Wikipedia

Talk:Departures (2008 film)/Archive 1

< Talk:Departures (2008 film)
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Crisco 1492 in topic Cast
Archive 1Archive 2

Plot summary

Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I didn't want to slap an ugly tag on the article because I'm sure it will become very popular because of the Academy Awards, but the plot section really reads like a promotional plot rather than an encyclopedia synopsis. Someone who has seen the movie should expand the plot, and keep in mind that Wikipedia is not censored and does have spoilers. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 01:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry about the elipsis at the end. I have NOT seen the film but took the synopsis from the Japanese wikipedia page. I think that the plot synopsys does go almost the end and there is no twist in the tale. Please feel free to add the ending and clean up the language of the synopsis. I just thought that it needed more than it had (ony the first paragraph when I came) after the academy award win last night. --Timtak (talk) 05:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I wonder why people who are not familiar with something are trying to write articles about it by cutting and pasting. I would also add that there is no such thing as an encyclopedic film synopsis. Though wiki contributors have gotten into the habit of writing articles that read like poor book reports of films and novels. There is no reason to have detailed retellings of the stories. The historic reality of the work is something rather different from it's plot, and there is no reason to go to these lengths, telling the endings, making assumptions and subjective judgments. By the way, I have seen this film. I was not surprised to find the typical wooden Japanese acting and narrow range of expression, repeating over and over again the "sensitive" grimaces and improbable outbursts that passes for drama here. But Hollywood is no better! Not the worst Japanese film I have seen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by APDEF (talk • contribs) 09:21, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Production

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I also wanted to add, as is wided reported in the Japanese press, that while the director is no doubt highly talented, the lead actor (I am a fan) had a more than usual involvement in the creation of the film. It was Mokoki's reading of a book about the work of Morticians that lead to the creation of the film. He is also rumoured to have had a say in direction, or at least that it was very much a collaboration. I hope that they do return. --Timtak (talk) 05:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Taboo in Japan

Latest comment: 14 years ago7 comments7 people in discussion

Why one has to say "death is great taboo in Japan"? It is essentially taboo in anywehere, any culture. Too much of stereotype view against Japan.--217.235.17.164 (talk) 13:08, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

The director expressed this opinion I think. Also, while death is taboo pretty much everywhere homonyms of the word death (shi, 4) are even taboo, and in Japan more than 50% of people who are dying of cancer are not told that they are dying of cancer, such is the strength of the taboo on dying. In the bible death is a punishment. In the Kojiki death is defilement. The attitude to death in Japan is a bit like the attitude towards sex in the Christian religion. So, I think that the director was right. But it is in there because the director said it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timtak (talk • contribs) 11:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Sex is taboo to Christians??? Are you kidding me??!!! Where is your data on this? Talk about stereotyping!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.166.14.201 (talk) 23:12, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Although death is a taboo nearly everywhere, not everywhere consider undertakers taboo. This dates back to the Japanese caste system, where so-called outcasts, Burakumin, were discriminated against, and their descendants continue to face discrimination. – Pedantic79 (talk) 21:25, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
What has Burakumin to do with death taboo? As of March 2004, the Buraku association has stated "the buraku issue has basically been resolved" (see Burakumin). This non-existing "problem" has nothing to do with 2008 film. You are obviously not updated about things. Some (not all) patients are not told about the cancer in Japan, but linking that particular point with death taboo is nothing more than his/her personal view, biased by the standard of how things are working in his/her country. Hindues sometimes let the dead bodies flow the Ganges river. That, however, does not necessary means the death is not taboo in India. Anyway, it is useless to discuss it here because Wikipedia anyway require external citation sources. --217.235.2.251 (talk) 18:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Good points. To say that a culture has taboos is not a "stereotype against". As for the Burakumin comment, Pedantic is correct in making the point. Contact with the "formerly living" was indeed such a taboo that it was assigned to "non-human" classes. This is history, and as such does not lack relevance here. Perhaps the user is not up-to-date in that it is no longer fashionable for (educated) Japanese to react excitedly to every comment about Japan as perceived "bashing". Furthermore this is the discussion page, no citations are required. Forward! —Preceding unsigned comment added by APDEF (talk • contribs) 09:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC) Timtak, very appropriate and good point: "homonyms of the word death (shi, 4)" It is always amusing in our Aikido dojo to hear people hesitate while counting, ichi, ni, san, ... YON ... in confusion". —Preceding unsigned comment added by APDEF (talk • contribs) 09:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

