Talk:Those We Don't Speak Of

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Those We Don't Speak Of is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result October 3, 2005 Peer review Reviewed October 10, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted Current Status: Former featured article candidate

	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

Contents 1 Actual existence 2 Picture 3 Similarity to 'The Beast' of Lord of the Flies? 4 Removed line

[edit] Actual existence

This part of the article is not factual --Elders never skined animals - Noah did. --Edwards talk of "rumors of creatures in these woods" is just that.. rumors, and seems to have been put there by the director to alow him to play his twist twice. --Lucious seeing a creature in the woods was either an Elder on patrol... or Noah playing at being a creature.

No where in the film is there a plot involving "real creatures". The only aparent "real creatures" that shows up turned out to be Noah. The writer could have just as well said existance of the Easter Bunny was not definitively answered in the film. (Halfblue 06:03, 20 February 2006 (UTC))

Could you come up with a source for those claims please? Then we can fix the article accordingly.SoothingR 07:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Noah as the animal skinner is established by several facts in the film. Someone (a non-Elder) is seen running away in a monster suit at the wedding "skinning" (The Elders didn’t know Noah had stolen a suit till later). When she finds Noah gone Noah's mom says "Oh-the animals!!!" when she sees that he stole the suit. The skins can also be seen hanging from Noah version of the creature suit. In the original script [[1]] it states more clearly that Noah’s suit seems to be made of animal skins.

What Lucius' "encountered" has to be taken in context. There are other shots of "the creature" roaming the woods and those shots show the red clocked "elder creature costume". Something that helps define what Lucius saw was the change the filmmakers made in the final edit of the film when they decided to changed the Elder's creature costume. Lucius' reverse view shot of the creature was cut out of the film because that shot was the "old" Elder creature costume... not because it was "a real creature".

As I said above the "Actual existence" part of this article tries to prove a non-fact in the film. At no part is a "real creature" put forward in the plot and the only reference to one is Edward explaining where the idea of "creatures" came from, he is not stating the existance of "real creatures" . This section is trying to prove the posible existance of the creatures by proving a negative which is logically imposible. Halfblue 22:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

This article is even less merited than fictioncruft like Tom Riddle. The status of the name as some sort of proper noun is, for example, quite questionable. At best it should be redirected to The Village (film), at worst AfD:ed. I would prefer the former myself.

Peter ^Isotalo 08:01, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

I find the article problematic as well. It is a citation of a character in a fictional work who is also fictional within the work...i.e. "Those We Don't Speak Of" don't even exist in the work in question (The Village). And they have no other existence outside "The Village. So this should be a subsection in "The Village" if it should exist at all. 172.145.59.248 04:24, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

The article also seems to (inappropriately) connect to werewolf mythology in the final section. Are there citations for the wolf-like animal sightings? (Actual wolves, perhaps?) I'm not sure if any kind of wolf mythology would inspire pig-like film characters, simply because wolves may live in Pennsylvania. Have there been interviews with the writers indicating this? If so, the information would belong in the article for the film.

[edit] Picture

The picture showing one of "Those We Don't Speak Of" is too shadowy and doesn't show enough of the creature, particularly its face. Perhaps a more complete picture could be put here? Scorpionman 17:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Similarity to 'The Beast' of Lord of the Flies?

I haven't watched the Village, but upon reading this description of 'Those we Don't Speak Of', the creatures and the theme behind them sounds familiar to the Beast of Lord of the Flies.

[edit] Removed line

I removed the following lines because the author wasn't aware of the history of English and/or misunderstands the word anachronism.

It is significant to note that the name represents one of the very few uses of contracted speech ("Don't" versus "Do Not") in the film's otherwise anachronistic dialogue.

156.56.201.10 11:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)