User talk:Bignole/Archive/2009/September

WikiProject Films August 2009 Newsletter
The August 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:33, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Season 9
I know kryptonsite is not a "reliable source". However, they have posted official discritions of upcoming episodes, via a press release from The CW. Why should we not listen to this? Also, since on KS the episode summary was posted, I have checked MSN and will check the official website, but we should keep an eye out for it poping up on reliable sites. When will we create the season page? We have more than enough info to start the page, and since we know the summaries are around the corner, it should not hurt to keep the episode section blank for a few days.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 00:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Michael's status
Should Michael's current status in the series be added to his article? Or should we wait until a offical announcment that he's dead or not?--Darkness2light (talk) 17:03, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Should Michael's new appearence be mentioned on the article and his new killing methods? There's many changes to his character in the new film but they fail to be mentioned on the page. Changes include: 1. yelling when killing. 2. Mask is absent in some kills. 3. Appearence in general. 4. Continues stabbing after victim is dead. 5. super strengh. Should they be added?--Darkness2light (talk) 19:37, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Laurie Article
On the Laurie Strode article the name of the new film is consantley changed. I originaly put it as "Halloween II (2009 Film)" then someone put it as just "Halloween II". Now it's "Sequel to the remake". What should it be as?--Darkness2light (talk) 00:42, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Halloween II (2009 film)
I only added brief quotes from an interview (see diff, my edit in green), and have corrected the cite tag so to credit ABC television. I may not have used the correct cite tag, but it is NOT a copyvio to quote a person from an interview on national TV.
 * See the ABC website ... the video is right on their site. I did not upload anything here! The quote is NOT a copyvio. I'll remove the Youtube link but the quote is notable and illustrates the director's own thoughts on his film. Ebonyskye (talk) 00:31, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Coordinator position
Hello, Bignole! Hope you are doing well... it has been too long since we last collaborated, especially with Alientraveller. I saw him editing a little bit recently, though... maybe we can re-team for Nolan's third Batman film after his Inception. :) I noticed that you got involved with WP:HORROR helping Hornoir, and I'm sorry to see that his effort didn't pan out.  Since you are still involved with some film articles, I was wondering if you would consider running as a coordinator for the upcoming election.  You've always been a welcome voice to help build consensus and implement best practices.  Do you have any interest? Erik (talk | contribs) 00:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Jason Voorhees
I understand why, I read the part about being brief and reading the film articles, basics only, but at the very least could we leave the "Burned in Earth 2's atmosphere" and "Freddy resurrected Jason which is why he's alive again in Jason X" thing? Because it might confuse some people. They might think Freddy vs. Jason takes place AFTER Jason X, since it was listed after that (it was only released after Jason X because at the time Jason X was released, Freddy vs. Jason was stuck in development hell. I know novelizations depict his return after Jason X, and probably some comic series too, but film-wise, he has not appeared after Jason X, he is completely destroyed leaving only the mask. The official DVD for it has a "Jump to death" menu, and Jason and Brodski are listed as the final deaths, with "atmosphere" as cause of death. So we could at least add what could possibly be Jason's final death (unless of course Freddy resurrects him again, lol). And for the unexplained resurrection? The ending of Jason Goes to Hell indicates the approach of a Freddy vs. Jason.

And fyi, on the Nightmare wiki, someone saw the pages I edited and actually mistook me for an admin. No joke. I might not always make edits you like on here, but on other wikis I do, and by no means am I a vandal. Ghostkaiba297 (talk) 00:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * So if this isn't a biography, and is not supposed to describe a possible final fate (even in a way that isn't one-sided and saying he definitely WAS killed reentering the atmosphere), doesn't that make Wikipedia inferior to other wikis like Horror Film Wiki and Friday the 13th wiki? Because I've got a gut feeling that you don't like to feel inferior to anyone. Your site's article on Jason could be superior to theirs, but if you don't want it to be, then couldn't we atleast recommend Horror Film Wiki or Friday the 13th wiki? Like, say "This is an encyclopedic article on Jason, not a biography. If you want a biography, try the Horror Film Wiki or Friday the 13th wiki". Ghostkaiba297 (talk) 01:41, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * So there IS one. That's good. Let's just hope people who want to know more about Jason quickly can think to click one of those links...Ghostkaiba297 (talk) 02:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

JLA
I agree that case-by-case, and this case the rationale is not compelling. The use of such images is clearly not a reflection on minimal-use, and the a compare-contrast with the comics costumes does not expand or provide depth for the Smallville characters. The policy points to the burden of edit on continuing to use the image. Are the versions of characters utilized, the same that Cranstoun derived her inspiration? As a fan I find that it is a really cool image, and I do like it ascetically; but in examining the fair-use rationale the image fails to meet criteria, as fair-use image, and as a gallery. -Sharp962 (talk) 18:47, 10 September 2009 (UTC).
 * HAHA, it looks like we start one at the NFC at the same time. You mind if I merge them with the Header of File:Justicecostumecompare.jpg? -Sharp962 (talk) 19:09, 10 September 2009 (UTC).

