Talk:Samurai Champloo/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Too many links

We dont need that many link on the bottom of the page, especially fansite links, this area should be simplified.-Tik

I suggest comparing these links to the ones on the Cowboy Bebop page. Bebop has 12 links: 3 are offical sites, 3 are encyclopedic sites, 4 are fansites (well done and quite famous one, however). Champloo has 10 links: there are 4 official sites (wierd), 2 are summaries, i.e. tv.com, one is a gallery and one pertains to the music, leaving only 2 of the most popular champloo fansites to be posted here. Perhapes the links should be organized in this sort of fashion? --Pointyfingers 15:10, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

I wont mess with the links, im not too good with organizing those, if someone wants to do it by all means go for it. I agree if they were more organzized they could look better. I dont know how many official sites we need but its not a really important topic so i wont fuss about it to much.-Tik

8 Mile?

The series also has some clear parallels to the Eminem film 8 Mile, and many anime buffs have made that comparison.

can we get some examples and specific sources here? otherwise this sentence is pointless.12.47.223.8 21:59, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree. What parallels, other than that they both involve hiphop? That sentence needs to be removed until someone can bring in some confirmation. User:Antrophica

Episode 11 - Ending Music

I've been doing research but so far have been able to confirm whether Gamblers and Gallantry's ending song (when Shino escapes with Jin) is a remix/sample of Jose Feliciano's Affirmation or George Benson's (who redid it) or simply an original tune. Though it not being included on any of the official soundtracks seems to go against that last possibility. I'll leave it out of the article until I can get some confirmation. Antrophica 04:19, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Visual Metaphors

This show is chockfull of them. I don't have access to any of the episodes at the moment; I'm listing what I can from memory. Anybody with the DVDs at hand, feel free to expand that section. Antrophica 19:50, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

If you wanna list all of them fine, but make sure you bother to explain what they mean.Bowen 02:01, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

It's unnecessary to explain the obvious. --Antrophica 16:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Can't follow episode

What exactly is happening in the episode where Mugen jumps off a cliff having been chased by soldiers.

The main confusion I have is where Jin says he was misled by the girl. Hackwrench 06:35, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm willing to help you, but I'll need more information. First of all, are you watching subbed or dubbed? If you are watching neither, do you understand Japanese? And what is the episode number? --Cyde 06:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

He's referring to the Episode 13 & 14 arc, 'Misguided Miscreants'. I found it easier to understand in the English dub. The scene where Mugen leaps off the cliff into the sea below is a flashback in sepia tone, which Watanabe (the director) is fond of using. Mugen was going to be executed for piracy (he was double-crossed by Mukuro), but decided he'd take his chances by taking a dive into the ocean, which he survived. The flashback mirrors the present events, where it's essentially the same thing happening all over again (Mukuro betraying Mugen).

The rest is explained in the Character Wiki, in Mukuro and Kohza's sections. In short, Kohza let Mugen die because he wasn't interested in helping her get away from Mukuro. She told Jin that Mukuro was behind everything, but neglected to tell him the rest of the story, that Shiren was in on the plot, too, and both of them planned to use Jin to kill Mukuro. Jin was clearly not happy about having been lied to and used like that, as he went after the the both of them. He was aware of Mugen's long-standing hatred for Mukuro and only killed Mukuro because he thought Mugen was dead and wouldn't be able to do it himself. He left Kohza to Mugen because he couldn't kill her himself (Bushido restricts samurai from attacking unarmed women).

Sorry. I'm not very good at simple explanations. --Antrophica 12:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks I appreciate it. I'm watching Samurai Champloo on Cartoon Netword Adult Swim. I kind of find not being very good at simple explanations an attractive quality, as I don't really care for them anyways. I didn't catch on that it was a flashback. Hackwrench 04:49, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Cowboy Bebop spoiler

Who put the huge Bebop spoiler under 'Crows'? :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.120.225.56 (talk • contribs)

• Sorry about that. I've updated the spoiler warnings. --Cyde Weys _talk^contribs 11:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • That was me; it slipped by.

