Talk:Hot Fuzz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hot Fuzz article.
Article policies
Good article Hot Fuzz has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
August 14, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
Film Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Good article GA
This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Low
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the priority scale.
Comedy Portal
This article is within the scope of the Comedy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to comedy, comics, comedians, comedy movies, and the like. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Archive
Archives
Archive 1


Contents

[edit] Style of Article

I hate to sound pickey, but the language/structure/style of this article seems kind of unprofessional (no ofense to who ever wrote it, but there are a few "X is seen. It's So and so and he's..."). I think a shorter summary/rewrite may be advisable, but it's just a suggestion.--Romulus 03:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree; I've replaced the plot summary with a shorter one from a previous edit that (I think, anyway) sums up the important details of the plot without going into unnecessarily detailed "Angel did this, and then a bunch of shots are seen..."-type exposition. I also removed the spoiler notes, since current Wikipedia guidelines state that a section marked 'plot' doesn't need them.
Also - is there by any chance anything we can do to get rid of that massive gap between the heading 'plot' and the actual plot summary? It just makes the article look really empty.--Joseph Q Publique 14:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Good job on the plot summary! I have no idea how to get rid of the space, though.--Romulus 03:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't the plot section be bracketed by 'spoiler alert' tags? I'd put them in myself but I can't seem to find the proper code for them. Kob zilla 02:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Generally speaking, spoiler tags aren't used in areas where spoilers are obvious (such as a section labeled "Plot"). EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aliens reference?

I'm wondering if I'm stretching it a little, but the last scene where the swan attacks Danny's father from the back seat of the car reminds me a lot of the scene in Aliens where an alien attacks Ferro, the drop ship pilot. 217.155.104.92 14:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that might be a bit of a stretch. Hopefully we can get a better list of references once the DVD comes out; I'd assume that they'd mention some of the references in either the commentary or special features. EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:57, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually it is a reference to aliens but it also references Kingdom of the spiders.203.53.167.180 05:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other pop culture references

To me this was obvious and I'm surprised it's not mentioned. When the black robed murder is on top of the church, it appears to be a fairly direct reference to the Weathertop scene of LoTR: Fellowship. The music distinctly changes to Howard Shore's 'Nazgul' theme. That one was pretty clear, especially since Peter Jackson had an uncredited cameo. Some others that may or may not be: -Very end of Romeo and Juliet: Camelot scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail -Pub scene in the market shootout: Classic Robert Rodriguez, especially Desperado

I'm drawing a blank now but those are the ones that come to mind initially. Jlbrightbill 07:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I actually was just thinking that the Lovefool bit could be in reference to the 1996 movie William Shakespeare's Romeo + Juliet since that was what made the song a hit.Thinkbui (talk) 00:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cast

The cast list is a nearly full one, so there is no need for the additional information which repeats much of the same. Dyingswansong 20:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A Self-Reference

There is something not mentioned on the article which I feel should be, I just don't know how to implement it.
Earlier on in the film, Frost asks Pegg the following:

  • Have you ever fired two guns while jumping through the air?
  • Have you ever fired one gun while jumping through the air?
  • Have you ever fired a gun whilst being involved in a high speed car chase?

Later on in the film, Pegg gets a chance to do all of these things, while Frost gets to also 'Be involved in a high speed car chase'.

Could anyone implement this or is it not worthy of inclusion? Cheers. Tr33zon 05:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, that would just fall under the heading of "gags in the movie"; we don't need to highlight every joke in the movie, as it isn't encyclopedic (and would ruin the jokes). EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, but to be honest, I only just realised it this morning and I watched the movie last night. As the gap between these events is so large, it's not your normal gag. Tr33zon 16:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Not to be too pert, but a gap in one person's thinking doesn't necessarily mean it's an unusual gag.

Well, there are a couple more, including 'have you ever shot a gun into the air and and gone "aaargh!"?' (reference to bad boys II? also, the clip is shown breifly to complete the link) which comes 'round again when Danny decides against firing at his father. But no, i don't think the jokes should be anywhere but the film.