Speedy deletion nomination of File:SmallvilleLana.jpg
A tag has been placed on File:SmallvilleLana.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free image with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the image can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the image. If the image has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. magnius (talk) 23:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Regarding you post to the images talk page and in the hangon, please see Non-free content → images → #12. In short, fair use does not cover copyrighted images of living people because a free image is possible to be taken. That is what we have no image of so many famous individuals who are alive even in well developed articles, and where we do have an image, they often suck, because it is only possible to be used because some Wikipedian snapped the image at some event or awards show rather than a professional photograph, and then released the image into the public domain or freely licensed it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 07:17, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

HII
When are you planning to see it? I don't even think it has a UK release date, so God knows when I'll see it. The first one was released months later in the UK. I read that awful review you removed from the article, doesn't bode well. I agreed with their point about all the characters being repulsive, they seriously need to open a hairdressers in Haddonfield.  Paul    730  00:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, enjoy the film, be sure to give me your review. The thing that stuck out in that review was the biggest problem I had with the original; the characters are unlikable, greasy rednecks.  In horror, I like my hero characters to be likable and relatable, it makes me care more when bad stuff happens to them.  Nobody in RZH was likable, not even Annie and she was Danielle Harris! (Actually, Laurie's parents were nice, come to think of it.)   Also, Haddonfield is supposed to be the perfect town, not a trailer park.  Oh well, you've heard my problems with RZH before.  It's just, you say it will be entertaining from a Halloween standpoint, but whereas the Friday movies had that perfect Friday atmosphere, these just don't feel like Halloween movies to me, which is why I have so much trouble enjoying them.  Meh, maybe I'll be able to detatch myself from it enough to enjoy it on it's own merits, if there are any.  I agree with you about Zombie's dialogue, it's atrocious.     Paul    730  17:03, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * But that's what was so beautiful about the original Halloween. Haddonfield appeared perfect but Michael represented all the repressed evil that people were hiding behind closed doors.  Turning the town into a redneck-infested cesspit robs the film of that juxtaposition.  I've said before, I think Zombie's child abuse storyline would have worked better if the Myers family had been middle class and appeared to be perfect from the outside.  Making his mom a stripper was rather on the nose.  If anything, Halloween 6 did a better and more realistic job of portraying a dysfunctional family, with Kara and Debra being physically and psychologically abused by John.
 * As I say, the only characters I liked were the Strodes, I enjoyed their obvious affection for each other and their little quirks (Mr. Bones the skeleton was a cute touch). You "despised" Laurie?  I didn't know that.  I think the only reason I dislike Scout's Laurie is because she's not JLC, to be honest.  I actually like the look of her role in the new film, it's very similar to the Laurie in the First Death comic; a drug-addled, hallucinating mess.  She's the most appealing aspect of the film for me.
 * At the risk of falling back into our old discussions, I still think explaining things is a cop-out in horror films. It's okay for anti-heroes like Jason, to provide sympathy for their actions, but not full-on villains like Michael and Freddy.  Horror should be mysterious, and explaining things is usually just a lazy road to take when you've run out of ideas.  "We don't know how to be scary anymore, let's just deliver exposition." It can also castrate your villain; Leatherface, Michael, and Freddy should not be sympathetic, we don't need to see scenes of them being bullied as kids (Jason is different, as he was a sympathetic victim to begin with).  I'm sorry to play the Nightdance card again, but a good writer can find new, scary stories without resorting to explaining things or changing the character beyond recognition.  Compare Freddy's Dead (which relies on exposition) to New Nightmare (which is just a damn creative story).
 * H20 is a strange one. I love it, it's my favourite Halloween sequel by a long shot, but it's Laurie's movie, not Michael's.  It's a human drama about overcoming fears, not a horror movie.  Michael is very poor in that movie (just a generic killer), and JLC holds everything together with her amazing character arc and acting.  In some ways, it's not a very good tribute to the orginal film because the message of that was "evil is everwhere and cannot die", whereas H20 shows evil utterly defeated by good.  That's one of the few reasons I tolerate Resurrection, it allows evil to continue and triumph over good (until Busta shows up...).     Paul    730  20:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * They don't have to exist in the 2000s, this is fiction. Personally, I like the irony of horror taking place in idyllic settings, that's why I like Sunnydale, Springwood, and Crystal Lake.  Zombie's "nature/nurture" question is interesting, I like this quote "Michael was created by a perfect alignment of interior and exterior factors gone violently wrong. A perfect storm, if you will."  I just think the family abuse was handled in a really juvenile manner, "Oh, your mom's a stripper and your dad swears at you, you're gonna grow up to be Michael Myers!"  It was crap writing on Zombie's part.  Had that area of the film been handled more intelligently, I'd probably be kinder towards it.
 * I didn't think Laurie was particularly foul-mouthed, but the scenes where she simulates sex (first with a bagel, later with Annie) were embarrassing.
 * Freddy had a background, but it was never explained. How did he have these dream powers, how was he still around after his death.  That went unexplained until Freddy's Dead, when we met the Dream Demons.  There was also all that exposition about Amanda Krueger and him being the product of rape, which I find interesting as a fanboy, but probably wasn't necessary.  In the first film, we knew he was a child murderer who was burned to death, but he was still more of a mysterious shadow than a full-fledged character.  I think he worked better like that, and because New Nightmare returned him to that (despite the story being completely different), he was more effective in that film than the other sequels.  With Leatherface, I was thinking more about the skin infection lack-of-a-nose thing.  Do we really need that concrete of a reason as to why he wears masks?  I prefer Gunnar Hansen's explanation that he has to wear masks to express himself because he has no personality, that was more interesting than "he has no nose".  Showing Leatherface abused by his family isn't a big deal, because as you say, that happened in the original.     Paul    730  11:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I saw in the trailer a scene which seemed to be Laurie putting the clown mask over her face like Michael did when he was killing Ronnie. I found that quite interesting, and it did remind me of Halloween 4s ending.  I heard Loomis was a blatant asshole, which spoils his moral ambiguity in the first film (which I liked... Loomis was great in the first film).  I like that Brackett has an increased role, he was always a character I would've liked to see more of in the original series.  I like that he's a father figure for Laurie in this continuity.  How big is Annie's role?  Her death scene has been ridicuously over-exposed in the trailers, makes it seem like that's her only part.  I did see an interesting scene with her and Laurie arguing, and her showing her scars.  Survivor Annie has so much potential, I hope it isn't wasted.
