Bowie admits in the documentary about the Labrynth that he did baby Toby's sounds in the song Magic Dance because the baby wouldn't gurgle.

David Bowie's "gurgles" only appear in the soundtrack release and 12" record of "Magic Dance" and not on the actual movie.

Yeah you're right. Also on the Soundtrack it is *so obvious* that the noise is Bowie messing about and not a real baby!Gunstar hero 16:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the George Lucas banner is doing there?[edit]

Labirynth was creation of Jim Henson!

Did you look at it? He was a producer on the film. - Zepheus <ツィフィアス> 17:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interpretation Section[edit]

The interpretation section is wholly original editorializing, and per WP standards, it should either be removed or edited to reflect published commentary. If there is no comment on this within a week of me posting this, I will take the action of removing the interpretation section. Azlib77 19:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I support this, it's blatant OR. Cop 633 22:20, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't support deleting the Intepretation section. Theoretically to say, Labyrinth is a children's film, it has many under-meanings to it and that's a part of its beauty. The lead female Sarah is in an in-between stage of maturing from a girl to a woman and the film is a fantasy type. Deleting this section would be like cutting away the fantasy part of the film. The intepretation section is the only place where one can express and share their intepretation on the movie and its many meanings. In stead of deleting it, I suggest careful supervision over it. Sythe 23/11/2006, Bangkok Thailand.

As interesting a read the Interpretation Section is unfortunately it contains far too much original research and speculation at the moment to remain. It should be either removed (though it could be maintained on another site) or overhauled with references to any relevant published research, should such research exist. I like it too but it is full of Wikipedia No-Nos I'm afraid :( --GracieLizzie 23:29, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised this section makes no mention of the importance of the fact that only 3 of the female characters in this movie are significant. One of the few places where females are seen (and they are all minor characters) is at the grownup party. There is much personal enmity between Sarah's and the other two females in the movie. Her real mother is deceased. All of Sarah's companions are male (even Ambrosia and Merlin). Sarah holds some level of authority over all the main male characters (Hoggle, Ludo, Sir Didimus, Jareth, Toby, Merlin). If I weren't such a dumb male I would probably see the meaning behind this--Zerothis 08:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the script called for the junk lady to be a puppet being manipulated by Jareth. I guess this proved to difficult to preform and was changed. So Sarah's stepmother is the only major female character. And, there is no major female characters in the labyrinth, only minor ones at the adult masquerade.--75.111.20.47 15:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the interpretations section, due to the aforementioned problems.--Drat (Talk) 13:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be appropriate to keep the Interpretation heading, if there was a simple statement such as "fans have published online articles that explore possible interpretations of the film, including Jungian and Freudian symbolism. (etc)" And then include the links to these articles? We could also quote statements of intent from the creators that the film "mean something" (to quote Henson in the making-of documentary) with citations, of course. It seems a pity not to acknowledge the deeper interpretations of the film just because there hasn't been conventionally published material about it.--Psipes 06:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing to stop someone recreating the section using citations and such. I removed the section entirely because it was just some random person's interpretation. In fact, it had recently been expanded with some IP user's screwball theory that Sarah murdered Toby.--Drat (Talk) 06:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need the interpretation section. I can't find it in the edit history, and it was the main reason I send people here to read this article in the first place. Coolgamer 01:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last diff before I removed it. I don't see why it'd be much use though. It's just someone(s) random BS ideas.--Drat (Talk) 05:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Themes Section[edit]

This seems to have the same problem as the aforementioned Interpretation section, but I feel like some acknowledgement of the themes should be made, if only through links to off-site articles. (See my suggestion under Interpretation Section discussion.)--Psipes 06:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for The Bog of Eternal Stench[edit]

Merge As this can easily be incorporated into the Labyrinth article. OverMyHead 15:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely.--NeilEvans 22:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Merge and redirect speedily. This is such a silly article. - Zepheus <ゼィフィアス> 18:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, definitely while I could understand Jareth or Toby having there own articles as they play important parts in both this and Return to Labyrinth I'm not sure the bog is significant enough to warrant it's own article. Does it play an important role in Return to Labyrinth? --GracieLizzie 18:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Having read Return to Labyrinth, I can tell you it has no significant role in it at all. I believe it's mentioned once from Jareth, as a usual threat to some lackey. F A E 06:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge without further delay. --mordicai. 23:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge immediately. The current version isn't even worthy of being called an article, quite apart from its superfluous subject matter.Gunstar hero 17:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External Links[edit]

I'm removing the external links to fansites per WP:EL. The sites are not verifiable sources. Jtconroy88 04:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Character list[edit]

First of all kudos to the person who added all that information on the characters in the film. However, I feel that it is a bit excessive. Personally I think only Sarah and Jareth should be given any great detail as they are the main characters, the protagonist and antagonist. All the other characters are surplus and should only be listed on this page with one or two short sentences. What do other people think?--NeilEvans 00:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely excessive detail. Take the shears to it.--Drat (Talk) 02:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you take it upon yourself to cut it down just because you want to keep the article short? The Labyrinth franchise is in the process of expansion. Do you think the people involved would really approve?—Preceding unsigned comment added by JTheGoblinKing (talk • contribs)