So what is your point of argument? The discussions is about "If the death is taboo (specifically) in Japan", and we are looking for an external source for it. We are not here to listen your "lecture" on Japan, and besides I can tell you what you write about "Ich Ni San Yon" is completely wrong. People often say "Ichi Ni San Shi" as well. Latter is rather common because it pronounces easier. "Shi" is sometimes avoided simply because it's hard to distinguish from sound "Shi" and "Ni". In addition, in Japanese, there are many words that has the same pronounciation but has different Kanji and different meanings. People care generally about the resemblance of the word, not specifically because of its relation to "death". The language is different from YOURS, and you should not just pick up one example, ignoring all other examples, and drive to your sloppy conclusion. This is not the attitude of an "educated" people.--217.235.40.228 (talk) 18:22, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Timeline

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I just want to clarify the timeline:

The wife leaves before Christmas The father dies during sakura (late March/early April)

So either she returns after a few weeks, in which case there is a long time between then and the father dying, or she returns after a few months (i'm pretty sure main character says two months), in which case the father dies soon after she returns.

I've edited the plot to reflect this latter account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.129.111 (talk) 22:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

English Title

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The original name of the film, Okuribito, is comprised of the root form of the verb okuru, to send off, and hito, person. It translates into English as "those [people] who send [something unspecified] off," or "those who send off." It refers to the NK Agency's encoffinment duo and others like them, men and women who send off the dead.

However, fan-made subtitles for this film as well as the English-language Wikipedia page are using the title "DEPARTURES" instead when referring to this film. Why is this? Unless the director himself has indicated that this is his choice of title in the English language, I do not think it correct to advance this word choice any further. It is not an accurate translation of the original title nor does it even refer to the same target(s) to which the original title referred. While a departure is what the deceased is performing (albeit passively), an "okuribito" is the person sending the departed off.

The English translation "Departures" is ingenious. While I do not speak fluent Japanese, as a native English speaker the title cleverly evokes many of the issues the movie deals with while retaining a similar word play conveyed by the Japanese title.

If indeed there is a solid reason for the selection of "DEPARTURES" as the English-language title of this film -- for example, if it is the title which was used by the studio which licensed the film for North American or European distribution; or if, as considered earlier, it is the title specifically chosen by the director -- then I think it would be wise to include this information somewhere in the article and to link to the corresponding source or sources which corroborate the claim.


Otherwise, I would recommend renaming the article to "Okuribito (film)" and redirecting "Departures (film)" to this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.107.176 (talk) 00:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Sources for building on

Latest comment: 10 years ago19 comments2 people in discussion
North American reviews
British reviews (can't leave them out, can we?)
Ozzie ozzie ozzie (oi! oi! oi!)

etc

日本語

I'll have to double-check how reliable some of these are—every Japanese website looks like tossed-together blog, even when they're pro. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 02:27, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

...

  • 09/03/02 毎日新聞10面文化欄、「納棺夫日記」著者・青木新門氏インタビュー — can't find this online, but apparently it's the Mainichi Shimbun interview wp.ja talks about where Aoki explains why he rejected the script
  • Curly, do you think there is any useful information and/or sound bytes here? I've already taken what I can reasonably understand through GTranslate. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:02, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Wow! Okuribito really cleaned up! You obviously have to mention how the enthusiasm of the cast gave birth to a miracle that tied together in a miraculous balance. Hallelujah! Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:29, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
      • Clean sweep, almost. Shame I can't trust Gtranslate enough to offer direct quotes. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:38, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
        • Automatic translation from Japanese to English is a Herculean task—aside from normal translation issues, too much is left unsaid in Japanese, left up to context. It's usually used as the model pro-drop language. What the WP article doesn't tell you is that the example sentence could just as easily mean "Did they like it?", "Did she like it?", or even "Did I like it?" (and the "it" could easily be "him", "them", or even "me"—"Idunno. Did I like me?") It's not merely acceptable—"dropping" the pronoun is far more common than stating it. A computer basically has to choose a pronoun at random, and do it for nearly every sentence.
        • It looks like this is Yamazaki's eighth win—the first was for Yashagaike (1979). He agreed to do the score after having read the script. It's second win for Kimiko Yo (Suporting Actress), the first for A Class to Remember III (1998). Hisaishi was nominated for the score to Okuribito, but unfortunately lost to himself for his score to Ponyo. Hamada won for Cinematography. Takaya Hitoshi won for Lighting Direction. Sound Recording went to Ozaki & Ono. Kawashima won fo Film Editing. Most of the commentary appears to be just the acceptance speeches (or maybe fragments thereof). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:03, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
          • Ah, that's some good information. Eighth win all together, or eighth in a supporting capacity? Any really quotable parts from the acceptance speeches? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:12, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
            • What, you didn't like the miraculous miracles? Japanese people are known for being so humble ... Other than that, nothing really stands out for me. For Yamazaki, it was his eight win in either a lead or supporting role. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:20, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I was being facetious, but if you like it, I might as well give the translations. Takita: "The enthusiasm of the staff and cast gave birth to a miracle." Motoki: "It feels as if everything miraculously came together in balance this time with Okuribito." Or something like that. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 12:42, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Question