 * I'll see the film when it finally gets released over here, and we can discuss everything in more detail. I'll definitely see it at the cinema.     Paul    730  18:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think Loomis was a little more good-natured in the first film than you give him credit for. Didn't he sacrifice himself for Laurie (I can't remember exactly).  He was heroic in the end.
 * Annie is in it to the end? Didn't expect that. :D The trailers kept showing that bathroom scene with Michael in the mirror, fans basically took for granted that she was dead meat.  I'm liking the sound of her role anyway.
 * Thanks for sending me that review and editing out the spoilers, that was nice of you. I'll probably give in and spoil myself though, I already glanced at the article plot section.  That seems like a fair review, and probably one I'll agree with given my reluctant respect/hate for the first film.  I really do want to like the first film, but it just won't let me. :/ I take it the hospital scene was a dream sequence as expected?  Deborah has a white horse? I'm not opposed to psychological ghosts and hallucinations at all, but what the fuck do horses have to do with anything?  Weird.  I can see this film becoming a cult favourite like HIII and H6, because at least it's a unique entry in the series, and it's free from the remake stigma of RZH. People will hate it, but it'll find a fanbase eventually.
 * P.S., a part of that review I enjoyed: "maybe it was just nice to see Michael stabbing the living sh*t out of someone instead of banging a piece of wood against the ceiling for 10 minutes?" Ha, the final act of RZH is so boring, I totally fall asleep.     Paul    730  23:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Break
I disagree, I think characters can redeem themselves with "last ditch efforts". You're talking to someone who loves Tina from H5 because she saves Jamie (and I just generally enjoyed her character, but her death was great), not to mention Gale Weathers from Scream, Brady from H4 and Ali from Friday the 13th Part III. I love it when asshole characters become heroes.

Oh, if the horse has some deep meaning, then I can accept it. I love all that metaphor shit. :P How is Michael's costume in the final cut? What do you think of it having seen the completed film? Does the dodgy beard make it in?  Paul    730  04:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It is a little cliched, but I still like it. It depends how it's done.  Gale had a solid arc over the entire trilogy and was a better developed character overall.  With Ali, it was obviously a little more one dimensional, but that's just Friday the 13th. It never ocurred to me that he was just avenging his friends, I always thought he was saving Chris.  I prefer to interpret it that way.  (I actually like all the bikers in that movie.  Especially Fox, I love how she's a bitch to people but quite child-like and innocent in private.)  Brady... I don't like him nearly as much as Tina but he did redeem himself.  He was a stupid kid, but he did try to protect his girlfriend, give him his due.  Even though it is cliched, I like the idea of people having the potential to be heroes, even if they're not super-nice people.  It happens a lot in Doctor Who, with the Doctor inspiring people to their deaths, something which disturbs him greatly.     Paul    730  04:58, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, a psychopathic killer is approaching them but Brady's thinking about how to get back with Rachel? Think you're over-estimating his thought process there.  He was trying to protect her and Jamie because he was basically a good person.  A stupid naive person, but a good person.
 * Yeah, Gale's was a gradual arc through Dewey, more so than any single act of redemption. I just threw her name in without really thinking.  She's still a hero though; she stops Billy in the first movie, even though it's Sidney who fires the killing shot.  I think it's probably Randy's death more than anything that softens her, that's when she stops thinking about her career and more about stopping the killer, it gets really personal.
 * Well, it depends. Obviously, simple suicide isn't helping anyone.  But you have to take their intentions into account.  Pyro died heroically after saving Senator Kelly.  Just because he was dying anyway (he had a virus) and Kelly was ultimately killed soon afterwards, doesn't make Pyro's redemption mean any less.  He did what he could under the circumstances.     Paul    730  12:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No he wasn't, he was a dumb kid. But I know you're just baiting me. :P  Brady tried his best, it's not fault Michael has wacky Thorn powers that make him super strong.  And you don't know it accomplished nothing, those 10 seconds Michael took to crush his face might have made all the difference for Rachel. :)
 * Pyro saved Kelly, Kelly didn't die until later but the effects of Pyro's sacrifice (Kelly was now pro-mutant and was going to champion their cause) didn't happen because Kelly was assasinated by someone else. Kelly himself actually achieved redemption of his own IMO, because he changed his views, he just didn't have time to do anything about it. (Similar to the film, where he realises the X-Men are heroes but dies anyway.)  I think you're putting too much emphasis on the result of the action rather than the action itself.  Banshee died trying to save people.  He failed miserably, but it was still a heroic death because he tried.  What if Loomis had done what you say, but Michael had caught up with Laurie in the hallway and killed her?  Would that just overwrite Loomis' sacrifice?  All due respect, I just completely disagree with your stance.  Obviously, it's more redeeming if the death achieves something, but even if it doesn't, the attempt still means something.     Paul    730  13:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, so Brady was an idiot who couldn't fire a gun, but still, I think his heart was in the right place. What about Tina.  I can see you absolutely hating Tina, based on your hate for Annie and Lynda, who she's basically a clone of, and the fact that at least half the fanbase think she's an annoying bitch. I really like her.  Heroic death: yay or nay?    Paul    730  14:02, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh my god, you really need to rewatch Halloween 5. Yeah, Tina was the curly-haired brunette who was friends with Rachel. She's like a sister to Jamie, but neglects her to be with her asshole boyfriend.  However, she's also very guilty about it and later, she runs into Michael and gets stabbed to save Jamie.  Here's her death.  I've seen a lot of fans hating her at OHMB, but she has a pretty vocal fanbase too.  She's a love her or hate her character.    Paul    730  15:36, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Huh. I figured you would hate Tina because of the way you villainized Annie for her selfishness in the original film (ditching Lindsey for her boyfriend).  Presumptious of me, sorry. :P    Paul    730  16:10, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, IGN did not like Halloween II. I've not even seen the movie and I totally agree with it, it basically raises all my problems with the original.  The score's a little harsh though... half a star?     Paul    730  18:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

B2