Either people will spot it or people wont. I agree with the comment that we dont need to highlight every joke in a film. My sugestion is to pay more attention when watching movies. MattyC3350 (talk) 06:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sandford merger

Apparantly, there is an article on Sandford, the fictional town in this film. It is a small article that certainly does not need its own article. Maybe if the town was important outside of the film or something like that, I might reconsider, but it's not. The article is comprised of a combination of trivia and information that is already on this, the main article. This is mostly a formality, putting this here, but I'm proposing a merger of that article to this one; either that, or it could just be deleted. Thoughts? -Platypus Man | Talk 05:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Merging it into the "Hot Fuzz" article would be good. Having its own page is over the top I do agree. MattyC3350 (talk) 06:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Action/comedy

I don't think "2007 action/comedy film" is good enough. I think it should be called here an action parody, as it is referred to as such everywhere else. 81.145.242.136 15:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Everywhere else, as in...? Sources? A good chunk of the comedy does not come from parodying action films. Geoff B 15:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Plenty of magazines and critics have called it so, and some of the comedy does come from parodying action films. 81.145.242.136 16:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I can't see this film getting classed as Parody as well. Fair enough there are a few cases in the film that either resemble scenes from other films of made to look like it. But as a whole I would class the film as Action/Comedy before placing Parody in it. MattyC3350 (talk) 06:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kill Bill reference

at the part of the movie when Danny opens the trunk door to get Nicholas out, the camera angle and lighting is setup like in Kill Bill when The Bride gets Sophie out of the trunk. I made an image to show Image Here

Just to clarify, it's not just Kill Bill. Thats Quentin Tarantino's signature "trunk shot". This can also be seen in Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. Give it a mention, then. 81.145.241.51 19:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I know its His signature "trunk shot" but I only mentioned Kill Bill because of the lighting, same shade of red.Magikmm 18:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I removed the addition about the information of the possible allusion to Kill Bill or any Quentin Tarantino trunk shot. The information needs to be sourced, as it may otherwise be seen as speculation or original research. I also think they look similar, but without an actor or director or somebody else directly saying it, I don't think we can use it. Good job with creating the image though. --Nehrams2020 23:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok I got it, its cool. and thanks for the image comment :D -Magikmm 00:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GAC nomination

For the last two days I have added multiple sources and several new sections of information. I nominated the article at GAC, so please look the article over and see if there are any problems before another editor reviews the article which could be over the next few days or weeks. Good work to everybody that contributed to the article and added sources. --Nehrams2020 06:57, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of August 8, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Good, just a few things
*"The three have worked together previously: - But you listed four people; this needs to be clarified
It is only three people, even though Simon Pegg is listed twice; however, it was changed to "they".
  • "Soon after Angel's arrival, however, a series of grisly deaths rock the village, all committed by an individual in a black hood and cloak. Increasingly convinced that Sandford is not what it seems and that the victims of the 'accidents' were murdered," - There is logical conflict here: first, "a series of grisly deaths" is mentioned - fine. Then it says they were "committed", which means there is murder (not just death). Then the paragraphs says "victims of the 'accidents'". This has to be resolved. It would be better to refer to them as accidents and then move the hooded info, or let us know that the audience knows about the hooded guy, and the town doesn't - something. But its current wording is in conflict.
Done. As a side note, should we refer to the accidents as collisions, as per Nicholas Angel?
I haven't seen the movie, so I cannot say for sure, but I would imagine collision would be preferable, so that the reader can most accurately match the thought process of the character.
It was just a joke from the film, I guess I assumed you had seen the movie. It should be fine as it is.
  • ""two films he and Danny - "two films that he and Danny"
Done.
  • the date in the soundtrack infobox needs to be wikilinked fully
Done
  • The reception and box office section should be merged and be called simply reception. See WP:FILM
Done; I had split it yesterday, forgot about the guideline.
  • "contains 22 tracks, and the US/Canada release has 14." - spell out twenty-two and fourteen
  • "Film dialogue extracts featuring Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are included," - passive-voice use obscures the meaning. Rephrase it to say "The soundtrack includes film dialogue extracts featuring Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, "
Done. — WiseKwai 14:54, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
2. Factually accurate?: Well-referenced. However, the author names and print dates have been omitted from the inlince citations - that should be fixed.
Will be working on this right now, shouldn't take too long. --Nehrams2020 22:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Done. --Nehrams2020 23:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
3. Broad in coverage?: Good.
*Why is the movie called "Hot Fuzz"?
I read about it in one of the sources but didn't know where to include it. I'll find the info and maybe include it in the plot or production section.
I added information about it in the first section of the production heading. --Nehrams2020 23:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
That looks good. I am guessing (from the article) that "fuzz" must be UK slang for the police.--Esprit15d 12:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • The promotion section could definitely be expanded, but since this is just a GA nom, I'll pass it.
4. Neutral point of view?: good
5. Article stability? good
6. Images?: Great job here.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. — Esprit15d 19:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Everything has been adressed so im going to pass this, good work on the article --Childzy (Talk|Images) 11:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Soundtrack section