Regarding the spoiler warning, what about making use of the End Spoiler template, if it lives the deletion poll? --Antrophica 07:19, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

• Nahh, I don't see the point. The less clutter on the page that isn't directly related to the article, the better. Hence why I also wanted to keep the number of spoiler tags on the article down to one only. --Cyde Weys _talk^contribs 07:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

You don't see the point? How about the fact that any spoilers to Cowboy Bebop aren't "directly related to the article" to begin with? At the very least, you need an end-spoiler warning to tell readers when they can safely get back to the article if they haven't watched the other series. More appropriately, the information related to Cowboy Bebop should be moved to it's own section and appropriately spoiler-warned. I'd do it myself but I still haven't seen Cowboy Bebop and would like to not ruin myself beyond what I've already read here, to my extreme displeasure. --Rocketgoat 22:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not sure why you have spoilers to one anime in a different article. That stuff belongs on a page dedicated to the director. I expect SC spoilers here but not CB ones so I just casually scrolled down and find spoilers to an anime I'm only half way through. Make a directors page, this stuff doesn't belong here. Bowen 01:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Adult Swim Censorship

Can anybody confirm the extent of Adult Swim's censorship, as well as the usage of "fuck" in the English dub? I've yet to come across it. Editing Methods ought to be rewritten to accomodate the all of this once it's been confirmed. --Antrophica 02:18, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

• I will look ito obtaining a copy of the american version to compare with my Japanese version. Drn8 19:51, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
• ratings 100% corect according to imdb as of my last edit, Imdb link at the bottom is to the samurai champloo page that is the source of my info. Drn8 04:47, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

  There's already an IMDb link in External Links, Drn8. There's no need to keep adding another one. If you manage to obtain all the episodes in English, could you look specifically into finding out if "fuck" is uttered at all? We'll list it under the Editing Methods section if it is. --Antrophica 06:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

  • will do, I just came down with the flu, and it looks like I missed the pre-existing link twice. DERP!Drn8 14:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Whatever axe you have to grind about adult swim, this is not the place to do it "Antrophica" Changed "editing" to "censorship" as editing reffers to filmic technique. A REAL section on the Mise en Scène and filmic technique would be sweet. the aus. rating is 'M' until someone provides a source to the contrary, I have provided a source in support. Drn8 00:42, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
      • I'm not the one making the "M"->"MA" edits on the Australian ratings, but I think I'll speak up for it anyway. See Television rating system#Australia. It would appear that "M" is the major rating and "A" is subrating, which stands for "medium level adult themes". I'm not sure if that would make it M-A or M though, or if, indeed, it got that "A" at all. At least in the US when a show is ranked TV-14 with violence & sex, it doesn't become TV-14VS, it becomes TV-14 VS. Whatever. Not important, eh? Leaving it as "M" should be fine. --Cyde Weys _talk^contribs 01:00, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
        • I have no ulterior motives, Drn8. I didn't create the section on Editing Methods; I cleaned up and expanded it. It didn't even occur to me that "editing" might be a mislabel.

Cyde, I lived in Australia, and the "MA" 'combined' rating does exist. But IMDb lists Samurai Champloo as being rated just "M", so we'll leave it at that.

Additionally, Drn8, I think Adult Swim actually censored "shit" and "goddamn" for Champloo, but left it in for The Boondocks. I think that was what the original informant was trying to convey. Did you confirm this before deleting the paragraph? --Antrophica 03:01, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

• I didn't delete the paragraph, that was done prior to my last edit, I Don't have all the adult swim episodes yet, when I do, I will make a through list of swears with the time and episode in which they are contained so as to finally put this matter to rest. Drn8 03:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Not enough images...

Is it just me, or does this page not have enough images? >_>... - 172.184.209.124

• It could use one or two more, I guess. I'd put in a screenshot of a flock of crows in the Visual Metaphors section if I had the episodes to grab them from. --Antrophica 10:23, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I have the fansubs on my computer, if you tell me which episode and approximately at what time in it the flock of crows is, I can take a screenshot. I'd still prefer if someone had the actual DVD though. --Cyde Weys _vote^talk 15:51, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
    • There are crows in every other episode, I think. Surely one of them has got to contain a scene of a flock of crows flying together. A close-up of a single crow would be fine, too. --Antrophica 00:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Pointlessness. Redundancy. Sloppiness.