But the review says the ideas were solid, it was the execution that was poor. Which is a very fair statement. While I personally believe Michael is better off mysterious, I don't deny that a prequel movie that explores his psychology and childhood has decent potential in the right hands. However, as we've both said, Zombie resorted to stereotypes and vulgar language to tell the story. Also, I'm not opposed to originality. I'm still annoyed that John Carpenter never got to make his Halloween 4, which was a ghost story in which Michael came back as a "psychic disturbance". That was a creative idea; it also retained the themes of the original (repressed darkness in suburbia, evil is eternal) while telling a different kind of story, which the remake never managed. I'd much rather have had that than the H4 we got, which is a perfectly likable slasher movie but totally lacking in originality.  Paul    730  22:04, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to lighten the mood after our little Freddy debate, the latest FvJvA came out and it was great. I'm totally loving this series, even though it's technically a load of shit (as is to be expected really).  More characters die brutally (guess they're not getting an ongoing series), Freddy and Jason unite to massacre the entire world, Jason becomes the general of an army of deadites, and there's a vicious traitor in the Nightmare Warriors' midst.  We've still not seen much of Tommy yet, which is disappointing (although there is a lovely moment where Freddy exploits Jason's vendetta toward him) and the art is a rushed mess, but overall this is just great brainless fun.  Even though I'm usually happy to enjoy comics as they are, I must admit, I would love to see this as a live action movie, as impossible as that would be.     Paul    730  15:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The first FvJvA isn't that great in retrospect. I would still totally recommend getting it, but I read it recently and some of the art/dialogue is pretty shoddy. I suppose that's the same as the films.  Yeah, I've noticed your work on Freddy and Leatherface.  I glanced at the B&W comics, couldn't be bothered reading the whole thing (I hate reading comics online).   Doesn't the Nightmare website have quite a few comics up?  I remember reading one which featured Nancy, and all the characters from 3, 4, and 5 uniting in the afterlife/dream world to take Freddy down.  It was quite impressive, and had some freaky Alice in Wonder Land-style artwork.  Sadly, it's contradicted by Nightmare Warriors though.  Good luck with your job hunt.    Paul    730  21:15, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If it's plot info you need, I'd refer you to Lord Crayak. He has a really extensive collection of horror comics and novels, and I'm sure he'd be happy to help.  You could just use the comics themselves as a primary souce, like we do with the films.     Paul    730  22:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, as I say, you should ask Crayak. I think has some pretty old, hard-to-find titles like the Chaos Halloween comics and a lot of the old novels.  It's possible he has some Nightmare collectibles too.     Paul    730  23:22, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'll be getting it. I've been a fan of that game series since X-Men: Legends (they're all pretty much the same format).  The Civil War plot looks cool, although I think it limits your gameplay (since which side you choose will affect which characters you can play as).  I'm pissed off Cyclops and Shulkie aren't playable, they're exclusive to certain consoles but not Xbox.  I mean, fucking Gambit's in it but not Cyclops?  What the hell is up with that?  He's the definitive X-Man and he was my favourite character to go as in X-Men Legends.  Do you think you'll get it?  I'd recomend it, it's simple hack-and-slash fighting, nothing revolutionary but fun if you like the characters.
 * Btw, what's up with the Lana image? I know it got deleted, but couldn't you have found a replacement where she wasn't knocked up? :P    Paul    730  16:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You could probably find the first one dirt cheap. Don't expect anything too sophisticated though, the gameplay is basically go from A to B and kill anybody in your way.  I saw the ridiculous Lana debate, you shouldn't accept that, it's you that's right.  You should re-upload the old image and reiterate your case.
 * I only saw the one UA trailer. It looked great, the gameplay isn't as close up as that though, least not in the previous games.  I must admit, I got a fanboy thrill seeing Civil War come to life like that.  Smallville looks good, not sure about the Batsuit though. I saw people complaing that they're ripping off Dark Knight.     Paul    730  17:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Ratings
Thanks so much for those links. We may have Smallville's (former) companion show up to GA here in a bit. Do you think you can find 2005-2006's season rankings at abcmedianet? Three out of four seasons are now using it, and I'm concerned they may be calculating things a bit differently, so don't make the perfect comparisons. If not, that's fine. Thanks again. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 17:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Voting
The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:31, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Birds of Prey
1. Instead of just removing the entire edit, you should have only removed the portion which was original research and left the rest. 2. I did it myself and you still removed it again. I'm assuming you didn't actually read my 2nd edit or the comment on the edit. --Ephilei (talk) 05:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Nightmare Warriors
Hey, what do you think of the Nightmare Warriors article? Given my usual procrastination on Wiki, I'm quite impressed with it. I wasn't even planning to do it, just in a horror mood and felt strangely motivated one night. I wanted it to hold it's own against the film articles. (Btw, the comics are on YouTube if you want to read them for free.)    Paul    730  02:22, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought you might mention the character section, and I think it's justifiable. I really only intended it to be a place to cover the characters' backgrounds, as you say, rather than info about their development in this particular story.  Since the article talks quite a bit about the melding of continuities and returning characters, I decided there should be a place where we actually identify which film they come from to provide context.  I suppose we could do it in the plot section ("Elsewhere Stephanie Kimble (Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday) and Alice Johnson (A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master, A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child) experience visions of Jason and Freddy...") but I think the list format is tidier and allows for other info like actors, and brief plot backgrounds.  It's not ideal (it'd be nice if there was characterization info for all of them) but for this particular type of story, I think it's neccessary.    Paul    730  04:34, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't the article be self-sufficient rather than relying on internal links to provide context? The name "Rennie" doesn't mean anything unless we identify where she comes from, and not all the characters are established.  I agree that it's the weakest section of the article, and wouldn't hold up in a FAR, but I don't plan on submitting the article for review so it's not a huge concern for me.  It's just a place to provide a bit of plot context, and since there's more OOU info than the plot and characters section combined, I don't think there's any major violation.  I'm just happy the article has some decent content now, instead of that crappy little stub.     Paul    730  23:05, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I just feel that the crossover element of the series is lost in the article if we don't identify where the characters come from. It seems like a basic point to make, especially since the writers go on about tying all the films together through the characters.  You're either assuming the reader knows who the characters are, or giving them the unnecessary hassle of clicking a dozen links to find out.  It's inconvenient.