The people behind the productions don't own the article. This isn't meant to be a fansite spilling over with trivial detail.--Drat (Talk) 09:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cut it down! It's ridiculous. When 'the junk lady' (who has like, one scene) is being given as much space as Jareth and Sarah combined, it's fairly obvious that the article has lost its direction. As they stand the two character lists are little more than elaborate trivia sections.Gunstar hero 17:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anniversary Edition DVD[edit]

Would it be worth mentioning that a new remastered anniversary edition of Labyrinth is being released in September and it will feature never-before-seen footage and new interviews with various cast and crew?

Return to Labyrinth[edit]

I am removing the mentions of Return to Labyrinth from the character area. This is an article about the movie, not the manga. I do not intend to remove the section on the manga, but by all means, give it its own article and put character synopsizes there.

Sting??[edit]

What's all this about Sting? I thought it was David Bowie? IMDB agrees with me...

Actually, looks like vandalism...I reverted it.

The DVD documentary suggests that Sting and Micheal Jackson were the two artists considered along with Bowie during the early writing stages. That may have been the source of the joke. Gunstar hero 17:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone always says that Henson said they were the other two choices, using the behind the scenes as reference. But in that footage, all he said was that he wanted a pop musician to play the role and then, in an "off the top of his head" fashion, he proceeded to name a few. Trakx (talk) 02:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fairies are stunned?[edit]

At its entrance, Sarah finds Hoggle, a dwarfish goblin, spraying fairies with a solution that stuns them so that they will not bite him.

I was under the impression that the spray was a pyrethroid pesticide that slowly killed the fairies with paralysis; intended to be a reference to the Raid commercials that celebrated the instant death of cutesy animated characters in contrast to the slow death insects endure in reality.--Zerothis (talk) 23:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Labmanga1.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Labmanga1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:44, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs significantly more sources[edit]

I tagged the article because it's sad that an article of this length and detail is stuck at Start class. momoricks (make my day) 07:39, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, I'm planning to give this article an overhaul when I can find the time. Seraphim ♥ 11:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Persephone[edit]

I wonder if there are any references linking the story of Labyrinth to the Greek mythology of Persephone, tricked and abducted into the underworld where Hades attempts to make her his wife and resorts to tricking her by getting her to eat fruit (pomegranate vs peach). It's not at all listed as an inspiration when there are clear parallels in the underlying story. Without a reference of course, it can not be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.236.208.169 (talk) 14:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plot and Cast[edit]

The plot section and the cast have too much duplicate information. If we are going to have a cast section with a lot of details about the characters, then we do not need to repeat that detail (as in the case of Sarah) in the plot. Likewise, the cast section does not need to repeat, in minute detail, events in the plot. Both of these sections can be pared down considerably. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 14:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pared it down – there you go. Sottolacqua (talk) 18:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I think you've removed too much information from the cast section. Now, it's practically empty. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 18:42, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most film articles include a cast section that merely lists the characters and actors. Why do paragraphs of character exposition and wp:or need to be included for a simple plot as in this film when films like The Graduate and The Godfather include concise lists or very brief descriptions of characters? Sottolacqua (talk) 18:47, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not disagree with you. All I was saying is that a line or two of description, especially for characters not mentioned or described in the plot would not be out of order. What was there previously was out of control. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:24, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other[edit]

Why no mention of contact juggling (the tricks Bowie does with the crystal balls) within the article? It was significant to the CJ and Juggling world, and seems to be the only use of such tricks in a major motion picture.

I think that's because Bowie didn't do them. It was another person behind him doing them, his name is Michael Moschen, and I think that Contact Juggling is famous because of him and Michael was the one who was significant to CJ and not because of the movie. --189.170.53.41 (talk) 03:59, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MC Escher's "Staircases"[edit]

That's an illustration called Relativity. Also I dunno if it would be ok to add that in the ending, as Jareth falls over, Sarah's hand comes up and partially grabs one of his glass spheres before it bursts like a bubble. It's another Escher reference, it's based on his Hand with reflecting Sphere illustration. In fact, and I know I need a source, so I'll go look for it and post it when I find it, the spheres are present because of that illustration.--189.170.53.41 (talk) 04:10, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Labyrinth (film)/GA1

Over-linking[edit]

This is a note to anyone who has been adding new links to names that are already linked elsewhere in the credits. Please take it into account when editing this article.

I worked hard to bring the Labyrinth page up to good article status, and while the review was ongoing I was told a prerequisite of an article being marked as a 'good article' is that it does not feature over-linking. Because of that, I had to go through and remedy this before the article was promoted. That is why I have reverted edits where people have linked every single incidence of a name they find, as it is both unnecessary and essentially undermines the hard work it took to get the article promoted in the first place. I hope to bring it up to featured article status eventually, and people who persistently add unnecessary links are not helping. That is why I have been undoing people's revisions, and I attempted to explain that as much as I could in the limited 'edit summary' field offered on wikipedia. I hope that makes sense, and would appreciate it if you did not promote over-linking on the page. Rachael89 (talk) 20:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Box Office Takings[edit]

Why is only the US box office taking listed for the film? Other wikipedia articles list the global takings, and some even show the Video, and DVD sales too.