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

"Yojiro [answering] dull questions in a dull manner": here we have no macrons in "Yōjirō"—I'm not sure if this is a case where we should be changing it (à la TIME ==> Time) or not, and I can't find in the MoS if it says one way or the other. Maybe either way it would be better to change it to Takita "[answering] dull questions in a dull manner", since it may not be immediately obvious who "Yojiro" is after calling him Takita throughout the rest of the article? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 22:59, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

More awards

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

More stuff

Latest comment: 10 years ago20 comments2 people in discussion

Checklist

Latest comment: 10 years ago59 comments2 people in discussion
  • Hmm... looks like we're getting there

Lede

(Save for last; let's get the content finished up)

Plot

Certainly good enough for GAN. Might need more polish for FAC.

Production

This is where we're hurting right now. It won't be FAC-ready until August, at least, as I need to check that interview. The cultural background section is probably ready.

Soundtrack

Only seems to have been given a domestic release. Curly, looks like you'd have to find the sources. If we can't find anything, work it into Adaptations and other media

Definitely don't have enough for a stand-alone section. Moving this here. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

All tracks are written by Joe Hisaishi

No.TitleLength
1."Shine of Snow I"1:12
2."Nohkan"3:10
3."Kaisan"0:53
4."Good-Bye Cello"2:16
5."New Road"1:15
6."Model"0:47
7."First Contact"1:51
8."Washing"0:34
9."Kizuna I"1:57
10."Beautiful Dead I"3:12
11."Okuribito (On Record)"1:51
12."Gui-Dance"2:26
13."Shine of Snow II"2:25
14."Ave Maria (Okuribito)"5:29
15."Kizuna II"2:04
16."Beautiful Dead II"2:36
17."Father"1:40
18."Okuribito (Memory)"4:10
19."Okuribito (Ending)"4:59

Themes and style

Probably good enough for GA. I'd want to flesh out a bit for FAC, and definitely polish the prose a bit more.

Release

Definitely needs more on the home release in Japan and Europe, if possible. A little more on the alternate media would be nice, and marketing if possible.

Reviews

I'd want another Japanese review or two to be safe, but this is certainly ready for GAC. Might be issues with the number of reviews cited, but I doubt we could trim more than 3 or 4 without losing our NPOV.

  • I've been having trouble finding newspaper reviews from the time of the release. Japanese newspapers are not good when it comes to archiving this stuff (Japanese publishers are allergic to digital in general—you can get Haruki Murakami for ereaders in English, French, Spanish, Italian ... but not in Japanese!). There is a library not too far from my place that has extensive newspaper holdings, I'll just have to find the time to get out there. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Just to make things harder to google for, it appears at least Asahi Shimbun has been using crappy OCR to digitize articles. This one obliterates both "Okuribito" and "Kinema Junpo" in the title, and it's as recent as 2009. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 00:36, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Awards

Just need to reference what is unreferenced, and maybe add some more from the hidden list there. There are enough awards for a stand-alone article, so we might be able to trim this to just the biggest awards (Academy Awards, Japanese Academy Awards, one or two others) once that article (list) is written. Curly, it appears most of those awards I haven't been able to cite are Japanese, and I'm at a dead end when it comes to Googling them.