 * As for being surprised at me not worrying as much about organization, I must admit, I'm caring slightly less about Wikipedia policy than I used to. Part of why I got tired of this site and starting spending more time at Wikia is because I feel all these policies and bureaucracy are kind of defeating the purpose.  What's the point of following policy to a T when 99% of readers don't care?  I still believe articles should be written well, with sources and OOU info, but I also think there should be some common sense applied and compromise between policy and giving the reader what they want.  Most people reading this article would probably appreciate having the characters listed in a clear manner, and I honestly don't see the big deal in doing so.
 * Review-wise, I just meant that not every article is FA-worthy. FvJvA isn't Watchmen, there's not going to be the same level of characterization info available.  I feel the article in it's current state does the series justice, so I'm happy with it.  I certainly don't feel like jumping through hoops to get it to FA status.  That said, I do feel that it's already GA quality, and wondered if you fancied reviewing it yourself?  You know I value your input, so if I reluctantly remove the character list do you think the article would pass a GAR?     Paul    730  23:53, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. I figured since you hadn't edited the article it would be okay, but probably better to get someone totally neutral.  I won't bother with peer review, because from the ones I've seen, very few people contribute especially to obscure fictional topics.  I'll let the series run it's course, and maybe request a GAR when it's done.  That'll allow more time to weed out typos and grammar errors anyway.  Btw, on the subject of the series being ongoing, how should I make that clear?  Given the way the plot section ends abruptly, someone might be confused.  I couldn't find a specific template for comics, and Template:Current seemed a little melodramatic and inappropiate.  Should I just put "This series is ongoing..." in the lead or something?  Oh, and please copy edit away, I'd appreciate it.  My prose is probably not the best, I was half asleep when I wrote it.  A few other editors have already caught typos.
 * No, I never noticed the Clark change. Aw, I was kinda fond of the old image but this one has his red jacket so it's probably better.     Paul    730  00:13, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. The plot is already laid out one-paragraph-per-issue so it's just a matter of throwing some section headers over it. No, I've not got back into Smallville yet.  I finished season five, but was fairly bored because I wasn't in the mood, and haven't been motivated to watch S6 yet. It's annoying, because the current seasons look so much more interesting than the Lana/Lex dreck I have to sit through to get there. :P  I've been watching Everybody Loves Raymond on DVD lately, peppered with Will & Grace.  I just had a strange nostalgia for Raymond one day, and started buying the boxsets.  Just finished S7. Also been watching random Freddy and Jason movies... I'm actually really fond of Dream Master.  Alice is a great heroine and I love the cheesy 80s songs.    Paul    730  01:29, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Green Arrow is pretty hot, that is incentive. The problem is that I'm never in a DC mood; whenever I want a superhero fix, Marvel has a more tempting offer (the X-Books are finally interesting again after an excruciating two year lull).  I have the DVDs sitting there, so they're there if I want them.  I still haven't read Superman: Birthright, which has been collecting dust on my shelf.
 * I remember you saying you were a Raymond fan, which is why I brought it up. I prefer the later seasons too, I enjoy Amy and her family as part of the cast.
 * Lol, what does Ali think of them? Seems like your pretty good at getting people to watch these movies, I just get rolled eyes if I mention Freddy or Jason.  How come you didn't show him Dream Master, that's a perfectly solid entry.  The only criticisms I have of it are the lighting (it's too bright and colourful) and the story is basically a retread of the first movie. The characters are all great though.  Didn't you show him the Laurie Strode trilogy?     Paul    730  03:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, comics > live action when it comes to superheroes, let's face it.
 * Lol, poor Ali, being subjected to your emotional rollercoaster. That episode of Smallville was brilliant, although I find myself missing Jonathan.  I don't think the show had the same warmth and homeliness after he died, he was so important.  Kind of like how Buffy suffered without Giles... it was still good but it just missed something.