Just listing the US takings does the film an injustice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.134.253 (talk) 22:45, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no information on the worldwide box office takings available for Labyrinth, which is why the wikipedia article only includes information on the U.S takings Rachael89 (talk) 14:37, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hoggle deuteragonist? Not Jareth?[edit]

Why is Hoggle said to be "the film's deuteragonist". Isn't the deuteragonist Jareth? --188.10.39.219 (talk) 06:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

So, after a huge blow up on this for no acceptable reason, this page has caught my attention. I've had a small batch of CC-BY-SA 2.0 images transfered from Flikr to commons: for use on this article and they are all in the category commons:Category:Labyrinth_(film) for easy finding. I hope someone can make some use of these. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 12:08, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where did the CC license come from? this was published in 1984 and is still under full copyright. Werieth (talk) 12:15, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is what they are marked as on Flikr, so I had them transfered to commons. I'm assuming that Flikr verifies this stuff, or it wouldn't be so easy to transfer them to commons using that justification. Technical 13 (talk) 12:28, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flicker doesn't verify anything. Those are fairly clear copyright violations. Unless we have confirmation from the copyright holder that these are under a free license they should be deleted. Werieth (talk) 12:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with Werieth. It's called Flickr washing. See [1]. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:13, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hrmm... I'm unsure here. According to commons:COM:LL, these images do not seem to fit the "indicators" of being such. The uploader of these images on Flickr does indeed seem to be the original taker of these images, the question becomes in my mind is whether or not they are significantly different enough from the originals to be clear of being considered a derivative work. Due to the alteration in hue, the extreme pixelization, and change of formatting, I'm not entirely sure there is enough of the original left for a claim that this is derivative. That being said, I'm far from an expert on the subject and would be happy to defer to someone who is; and as such, I'm unwatching this page which means that you will have to {{Ping|Technical 13}} if you want my attention here again. Thank you for your comments. Technical 13 (talk) 13:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Technical 13: You have two people saying that the content shouldn't be labeled as CC anything on Flickr. Take that as a hint. I've listed every single upload on the commons as a copyright violation.—Ryulong (琉竜) 13:57, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Film?[edit]

Why is this even on here? Is there even ANY truth to it? I mean, it is using the Onion as a source. Kaisar Dragon (talk) 01:18, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The AV Club isn't satirical. However, the Variety article barely mentions it. I removed it since it's so little info, practically a rumor. It'll probably get added again, and I see a potential edit-war. But for now, it's out. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - General Health ‖ 04:13, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Toby Froud[edit]

The link to "Toby Froud" (who plays Sarah's BABY brother) directs to a man who was born in 1947 (and so would have been just under 40 years old at the time of the film?)

I am not an expert on this film, but this strikes me as wrong.

(It is a redirected link, so maybe someone screwed up that page?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:A88:1:E:FFFF:0:0:D4A5 (talk) 16:11, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That man is actually Brian Froud, Toby's father. Brian was the conceptual designer and costume designer for the film. Somebody just messed up links, but it has all been cleared now. Norum 10:55, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

companion book[edit]

Does anyone know that there's a companion book that highlights stories involving the characters of the Labyrinth itself? Visokor (talk) 11:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Labyrinth (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/20120717000000/http://www.beanblossom.in.us/larryy/cgi.html to http://www.beanblossom.in.us/larryy/cgi.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://connect.afi.com/site/DocServer/10top10.pdf?docID=381&AddInterest=1781

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: 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) 07:33, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Labyrinth (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:

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: 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) 05:28, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Hogwart"?[edit]

This is OR, and I'm just curious, but I recently noticed that shortly after they meet Sarah calls Hoggle "Hogwart" and he corrects her. Did this inspire? JK Rowling? The most effectual Bob Cat (talk) 18:38, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hoggle's overwhelming similarity to Charles Bukowski[edit]

Hoggle’s face is an obvious exaggeration of poet [Charles Bukowski]’s face. Have any of the character designers acknowledged this? It cannot be coincidental. Breadteam (talk) 07:57, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Woops - linked wrong: Charles Bukowski Breadteam (talk) 07:59, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Production Trivia[edit]

On a YouTube podcast called. "Jack's Throwback Attack", I heard in an interview with Francis Wright, one of the puppeteers in the film, a fascinating behind the scenes story between David Bowie and Toby Froud that never seems to get talked about. It was in Jareth's castle I think during the shooting of "Magic Dance", and it tells of a connection between Labyrinth and popular British children's character Sooty. If I added it, would it not be considered appropriate for Wikipedia? If anyone wants to, I can link the video of this podcast episode that way you can have proof. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 04:45, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]