當時，該片被翻譯為《為逝者送行的人》，參加的是金雞百花獎的國際影片展映單元，也是該片的全球首映。但是據當時在現場的記者回憶，整個放映過程並不順暢，影片只有前半部分有字幕，中途還燒了三四次膠片。在場的都是記者和嘉賓，人數並不多，但沒有人因此退場。

“那次我們拿到了3 個獎，最佳導演、最佳影片以及最佳男主角，那也是這部電影拿到的第一個國外獎項。” 瀧田洋二郎告訴記者。導演和演員當時都沒去大連領獎。 獲獎的消息被擔任字幕放映的志願者第一時間打在銀幕上，影片結束後，現場的中國觀眾集體起立鼓掌，表示祝賀。

At that time, the film has been translated as "farewell to the deceased person", to participate in the international film screenings unit Golden Rooster Awards, is the world premiere of the film. But according to a reporter at the scene recalled the entire screening process is not smooth, only the first half of the film has subtitles, midway also burned three or four times the film. The presence of both reporters and guests, not many, but no one therefore withdrew.

"That we got three awards, Best Director, Best Picture and Best Actor, it is also the first film to get the foreign award." Yojiro Takita told reporters. Director and actor at the time did not go to Dalian award. The award-winning messages are screened volunteers as subtitles on the screen the first time to play after the end of the film, the scene of the Chinese audience stood up to applaud, congratulations.

Notes and references

Needs to be standardized. We can save this for later though. SFN all the way?

Probably the only section here that is 100% ready.

Others

Images! Oh, how we need images... nothing on Flickr. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:57, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Onkyō Publish

Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I don't know if it makes a difference, but "Onkyō Publish" is actually the name—scroll down and see. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:18, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

Latest comment: 10 years ago44 comments3 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Departures (film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 19:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


Will review later in the week.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Lead
  • Why is there the Japanese given for mortician (納棺師 nōkanshi?)?
    • Because the term "mortician" is only a rough translation of the nōkanshi and has some very different connotations and denotations (including the encoffining ceremony); the original is provided for precision. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:52, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
You should probably write it as nōkanshi (mortician) then or add a footnote explaining what you just said.
I see you've added a note to production so it should be OK, but I'd be inclined to put the note in the lead on first instance unless there is some sort of MOS guidelines which advises against it.
Or I can't. I'm getting ref errors. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:19, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
The template's fiddly—I've never liked it, despite my addiction to templates. Partly it's because Japanese writing (and transliteration) itself is so fiddly. The documentation does give examples of a lot of different ways to use it—you don't have to put the English first. Still, I think it wouldn't be a crime to drop it.
I think I might prefer to call them nōkanshi right off the bat and explain the profession as something like "ritual mortician" (?) or something. You know, like: "stumbles across work as a nōkanshi, a traditional Japnese ritual mortician". I might kick the kanji out of the lead, too—I can read it, and I still find it distracting at that scope (I know a lot of people strongly disagree with me on that, though). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 09:30, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
That should be fine.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:01, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • nōkan - you might want to put in a footnote what this is.
OK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:13, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Production
  • "Despite the importance of death rituals, the subject is considered unclean as all which is related to death is considered " -rep of considered. By whom anyway?
    • in traditional Japanese culture / by the Japanese (I had hoped this was implied from the first paragraph). This is meant to be a very general overview and point the readers at the articles on related topics (Japanese funerals goes into some detail). Duplication removed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:05, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Conception
  • "While in India, he visited Varanasi. There, he witnessed a ceremony in which the dead was cremated and the ashes were floated down the Ganges.[10] Motoki said that, while in India, he was deeply affected by this ceremony of death against a backdrop of bustling crowds going about their lives." This could be reworded a bit, "while in India" is a bit redundant too. How about "While in India, he visited Varanasi, where he witnessed a ceremony in which the dead was cremated and the ashes were floated down the Ganges. Motoki was deeply affected by this ceremony of death against a backdrop of bustling crowds going about their lives."
  • "Among the books he read Motoki came across" - he read /came across look awkward together here. Reword. "Among the books he came across" or something
  • "Production of Departures took ten years, and the work which was ultimately only loosely adapted from Coffinman." Sentence seems to be incomplete, "which" is the word I think which seems strange.
  • Link Yamagata and Toyama?
  • "Aoki expressed concern that the film was ultimately unable to address "the ultimate fate of the dead", " -rep of ultimate, I think you can remove ultimately and still get the same information from the quote.
  • "as the its humanistic approach"
  • "In Coffinman, the protagonist was the owner of a pub-café that had gone out of business; during a domestic squabble his wife threw a newspaper at him, inside which he found the ad for the nōkanshi position.[2" -Don't we use present tense when referring to literature/films?
  • As this is an autobiographical memoir, I don't think that's best. Also, here we're referring to the contents of the work without presenting it as a narrative. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:23, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
  • What is this "light" you keep referring to? Perhaps a note to explain?
Filming
  • Some of the earlier content in this section isn't really filming, you might consider splitting it. Motoki down to realistic effect looks more like Casting and preparation or something.
  • No article for Himitsu?
  • "Negotiations were slow, as many local property owners were reluctant to "- reluctant to what?
Ah, don't worry about it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:29, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Style
  • "which are "suggest"
  • "Through this use of humour, Betsy Sharkey of the Los Angeles Times opines, the film avoids becoming too dark and instead acts as a "warmhearted blend" of whimsy and irony.[55]" -I'd reword as Betsy Sharkey of the Los Angeles Times opines that through this use of humour, the film avoids becoming too dark and instead acts as a "warmhearted blend" of whimsy and irony.[55]" to improve flow.
Release
  • "with the festival's grand prize." -does this have an article or official name?
  • Isn't taboo already linked somewhere?
  • " at the fifth week" =during the fifth week?
  • "Executive producer Yasuhiro Mase credited this success to the effects of the Great Recession on Japan: viewers were "looking for work after being restructured out of a job", as with Daigo.[6" -I don't think you need the quote here and it would read better if you paraphrase it.
Excellent.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:47, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Adaptations
  • "and came to feel that a too-literal adaptation would not be proper. " -I think "appropriate" would read more smoothly here.
  • " It contained nineteen tracks from the film and featured " -should be present tense I think.
  • "saw a published edition the first draft"
  • "It starred kabuki actor Nakamura Kankurō as Daigo and Rena Tanaka as Mika[79] when it debuted at Akasaka ACT Theater (ja) on 29 May 2010.[80] " -try "It debuted at the Akasaka ACT Theater on 29 May 2010, and featured kabuki actor Nakamura Kankurō as Daigo and Rena Tanaka as Mika." I think that flows a little better.
    • I think Curly was trying to ensure that we weren't incorrect in case there was a casting change somewhere down the run. If that's correct, perhaps "It debuted at the Akasaka ACT Theater on 29 May 2010, with a performance starring kabuki actor Nakamura Kankurō as Daigo and Rena Tanaka as Mika."
Home release
  • "It featured " -again I think "it features" when referring to an existing product.
Reception