 * I'm thinking of rewatching Freddy's Revenge. I read a good review which made me re-examine it.  I'm still not keen on using a murderous demonic paedophile as a metaphor for repressed homosexuality, but I think the film probably has more substance than people give it credit.  The Nightmare movies have so much potential to go deep, it's a pity they rely so much on cheap gags.  Oh, and Dream Warriors is good, but overrated I feel.  I think Nancy makes it feel better than it is.  It's rather cheesy.    Paul    730  22:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Dream Warriors doesn't live up to it's premise. The idea of becoming empowered through dreams is great, pity it was boiled down to nonsense like "I am the wizard master".  The SFX were great though, it's probably the best Nightmare visually, but even that was a mixed blessing because it introduced the cartoony deaths.  My only problems with Freddy's Revenge are the slightly offensive subtext and the fact that Jesse is a whiny, sweaty little ass.  Grow a pair, boy.  Nancy, Alice, and Maggie all kick ass... what's his excuse?  The film's a little long too, maybe it should've ended at Lisa's house rather than the power plant?     Paul    730  02:22, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I heard about the gay subtext before I saw the movie, so it was always obvious to me. I actually like that the movie has a subtext, intentional or otherwise, but I just can't reconcile using a symbol of evil as a metaphor for homosexuality, it's too uncomfortable.  I don't remember Alice all that much in Dream Child (that whole film kind of bores me), but she kicks ass in Dream Master.  Love the scene where she's swinging the nunchucks around.  What didn't you like about her in 5?  Kristen never really stood out to me, she's always upstaged by a better character.  Like you, I prefer her in Dream Warriors though.     Paul    730  16:58, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * *Gasp!* Thom Matthews is my favourite Tommy, I loved him in 6. Much prefer him to that block of wood in A New Beginning.  The novels explain that Pam helped him recover his sanity, and we don't know how many years later the film takes place.  I don't really care how he recovered, I prefer him as a dorky hero than a mute borderline psychopath.  He's kind of an asshole now in Nightmare Warriors, he dresses like a soldier and brags about how only he can defeat Jason.  Luckily Ash is there to put him in his place.     Paul    730  18:12, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * What accent? Doesn't he just speak with a regular American accent?  Oh, I just finished watching Freddy's Revenge and really enjoyed it.  Freddy is excellent in it, really scary and not at all wisecracky.  It's really easy to believe that 1 and 2 take place in the same world.  I know what you mean about the music, it was very effective.  The pool party is a highlight.  I'm watching the movies all out of order; I started with 4, some of 6 (I skipped to the good bits), and now 2.  Think I'll watch 3 next.     Paul    730  21:52, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I fancy a re-watch of New Blood myself, actually. Think I'll watch that after Dream Warriors, and then possibly Army of Darkness.  I watched Manhattan recently... Rennie is the most useless final girl in the history of that series. I hate her. She escapes from Jason, then sits down to have a 15-minute chat about her traumatic childhood and make out with her boyfriend, even though Jason is clearly still on the loose.  Get a grip, girl!  I think that film has some of the worst acting and cheesiest moments; I still like it but even for a F13 movie it's pretty bad.  Jim and Suzi's scene at the start... oh Jesus.  Damn, you got my hopes up there. I thought you meant the real HII is being re-released on DVD or something.  Yeah... I know the Zombie one is out next month, I'll go see it.
 * I don't really notice Californian accents, tbh. American is American.  Unless they're, like, a hillbilly or something.
 * Hey, I'll watch Smallville when you read Nightdance. :P   Paul    730  23:04, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Break
I know what you mean, the Friday characters are pretty faceless. I do like Ginny, Trish ("I'll give you something to remember me by!"), Tommy (obviously), Megan, Rowan, and Clay. Tina stands out because of her powers, but her personality is annoying (I'm kinda rooting for her and Ash to get together though). Rennie just annoyed me because she seemed to have no survival instinct whatsoever. She didn't even defeat Jason, there just happened to be a bunch of toxic waste flushing the sewers. Who would your ideal Friday hero(ine) be? I'd like to have a bit of diversity, maybe a black or Asian girl, or a gay guy.

Spite or no spite, you've done yourself a favor. Get some Angel boxsets while you're at it. :P   Paul    730  01:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, I love how much thought you've put into this. I don't know if you know it, but your g/f character sounds exactly like Kennedy, in the way that she's sweet to the tfg, but bitchy and outspoken to others.  That'd be fine with me, because I love Kennedy (more than Tara tbh) and think she'd make a great protagonist.  Can totally see Kennedy kicking Jason's ass.  I would have there be kissing etc between the two girls though, otherwise it seems like you're apologising for their sexuality.  Don't have any nudity or actual sex (since they're the heroes... gotta respect the Rules of Horror) but have them show physical affection, like any other couple.  Oh, and FvJvA is set during winter.  I always thought a winter-set movie would rule.
 * I've not thought as much about my fantasy F13, but I'd like the hero to be a gay guy. Basically, I thought there should be gay characters in F13, but then if you kill them off, it seems like they're being punished for being immoral.  The only way to escape that is to make one of them survive.  My character idea is a Tommy-style action hero, whose b/f gets killed by Jason.  Hopefully he'd have some original traits to distinguish him from Tommy/Clay though.  There'd also be shameless guy-on-guy action, just to piss of the people who would object to that. :P I also thought about an Asian heroine after hearing and agreeing with this awesome song from Dr. Horrible.     Paul    730  04:33, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, continuing the Kennedy comparison, what about her and Willow's love scene in "Touched"? That was fairly explicit for Buffy but tame for F13.  Something like that would be acceptable for a final girl IMO, since it's sexy and romantic, without being two people just pumping away (like Trent and Bree in the Friday remake).