Found here: Hot_Fuzz#Soundtrack, does it need to be so big? Seeing as how there is an article on the soundtrack, I personally think a tracklist (and the picture of the CD) isn't needed here. What does everyone else think about this? RobJ1981 09:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

If we're going to have a separate article, it seems a bit excessive to duplicate it here, but the soundtrack article doesn't seem to have much more info than what is already in the Hot Fuzz aricle... Geoff B 09:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
The soundtrack section doesn't need to contain the track listing, which is duplicated on the soundtrack stub (which can always be expanded). Instead, the soundtrack section on this article could be a one-paragraph prose summary of some of the musical genres, songs, and artists featured. I am happy to contribute to this if it doesn't step on anyone's toes. — WiseKwai 10:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I only added the track listing as the current soundtrack section at the time was just a few sentences. I don't think it takes up too much room, but if you think it should be removed, go for it. Many soundtrack articles I have seen are all stubs and are rarely expanded, and I usually don't think their necessary. But again, I was just adding information to help expand the article, and if you want to develop the prose more that would be great. --Nehrams2020 23:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I think in the case of this film, having a separate article listing the soundtrack songs makes sense, since there have been two releases (bit of a rip-off for US/Canada fans ;) ), and listing them both here might make the article a bit too listy for some people's tastes. — WiseKwai 06:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
If we did want to list the soundtrack here, we could just list the 22 tracks and asterisk the ones not included in the US version, adding a note at the bottom. Just an idea. Geoff B 12:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:LE tag removal

Ir emoved the WP:LE tag becasue "fictional police" do not fall with in the scope of the project. PLease discuss here before replacing the tag if yo disagree.EMT1871 06:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


[edit] The less important things

I was thinking that maybe Someone could add the less important details on the plot. Examples: The Trip to the Andes scene, The boy commiting public urination, ETC. Like all of the funny things. -Kyle

The plot section is only there to give a brief synopsis of the film, not detail everything. It's actually too long as it is, I think. Geoff B (talk) 04:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


Ok I was just wondering. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.90.174.173 (talk) 00:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question?

How is this movie Preceded by Shaun of the Dead? —— Ryan (t)•(c) 09:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

It's part of the Blood and Ice Cream trilogy. Apparently. Geoff B (talk) 09:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hot fuss?

What is that at the top of the page? "Not to be confused with Hot Fuss"? What is that about.

-Kyle
Hot Fuss is an album by The Killers, the little note at the top is to alert page crawlers not to mistake this article for the album article. —— Ryan (t)•(c) 15:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism or the real ending?

I have not seen the movie, but I did notice this edit, and it seems rather nonsensical to me. Could someone who has seen the film confirm or revert it? Diff of the edit Thanks! Willscrlt (Talk) 14:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I have seen it, believe me its vandalism. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 16:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea it's vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylesenior (talk • contribs) 10:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Point Break and Bad Boys II

Do we really need to specify that the boys watch Point Break and Bad Boys II? I think that the phrase "action films" covers it nicely. -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 08:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Without mention of the full-circle gag of Nick Frost firing his gun into the air after refusing to take down his dad, it doesn't merit mention. Alientraveller (talk) 12:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I also agree that "action films" is enough in the plot summary. The films are mentioned in the homage section. This constant uneccessary expansion of the plot really has to stop!

Yeah I agree, I mean lets face it people coming to this article are trying to find out its details but I shouldnt think they really care about what movies the character see's in a very brief seen. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 13:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I think its turrning into a bit of an "My Article" discussion here. Personally I dont see any difference in either placing "Action films" or the names of "2" films they were watching. It would be a different story if someone decided to list all the movies that were shown in his house. MattyC3350 (talk) 06:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)