CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Arts & Letters

Little Nicky

2000 film by Steven Brill

Manuscripts, fine bindings, an engraving plate and preserved performance ephemera
Arts and lettersInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 20, 2026
Entity authorityQ267866 ↗
Source-derived summary

Little Nicky is a 2000 American dark fantasy comedy film directed by Steven Brill, written by Tim Herlihy, Adam Sandler, and Brill, and starring Sandler in the title role, Patricia Arquette, Harvey Keitel, Tommy "Tiny" Lister Jr., Rhys Ifans, and Rodney Dangerfield with supporting roles by Allen Covert, Kevin Nealon, Jon Lovitz, Michael McKean, and Quentin Tarantino. The film depicts the son of Satan and an angel who is tasked with returning his two brothers to Hell and preventing them from destroying the boundary between good and evil on Earth. Little Nicky was released by New Line Cinema on November 10, 2000. The film received negative reviews from critics and was a box office bomb, grossing $58 million against an $80–85 million budget.

Plot

With his 10,000-year reign coming to an end, Satan must decide which of his three sons will succeed him as ruler of Hell. Adrian is the most devious, Cassius is the cruelest and Nicky is the kindest. Nicky has had a speech impediment and a disfigured jaw since Cassius hit him in the face with a shovel. Satan assembles his sons to tell them that as they are not yet ready to succeed him, he will continue ruling Hell.

Angered by this decision, Adrian and Cassius travel to Earth to create a new Hell by possessing religious and political leaders in New York City. As they leave, they freeze the entrance to Hell, preventing more evil souls from entering and causing Satan to begin to disintegrate.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Little Nicky” as 2000 film by Steven Brill. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA productive route into publication, performance and collection histories when the underlying object or edition remains clearly identified. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2000—that can be checked directly. The authority record carries competing date values—2000-11-10, 2001-02-22—which should remain separate until their references and qualifiers are resolved. The account is most persuasive where Little, Nicky and film can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the arts & letters register because the source frames it as 2000 film by Steven Brill. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Reception evidence should be dated and situated: later canonical status may differ sharply from the work’s initial circulation. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 20, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q267866. 1 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 2 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2000.

Critical limits

Titles can refer to several editions, objects or performances, making precise identification essential before interpretation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Separate the work, its editions or performances, and its later reception. Catalogue records, publication histories and object files often preserve different parts of that story.

Best used for
  • Identifying works and editions
  • Tracing reception history
  • Finding collection records
Verify next

The original object or edition, catalogue raisonné, performance record, rights file and holding institution.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Little Nicky”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Little Nicky primary sources, Little Nicky archive and Little research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Little Nicky”?
  2. How did later circulation or interpretation alter the work’s reception?
  3. Which edition, object, performance or recording is being described?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Little Nicky” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.