 * Oh, you can totally kill a gay guy without being homophobic. I was impressed with how they handled the gay character in Bride of Chucky, and he was splattered by a truck.  But the Friday the 13th movies are all about punishing teens for their sinful behaviour.  If Jason kills a gay character, there's kind of an uncomfortable subtext there, even if it's accidental.  I dunno, maybe I'm just being paranoid.  I know there was a gay couple in the Wildstorm F13 comics, I'm not sure how they were handled though.  Yeah, I'd definitely want him to be a normal guy, like Clay, who happens to be gay.  I'd still want his sexuality to be an explicit part of the character though, otherwise you get into Wiccan and Hulkling territory, where their sexuality is so discreet it's practically non-existant.  I'd also want him to be a cool hero and not a sap like Jesse.     Paul    730  14:11, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, obviously she couldn't be a full-fledged Slayer like Kennedy, but personality-wise she could. I like the idea of her "hunting" Jason.  What other ideas would you like to see in a Friday film?  I'd quite like a Sin City-style anthology film.  I've noticed the comics have more creative stories, because they're not tied to the formula of the movies, and it'd be nice to see that creatively onscreen.  Lose the tired "final girl" slasher formula, come up with something original.  I'd love to see some kind of adaptation of Abuser and the Abused, especially this scene.  I love the imagery of a "junior Jason" hugging their idol.
 * Uh... I think New Blood was the gay Friday the 13th. Pretty sure the Nick actor was gay.  Yeah, I remember being impressed that there even was a gay character in a horror film.  I honestly can't think of any.     Paul    730  01:09, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Abuser and the Abused isn't a "backstory" comic, it's about a girl who gets victimised by everyone around her and turns to murder like Jason did. When she meets Jason, she tries to show him how similar they are.  It's an emotional little story that fits the themes of Friday the 13th.  Really, the only reason it couldn't be a film is because it's so short.  But I think that's a benefit; I'd rather see three short stories revolving around Jason, than another full-length story.  Frankly, faceless teens getting slaughtered gets boring fast, and isn't what I watch F13 for.  I'd rather have an anthology focused around Jason himself, with tighther stories.  I don't have a problem believing that people would go to Crystal Lake; I think the risk of Jason being there would make the area more appealing to dumb, thrill-seeking teens.  People would come from all over the country to see the infamous "Camp Blood".
 * Lol, that's pathetic how few there are. I wouldn't even count True Blood, cos that's a TV show.     Paul    730  02:45, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * How would telling a different story with Jason relegate him to minutia? Abuser has more to do with Jason's character and what he stands for than half the Friday movies, because Maggie's character arc paralleled Jason's.  That's a helluva lot more than A New Blood or Manhattan can claim.  Changing the formula isn't necessarily a bad thing.  How do you know what the masses would like?  Most people I've spoken to, online and in real life, were totally unimpressed with the last Friday.  It was a generic slasher movie with no stand-out qualities whatsoever.  It's only the fanboys like us who actually cared about it.  Sin City proved that you don't have to dumb down your movie for mainstream audiences.  If it's good, it's good.  There's no reason people wouldn't like an anthology Friday; there'd still be all the classic elements.  I'm not saying Jason should be absent or anything, it'd just be nice to tell an actual story about him for once.
 * Well, Jason Goes to Hell toyed with the idea of tourists coming to Crystal Lake because of it's history. They even had Jason Burgers.    Paul    730  04:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Jason appears prominently in Abused, about half the story is dedicated to his fight with Maggie. That's a larger percentage than Part II - Final Chapter, where Jason is quite literally only seen in the final act.  I'm not saying we should have an hour-and-a-half of just Maggie killing random people. I don't understand your argument at all.  Why would audiences care less about Jason fighting Maggie, than Jason fighting any other girl?  Just because Maggie has an actual storyarc?  Do you really think audiences would rather see faceless victims than fleshed-out characters?  I don't agree with your belief that movies should deliberately dumb themselves down to appeal to mass audiences.  Certainly they should be accessible (something like Nightmare Warriors would only appeal to hardcore fans) but that shouldn't rule out creative storytelling.
 * With Sin City, I was talking more about the anthology format. They could have Hollywoodized that into a clichéd action movie formula to attract a broader audience but they chose an unconventional structure.  No reason a Friday the 13th movie couldn't do the same, not because of the comics, but because it's more creative.  If, as you say, people only come to see Jason kill people, why would they object to him killing people in three different stories, rather than one?  Sorry, but I've not heard a single convincing argument against the anthology format.  I'm not saying the comics should be adapted panel-for-panel like Sin City, just that mini stories about Jason might be more interesting than the tired 15-teenagers-whittled-down-to-one-girl formula.     Paul    730  19:11, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * But Jason wouldn't have to be a background figure any more than he already is. In the classic films of the series, you barely see Jason.  He's not a background figure at all in Abused, or How I Spent My Summer Vacation, another short story.  You seem to have this idea that Jason would have to play a smaller role in an anthology, which just isn't true.  He has a lot of panel-time in Abused, and the story explores the themes and motives of the character.  How does that make him a background character?  It's not like Freddy's Nightmares, where Freddy shows up for two seconds and then we cut to some random irrelevant story.  Even if Jason did make minimal appearances, it's an anthology, so his collective screentime in the three stories would probably amount to the usual.
 * You keep saying that comics don't translate to film, usually without having read said comics or providing any specific reason. How d'you know FvJvA coudn't be a movie? FvJ was, and an enjoyable one at that.  The only thing that killed FvJvA was rights issues, and Sam Raimi/Bruce Campbell's lack of interest.  It started as a film script (which shows in the final product unfortunately, because the pacing is off... it might've worked better as a film).  I think Nightmare Warriors works better as a comic because of it's large scale and returning characters, as Jason Craig said, it'd be too expensive to do as a film.  I should point out that Jason X and Freddy vs. Jason were far more "comic booky" and ridiculous than anything I'm suggesting; my ideas are fairly low key, just with an unconventional plot structure.
