Wikipedia:Peer review/Branded to Kill/archive1

Branded to Kill
There are precious few foreign film FAs and I'm hoping this article might help fill in that gap. It's currently a GA. There's not a lot written about it in English, comparitively, though much more than about any of Suzuki's other films. Still, I've managed to Frankenstein together a lot more information than I'd thought would be possible. Seems to have managed comprehensiveness. Any and all criticism is welcome. Be brutal, I can take it. Thanks, Doctor Sunshine   talk  01:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * First lead paragraph: "...with his sanity as much imperiled as his life." Can this be written to be clearer?
 * Second lead paragraph: "...its unconventional style, rather confusing narrative and arguably as his greatest and best known work." Was the film really renowned for its "rather confusing" narrative?  Also, "arguably as his greatest and best known work" seems out of place, as the first two items describe why the film was liked, and the third item separately describes the critical status of the film.  Can these items be separated?
 * Synopsis seems to be too succinct of a word to describe the three very full paragraphs about the film. What about Plot or Plot summary?
 * Is there a significance to the second sentence in the Synopsis image's caption? If there is thematic significance, slightly further explanation and a citation may be appropriate.
 * In Production, the first mention of Kaneo Iwai should include that he is a producer.
 * In Production, it does not mention the first screenwriter at all (Hachiro Guryu, I assume?) and only mentions who rewrote it by his last name. My suggestion is to write the Production as stand-alone as possible, assuming that the reader does not look at the lead paragraphs or the Infobox Film template for information.  Identify the director, the star, et cetera in the beginning of Production so someone new to the material can follow it.
 * I notice that "It" tends to be used a lot to refer to the film. Try to mention the title or refer to it as "the film", such as in the first sentence of the third paragraph in Production.  This helps re-identify the subject for the reader, especially if you talk about other nonpersonal subjects like the script and the set.
 * "He felt that the only person who should know what is going to happen is the director and that inspiration made the picture." Are the two parts of the sentence related?  It seems to imply that the director's exclusive knowledge causes inspiration to help direct the film.  Some separation and/or clarity may be needed here.
 * "One example of his script changes is the addition of the Number Three Killer's rice-sniffing habit, he explained that he wanted to present a quintessentially "Japanese" killer, "If he were Italian, he'd get turned on by macaroni, right?". This is a run-on sentence.  I suggest writing it as "One example of his script changes is the addition of the Number Three Killer's rice-sniffing habit.  Suzuki explained that he wanted to present a quintessentially "Japanese" killer, "If he were Italian, he'd get turned on by macaroni, right?" (Note the re-identification of "he" so it won't be assumed that "he" is the killer, the last subject of the previous sentence.  Also, no punctuation at the end after "right?"
 * Is it possible for the Cast section to precede the Production section? It seems better as a transition section, covering some aspects of the film's story and some aspects of the casting (which is production-related), before moving on to in-depth Production information.
 * In Style, "The influence of film noir permeated the film" sounds too personified. Something like "Branded to Kill was influenced by film noir..." would be more neutral and encyclopedic.
 * "Due to the wide frame, moving a character forward did not produce the dynamic effect desired so he relied on spotlight use and monochromatic images to compensate in creating action and suspense for the viewer." This is a long sentence.  Perhaps rewrite as, "Due to the wide frame, moving a character forward did not produce the dynamic effect desired.  Instead, he relied on spotlight use and monochromatic images to compensate in creating action and suspense for the viewer."
 * In Style, can the image be described in more detail to be more self-sufficient, so the reader does not necessarily have to find "When Hanada is unable to kill Misako he wanders the streets" in the text itself to understand the context of the image?
 * In Reception, key figures need to be re-identified so the section can stand alone without having read Production. For instance, Hori needs to be described in full at his first mention in Reception.
 * "...were told that "Suzuki's films were incomprehensible...'" should be rewritten as "...were told, 'Suzuki's films were incomprehensible...'"
 * Tony Rayns is described as a historian (I assume film historian), but his Wikipedia article does not say anything about this. Can this be cleared up?
