Talk:Carl Denham

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tokusatsu, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tokusatsu 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.TokusatsuWikipedia:WikiProject TokusatsuTemplate:WikiProject TokusatsuTokusatsu articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Film

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

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Fictional psychopath[edit]

After having watched the 2005 remake of King Kong, I realized Carl Denham is the perfect example of the fictional psychopath who does not appear to be "evil." He displays many typical signs of the psychopathic personality like deceit, manipulation, fearlessness, impulsivity, an empathy deficit, financial irresponsibility, and grandiosity (his dream of being a highly successful film producer if only next time). He even has a warrant for his arrest. Most moviegoers would never think of him as a psychopath or even really such a bad guy (reckless, yes), yet the label of psychopath is appropriate.

Correct or not, do you think it might be original research? CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 02:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to my reading of Wikipedia's policy forbidding original research, this does not appear to constitute original research, so long as I cite the sources for this, which would be the PCL-R and Peter Jackson's 2005 remake of King Kong. It appears to be straightforward application of the checklist to this character in much the same way as 4 is the straightforward application of addition to 2 and 2. I do not know of any scholarly journals that publish hypothetical diagnoses for fictional characters at any rate, so I do not see how this could be a matter of dispute anyway. Nevertheless, I mainly just edit and don't follow the latest in policy trends around here as I am more concerned with the information than with wikipolitics.--NeantHumain 05:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dates of birth and death[edit]

Where did these come from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.208.7 (talk) 23:39, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]