 * An anthology film wouldn't need to dumb down characters; quite the opposite, because the protagonists would have less screentime but tighter, more focused stories. In a traditional Friday, you have one or two lead characters, and then 10+ fodder characters with zero development who exist only to pad out the film with meaningless death. That's one of the reasons I get bored in the middle of F13 movies; the fodder characters don't hold my interest. Who cares about Dead Fuck guy and his love life?  He's boring.  In an anthology, you could have three main characters with separate stories, requiring less filler scenes of random kids shagging/smoking.  In Abused, Maggie is a reasonable well-developed character (for F13, she's no Buffy).  Her abusive parents and boyfriend are necessary plot devices for her story, while also providing blood and gore for the audience.  So, say Abused takes up a third of the film, that's four necessary deaths and one well-developed character.  If the other two stories did the same, that's three well-developed protagonists and about 12 plot-relevant deaths.  Not bad.  I honestly think if you could see this film they way I do in my head, you would like it.
 * Here's how I would envision the movie: you open with some kind of framing device setting up the Jason legend. Perhaps some campfire kids, that's always a fun cliché.  Then cut to different stories which focus on specifc themes in the Friday the 13th series.  Abused would obviously deal with being victimised and vengeance.  Another one could explore a mother/son relationship (there was a lovely scene in Summer Vacation where Jason puts dead flowers on Pamela's grave).  Other themes could be neglect/hedonism, curses and bad luck, or ugliness and hiding your features.  Obviously, Jason would play a prominent role in each story, killing or attacking the protagonists.  There could be continuity between the stories (like in Sin City, where Shelly the barmaid appears in different yarns).  The final story would be more action-based than the others, to act as a climax, with Jason being defeated.  I firmly believe this structure could work.  In fact, Friday the 13th already has an anthology-style structure because, unlike Halloween and Nightmare, there's not much continuity between the films.  Jason is the only recurring element.     Paul    730  20:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * So you'd rather see a hand stabbing someone, than a movie that actually explores Jason's characterization? That's what defines a Friday the 13th movie to you?  I've not seen any of those anthologies except Tales.  I enjoyed Tales, but it's not what I had in mind for my imaginary F13.  That movie is random horror stories with common theme (people being punished for their sins).  My F13 movie is one big Jason movie, with mini stories exploring different themes about the character.  If Sin City isn't a true anthology, then F13 wouldn't be either, because my movie would have more in common with that than Tales.
 * The Evil Dead movies don't have any consistant tone, it changes movie-to-movie. The first is a straight horror film.  You could easily tone down or remove the slapstick, which the FvJvA script does.  The only elements from Evil Dead that appear in FvJvA are Ash and the Necronomicon.  Ash is cheesy and an asshole, but nothing he does really clashes with the F13 movies and their tone.  There's no wacky Three Stooges humor.  Freddy is still camp, but he kind of has to be in a story like that.  He's no different to how he was in FvJ.  You have to approach these movies with a tongue-in-cheek attitude; Freddy vs. Jason wasn't as serious as the original Nightmare and Friday, but it was a fun movie.  I don't think Bruce Campbell as Ash would have made things any dafter than they already were.  I agree it's hard to reconcile Army of Darkness and the original Nightmare as happening the same universe, but whatever, it's just a popcorn movie.
 * The story is about Maggie, but because she's a foil for Jason, it's really about Jason. Read her character entry for a plot summary.  Maggie fights Jason, and tries to reason with him by pointing out they are the same.  She even gives him a hug.  It seems to work, but then Jason changes his mind and decapitates her.  That one scene gives more insight into Jason's character than half the movies.  Quality over quantity.  Again, why good for TV but not film?  What's this rule where films need to follow a strict, repetitive formula?
 * Yeah, yeah, there's minor bridges between the films but each entry is largely standalone with few recurring characters. Halloween might have three continuities, but Laurie and Loomis are entrenched in it's mythology.  Even when Laurie's not there, she's represented by her daughter.  Same with Nightmare, it always comes back to Nancy in the end.  She's a crucial part of the series.  Friday the 13th just rotates through generic final girls, even when it does get a recurring hero, he's played by a different actor each time.  All you need for a Friday film are Jason and Crystal Lake, and sometimes not even those.     Paul    730  23:08, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The girl would just be one element of the film though, Jason would appear in all the stories and therefore be more prominent.
 * Oh yeah, I totally wouldn't want a FvJvA movie now, that ship has sailed. It would've had to have happened between 2003 and 2009.  I don't even really want that movie at all, I like the comics as they are.  I just think some of the straight Friday comics, like Abused, have some potential for partial adaptation.  Like, if I was making a Halloween movie, I would take elements from Nightdance, but I wouldn't make it a direct adaptation.  There's just some creepy imagery from that story that I would love to see in live action, like the human jack-o-lantern.  In fact, I'd make that the poster. :D Nothing like a hollowed-out human skull to show people what you're all about.
 * Maggie is well-developed for a F13 character, but her story wouldn't take 42 minutes to tell. She gets abused, goes nuts and kills people, and meets Jason.  That's pretty much it, you could tell it in 20 minutes.  Sometimes I think stories are more powerful the shorter they are, it's like drinking a shot.  I love Tales of the Vampires; some of those stories are only a few pages long but they pack a punch, you just need to know how to tell them.
 * That's the thing though, her appearances are spread out because the series kept returning to her. It doesn't matter what they did, how creative they tried to be, they always went back to Nancy in the end.  Look at the new movie; no characters from the old series return except Freddy... and Nancy.  The Texas and Friday remakes never did that.  Even without Nancy, the characters often passed the torch from one film to another in a way that Friday never bothered with.     Paul    730  00:20, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Lol, I'd love to make this film just to show you how awesome it would be. ;)   Paul    730  03:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh please, I could churn out any old crap and it would still be good for Friday the 13th, let's face it.    Paul    730  03:48, 26 September 2009 (UTC)