 * "[it] is a bloody marvellous looking film" → Should be [It]. There needs to be capitalization of letters at the first instance of a quotation that is not fragmented.  This is an fragmentary example:  "He called it a 'terrific masterpiece'."  A full quotation would be, "He said, Branded to Kill is a terrific masterpiece."  There are different punctuation rules depending on how you quote someone.
 * Branded to Kill needs to be identified at the very beginning of the Legacy section for re-identification.
 * "Although Elvis Mitchell maintained its zeal fell slightly short of the original." This is a fragmentary sentence, and the reviewer should be identified more fully without needing to click on the wiki-link.  Even "Reviewer Elvis Mitchell" would be fine.  Also, "maintained" seems to indicate Elvis said something about it before and has kept saying it.  A different verb would be more appropriate.
 * Home Video → Home video, per section titling conventions
 * The first paragraph of Home video does not cite the release dates. How can the reader now if the dates are indeed accurate if there is no citation available for verifiability?
 * The Criterion Collection DVD cover image seems to serve as a decorative purpose, since it is not in the same section as the text mention, and also, the text mention (only part of a full sentence) may be too insufficient for fair use rationale. DVD covers have been challenged in film articles as not adding any realistic substance, though I imagine that the DVD packaging for something like Memento would warrant DVD cover inclusion with enough content.  Not sure if this is the case here.
 * If the reason for the image was to break up the monotony of the text, maybe you could use quote boxes instead, as seen at Aaron Sorkin, citing reviewers or producers.
 * Caption for film poster should avoid punctuation; images with captions that are one sentence or less do not need punctuation. Something like "Original Japanese theatrical poster" would suffice.
 * I hope you can make use of my suggestions! 155.91.28.231 17:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for taking the time to do this. Your comments were extremely helpful, especially in regards to the prose with which I was a tad clunky. I think I've address almost everything above, though I'm going to take another swing at copyediting keeping your suggestions in mind.
 * In regards to the original writer, I've found no information who it was. Most reliable sources simply state the writer as Hachiro Gyuru without any elaboration. The few reviews that attempt to elaborate seem to get the facts rather mangled. The actual film credits indicate that someone named Akira Suzuki wrote the script, unless I'm crazy. However, the information I do have about Hachiro Gyuru being a joint pen name is most I've been able to find on the subject (and most reliable) so I've left it at that rather than risk including anything erroneous.
 * I put the DVD cover in that section in keeping with the text about the film's introduction to the West. I think it is useful in showing how the film is marketed today, as opposed to the original marketing with the poster. Of course, no one's analyzed Criterion's marketing so I can't add anything and the image has to speak for itself. It's also how most North Americans were exposed to the film but only one review mentioned that and I'm not sure it's a notable enough website to be cited. I'll see if I can come up with a better caption or someway to confirm it's worth including but nothing's springing to mind at the moment.
 * Anyway, thanks again. Much appreciated. Doctor Sunshine   talk  22:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment. Some of the purpose of use descriptions in the fair use rationales of the images in this article could be improved, because "for informational purposes" is not really explaining why an image significantly contributes to readers' understanding in a way words alone cannot (WP:NFCC #8). – Ilse@ 23:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment. Some words seem to be misplaced in this sentence: "In 2006, Nikkatsu celebrated the 50th anniversary of his directorial debut by sponsored the Seijun Suzuki 48 Film Challenge retrospective at the Tokyo International Film Festival, showcasing all of his films to date." – Ilse@ 23:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Yikes. Obviously I still need to give the article a thorough read through. I've cleaned that sentence up and I'll fix the fair use rationales tomorrow. Thanks very much. Doctor Sunshine   talk  08:01, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I tried to improve the readability of the lead: I separated and grouped some elements, tried to remove some unencyclopedic wording, and removed some details about Seijun Suzuki being fired. It can probably be further improved. – Ilse@ 11:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Does "fatalistic femme" mean femme fatale? – Ilse@ 11:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * That looks better. Both terms, fatalistic femme and femme fatale, apply. Fatalistic femme is admittedly a pun but it encapsulates the defeated, death-obsessed and dangerous nature of the character concisely (I hope) whereas it's explained in more detail in the plot and cast sections. I know puns seem iffy but, FA-wise, B movie has a few and I'm sure there are others. Doctor Sunshine   talk  01:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)