This is very long, quite a mouthful to read fully. I think you could condense it a bit and not lose anything too valuable. Can you try to shorten it a bit?

  • Reviews, I'd assume? I did trim some before nominating, but I avoided losing any who I quoted elsewhere and from major publications. I'm loathe to lose any of the Cultural impact section, which is quite tight already. Awards could lose a paragraph, maybe. Maybe. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:57, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Reviews I mean yeah, it's a wee bit too detailed I think. If any reviewer says the same or similar thing in some cases you might say xxx and xxx believed that film was xxx and paraphrase a bit. Something to consider long term anyway, it's not stopping it from being promoted.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:04, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Cultural impact

Is Mukaebito meant to be italicized?

LOL, is there no limit to how many guidelines we have on here?...♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:07, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:  
    B. MoS compliance:  
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:  
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:  
    C. No original research:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:  
    B. Focused:  
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:  
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:  
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  

Looks fine for GA, excellent work! Some of those Japanese sources really look a nightmare to research and archive so well done on that!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:11, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Trivia?

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In an essay, Aoki wrote that while there was a scene in the book (as in the movie) in which his wife yelled at him about his "filthy" work, she was infuriated when a neighbour asked her if she had actually said that.[1]

  1. ^ Handa 2010, pp. 75–76.

Where to fit this?

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Daigo gains a greater perspective on life and comes to know the diversity of people's lives only after encountering them after death.[1]

Or something like that—something about the diversity of types of people Daigo meets in his work (the yankī schoolgirl, the crossdresser, the grandfather covered with kisses, the old woman who dies alone...). I couldn't figure out where to fit it in the "Themes and style" section. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ Katsuta 2008, p. 11; Iwata 2012, p. 8.

