Talk:The Host (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (nations and regions): Korean cinema task force

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea (Film), a project to build and improve articles related to Korea. We invite you to join the project and contribute to the discussion.
	B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
	Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Go Ah-Sung 2 American military bases in Korea 3 sentence unclear 4 The plot summary 5 Viral Marketing Campaign 6 Two small continuity questions 7 one small continuity question 8 Politics 9 Fair use rationale for Image:C9841-01.jpg

[edit] Go Ah-Sung

I haven't seen any sources that list the actress as Go Ah-Sung.

Many list her as Ko Ah-Sung, or Ah-Sung Ko.

I'll change it back unless someone can point to a viable source.--Joel Lindley 06:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• Nevermind, I found it.

I'm assuming it's the correct way to say it in Korean?--Joel Lindley 06:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] American military bases in Korea

I'm going to reword the bit about the impact of the dumping incidents. As far as I can tell, there are no sources for the following claims, which may in fact be not true:

• 59 bases were returned to Korea. The citation only states that there are ongoing talks to do so.
• Toxic wastes covered up by cement. Unsourced, and may not be true, given that the above has not yet occurred.
• Great environmental problems. It would be foolish to say that there was no impact at all, or that it did not negatively impact South Korean perception of the US presence. However, "great" is a qualifier I think that is not warranted here.

John Sheu 08:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right, USA fanboy!

[edit] sentence unclear

"In addition to its environmental impact, this has added some antagonism against the United States" - What does this mean? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kdammers (talk • contribs) 02:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

It means that there are fewer USA fanboys in South Korea now.

[edit] The plot summary

Anyone want to go over the plot summary (I hate writing them)? For one, it's about twice as long as it should be, and for another, it still only covers the first 20 minutes or so of the film. Scene by scene analysis really isn't necessary. - Bobet 18:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it's sloppy to have something that detailed at the start and then a signle sentence for that much of the movie afterwards. I'm doing a lot at the moment, but I may have time a couple weeks from now to write up a summary. Boter 05:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

• I totally agree, and am going to work on this today, since I've seen just seen the movie. It goes into painful unnecessary detail about the first 5 minutes, and then drops off to nothing after that. I'm going to have to weed out some of the less important stuff from the beginning (90% of it) and add more of the major plot points following that. Also, I am taking out the part about the man who committed suicide "presumably" being turned into the monster, as this isn't supported by the plot at all (in the following scene you see them fishing his body out of the river). Please improve mine as you see fit also. Great movie... WETA did an excellent job. --64.253.48.73 14:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

• Ok, finished this, but it's still on the long side. I can't really condense it more without losing what I feel are important plot points, though, so I'll leave it. I did cut down the over-detailed opening scenes, though, and just stuck to important developments. Hopefully the article can be re-rated at some point? --64.253.48.73 21:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I've cut it down some more. It's still too long, but it's slowly getting there. Geoff B 23:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Viral Marketing Campaign

If someone feels like it, maybe there should be a section added about the "cryptidtruth" (youtube) and "thinginthewater" video and photo viral marketing campaign for this movie going on right now. It's traceable back to www.mosterhunterclub.com. Gh05t 00:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Two small continuity questions

• I rewrote the plot summary, per my comment above; it now encompasses the entire movie instead of focusing on extraneous details from just the first 5 minutes. I did have two questions, though--what was the point in the suicide scene? As my comment above noted, I don't thnk that man was meant to be what transformed into the monster (would not make any sense with the fisherman/small mutant scene, also they show his body being pulled out of the Han in a bodybag on the news). Was this just metaphorical? Also, was the American Donald that was a hero in the beginning the same Donald who was a US soldier on the news who "fought heroically against the monster"? I thought so at first, but having rewatched that scene, it looked like the first Donald was being eaten when Gang-Du smashed the signpost on the monster's tail, and not like he got away with just an arm amputated. --64.253.48.73 18:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The suicide scene is just a bit of foreshadowing that there's something unusual in the river, AFAIK. And yes, the Donald is the same one. There's no other American in the film that we see fight the monster. Although in the process of being chewed on, Gang-Du interrupted IIRC. Geoff B 19:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

• I agree with the foreshadowing idea, but I still wonder about Donald being the same one (it could have been another off-screen Donald). We see the monster swallowing a man in the scene following the street sign. Also, that Donald had dyed hair, and that's not allowed in the US Army (of which I am a member). --64.253.48.73 19:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

It's been a couple of days since I watched it on DVD, so my memory of the scene isn't 100%, but I think it's the same one. The chances of a South Korean national knowing US Army grooming regulations is fairly slim, I think. Geoff B 20:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

• The thing is, the Korean Army has even stricter standards... there's no way someone with bright, half-blond hair would keep it. But yeah, I guess anything's possible, and the filmmaker just didn't care. --64.253.48.73 20:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The Korean man committing suicide is parodying, or at least referring to, the fact that many Koreans that rank high in the business world commit suicide when too much pressure is put on them. If you research a bit, the Korean suicide rate is unusually high. I don't think too much should be made of it. DRaGZ 04:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] one small continuity question

how does gangdu know which tunnel hyun-seo is in? is it because nam-il sent an email to both nam-joo and gangdu? I just dont remember him checking his phone, but it seems plausible that the director just assumed the audience would make the assumption.

After Nam-Joo gets the text message, she calls Gang-Du at the quarantine center because she couldn't reach Nam-Il. That's how he knew which bridge his daughter was under.76.64.188.144 03:22, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Politics

I wonder why they didn't make a film about North Korea's nuclear test causing a monster, instead of making a big deal about a little formeldahyde. --Scorpionman (talk) 18:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:C9841-01.jpg

Image:C9841-01.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)