Prose slips

Latest comment: 10 years ago14 comments3 people in discussion
"Daigo prepares her body in front of the Yamashita family and Mika, who had the public bath owner. " (had known?)
"Although the character of Mika was initially envisioned as being the same age as Daigo, pop singer Ryōko Hirosue, who had previously acted in Takita's Himitsu (Secret) in 1999." (what about her?)
"Aoki expressed concern that the film was unable to address "the ultimate fate of the dead", and later reportedly refused permission for Departures to use the Coffinman title"; "After seeing the script, Aoki rejected having his name and book title used in the film, ...". It seems unlikely that both of these can be true. Belle (talk) 11:02, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
I meant that one was "reportedly" and the other was "fact". (Still, it's gone, so who cares) Belle (talk) 12:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
One more: "Scott highlighted the contrast between the taboo of death and jobs related to it." Should this be contrasted with something else? There doesn't seem to be any contrast between these two things.

(BTW, I removed the literal translation as it felt a bit ham-fisted since the concept of Okuribito doesn't exist in English and can't really be explained in English; "send-off person" would be more literal anyway) Belle (talk) 12:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

    • Which is why I'm suspicious of that nasty word "literal", but there should still be a translation because (a) we don't want people thinking "okuribito" "literally" "means" "departures"; (b) we need context for the pun of "Mukaebito" that comes up later; an (c) okuru (from which okuri is derived) covers both "send [an object]" and "send off [a person]"; at first glance, "okuribito" can appear to have something to do with a delivery service (which I guess it does in a way). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 21:33, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it literally makes me tear my hair out every time I see it. Must stop typing now as I have to go to hospital and then the wig shop. (I see your reasoning for the translation, the hidden note should prevent meddlesome types like me from dipping their sticky paws in) Belle (talk) 07:43, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I literally don't have nearly enough hair to afford a good scalp-tear, and am literally envious of you having such an option via which to vent. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 13:40, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Comicalize

Latest comment: 10 years ago16 comments4 people in discussion

There's nothing really "so-Japanese" about コミカライズ---it's just a cheezee wasei eigo portmanteau of "novelize" and "comics". I don't think anything important would be lost by translating it as "comics adaptations".

For 映画で企画、漫画を作る　「コミカライズ」が隆盛, "In the Movies, Planning for Comics, Komikaraizu is Flourishing" can't be right. I can't think of something elegant, but the gist is of something being originally planned as a movie and then being turned into comics. Not "literal", but the sense is "'Comicalized' comics adapatations of films flourishing". (I don't think 企画 needs to be translated---in context I think it means "originally planned for", with "story" implied and not stated). The article is about comics adaptations that happen to appear for whatever reason before the film they're adapted from. The title is confusing to parse because it's in abbreviated "headlinese". Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 13:12, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't finish translating the titles. I thought I had done them all already. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 13:15, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

  • "In the Film Industry, Planning for Comics Adaptations (Comicalisation) is Flourishing", you mean? Or perhaps "In the Film Industry, Comic Adaptations Are Flourishing"? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
    • No, "planning" refers to the movie, not the comics .Or, rather, it refers to the story being planned for the movie, and then adapted into comics. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 13:20, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
    • "The story" meaning any story, not Okuribito. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 13:22, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Right, I got that much (second point). Hmm... "In the Film Industry, Planned Stories Flourish as Comics" or "Comics Adaptations of Planned Movies Flourish" (completely different structure, but...) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
        • The article talks specifically about planned (as in "projected") movies, but that's not what's meant by 企画 ("planned"). It just means stories that were originally planned for movies (at least in this context). In the first paragraph the article also talks about movies that come out first and are followed by adaptations, and it uses 企画 to refer to those stories as well. This is one of those places where dictionaries/Google Translate fail---they can't give you context. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 13:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
        • I'm actually thinking now that the first translation I gave is the one to go with. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 13:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
      • (ec)I got the impression the article was suggesting that when the stories were planned for the movies it was with an eye to the adaptations. It's not a great article in that regard, just a collection of loosely related movies/adaptations smooshed (that is a technical term; yes, it is) together. The first translation could benefit from leaving Komikaraizu untranslated to avoid '"Comicalized" comics' (a tautology which can be disguised with the Japanese; not like Sean Connery in You Only Live Twice though, that's not fooling anybody). Belle (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
        • No, it starts by talking about how we expect to see movies adapted from novels, comics, and TV dramas, but that recently we see more and more films being adapted to movies. Then it talks about a couple of cases where such adaptations end up preceding the movies, and that fills up the rest of the article. And I don't think "Comicalized comics" is any worse than "manga wo tukuru komikaraizu"---it's not our job to unshittify bad writing. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 14:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Aaargh...I've got to get to bed, but one last thing: I think the wording about "being fired" should be have something to do with downsizing or restructuring. It's not just anyone who had been fired who would sympathize with Daigo, but those who had lost their jobs since the Bubble burst in the '90s---the generation that first experienced that "lifetime employment" was not a birthright. Something the sources probably don't explicate, assuming you know already if you're interested enough to read about a Japanese topic in the first place. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 14:06, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Odds and ends

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Only eight edits in the whole of 2013, but nearly 700 (and counting) in 2014!

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article is just a total ego trip. A stable article is turned into a long-winded cut-and-paste. No more plain cast list, no more soundtrack list, no more simple location listing. Instead we have reams and reams of padding (ie twaddle) about how it was received and reviewed. Yeah we get that it was an international hit, but just how many reviewers comments does that require? Likewise how much does it matter the subject is taboo in Japan, it was a hit outside of Japan.

This article is why Wikipedia is a nothing more than an outlet for people with feeling of social inadequacies. The article is entirely invented by plagiarising what can be found on the internet or published sources (lol it's only an infringement of copyright if it's obvious, however all Wikipedia is paraphrased plagiarism!). Instead of keeping it tight - like the article was for an entire year, someone with a need to feel self important copy/pastes everything they can just so they can get a "good article". And in turn screws the reader.

Sorry but the article is now a self-indulgent piece of crap that serves no useful purpose except to the person who wrote it. And they now spend all their time like a loner with a shotgun trying to stop any edits that might harm their precious ego trip. You can feel the sanctimonious sense of achievement oozing from the article, how the information contained therein is not for informing the casual reader but garnering self promotion for the author. The sections are too long, and the writing boorish and verbose.

Anyone with half-a-brain should be given the choice of whether they wish to read the non self-indulgent article from a year ago or this testament to hubris! An article that is all ego trip is only "good" for its author not the reader.  :-( 31.51.45.135 (talk) 17:57, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Cast

Latest comment: 9 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

A cast list is useful for the following reasons: Notable actors are listed (even if they have a minor role) - Concise Main actors can be found easily. There is no reason, why this section can not remain together with a plot section which also links to the main characters. A rule specific to one article created by the main contributers tastes a bit of ownership.Inwind (talk) 07:17, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

  • We have a cast list: worked into the body of the plot. The main characters and their actors are readily accessible there, as is the context of their performance. Furthermore, WP:FILMCAST recommends that only one form of cast list be included, and notes that stand-alone lists work better for stub-class articles (which this is certainly not). Through the GA and FA review process, there have been no complaints over the current format; there is a WP:CONSENSUS that it is acceptable. Your arguments otherwise are not convincing. Of course, Curly Turkey may have other views. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
As far as I can see, user Crisco 1492s edit removed the cast list and it was not challenged since. My edit changed the status quo, therefore WP:CONSENSUS is no longer true. Any other opinions ? Inwind (talk) 08:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
No, I don't have an opinion, but I'm for the status quo unless a consensus is formed to the contrary. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 10:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I quite honestly can't follow your logic, inwind. I've pointed you directly to the part of the MOS which implies that, in well-developed articles, a bare cast list is not enough/acceptable. You not only ignored that, but claimed that your edit (by a lone individual) is enough to overcome a consensus established by a dozen other editors. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:49, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I think in this case, if we must have a section for casting list, it's should be more like Prometheus (2012 film)#Cast, with much detailed infomation. But consider there's already a "casting" section in this article, I think it's make this stand-alone lists pretty unnecessary, so I concur with Crisco 1492 here.--Jarodalien (talk) 14:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Any objections to adding an infobox in the casting section in a similar format as Fight Club ? Inwind (talk) 05:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
  • More manageable, but even then (if we're using Fight Club as an example) we'd have to limit it to the main cast. We've already got a good image of Hirosue (though I'd prefer one of Motoki, if there were a free image available), and that's more useful than an infobox repeating information that's already in the plot section. According to MOS:IMAGELOCATION, we'd have to lose the image if we wanted to put in an infobox there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:38, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Departures_(2008_film)/Archive_1&oldid=749816707"