68.108.96.45, please stop inserting things like "most graphic animated show ever made" unless you have a reasonable source to cite. I think the article, especially the Certification section, speaks for itself. Additionally, inserting "strong" in front of "graphic violence" is pointless and redundant because graphic violence already means strong violence. All this makes the article look sloppy. --Antrophica 10:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

• Most graphic animated show ever made? Hah! It becomes clear to me that whoever said that really has no experience with anime in general. They've probably only seen the anime on Fox (like Pokemon) and maybe some other tame shows on Cartoon Network. But in the grand scheme of things Samurai Champloo is nothing. --Cyde Weys _vote^talk 15:50, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Dates

Adult Swim started airing episodes 14-26 eight days after they premiered the series? Apofisu 04:46, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Certification

I think Samurai Champloo contains enough of the following to justify their listing: graphic violence, strong language, brief nudity, sexuality and drug use. If you're a detractor, you might discount drug use on the basis that the events of Episode Nine were meant to be comedic. But drugs were consumed. To be precise, an entire field of marijuana was lit up and almost everyone in the vincinity got stoned. --Antrophica 16:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

That wasn't marijuana, it was opium. Geez. Keep in mind Wikipedia does not offer advice and it is not censored for the protection of minors (see WP:WWIN). Given that, I think we should include only information on content from a reputable third-party source. If the TV Ratings Board (or whoever it is) says it contains "Violence and strong language", that should be included. If you think "drug use" should be included because of your personal opinions but it's not in the published ratings, it shouldn't be included. This is not about what you think. Understand? --Cyde Weys _vote^talk 17:02, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, it's all but stated in the episode where it appears that that is indeed marijuana. I'm not a drug expert, but from the appearance of the plant to the effects to the intentionally-anachronistic reference to 'purple haze,' I sincerely doubt it's opium.--MythicFox 10:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

But Cyde, I've yet to come across a source that actually lists the show's content, which is why I relied on my observation. Cite a credible source that doesn't include "drug use" and I'll rest my case. Right then, case rested. --Antrophica 03:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to have to drag this up again. Cyde, could you provide a source for the MPAA rating? It's been changed a few times since then by others and I'm unsure if they're conforming to the MPAA or simply switching it around to what they think fits best. --Antrophica 14:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Hrrmmm, I originally found that information on Amazon but now I'm seeing some of the DVDs as unrated (by the MPAA) and others as simply TV-MA. Anyway, according to WP:V we shouldn't list info on ratings unless it can be verified. What some random person thinks about the contents of Samurai Champloo doesn't matter; it has to be sourced. --Cyde Weys 09:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

• Then we'll revert it for the time being, as, given his/her history, I don't think 68.108.96.45's opinion can be trusted. --Antrophica 09:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Frankly I'm inclined to remove the statements on certification altogether until someone posts a link that says one way or the other. WP:V is very important. I thought I had such a link earlier but I really didn't. --Cyde Weys 00:17, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

• Go ahead and remove it if you can't hunt down a verifiable source. --Antrophica 06:11, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Jbetteridge, the MPAA portion aside, the information in the Certification section was listed on IMDb. Unless you're absolutely certain that IMDb is grossly inaccurate, then simply removing an entire section like that can be considered vandalism. --Antrophica 15:07, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• The information on IMDB is completley inaccurate. I live in Canada and there is absolutely no cerification known as "XXX", nor would such a rating even be given to an anime. That particular rating was obviously vandalism placed on IMDB, but the fact that not a single episode of Samurai Champloo has actually received a "TV-MA" rating for its television broadcast leads me to believe that none of the certification information is accurate. I also have to question the point of even having the certification section. It's not something I see often on other pages, and it's so incredibly subjective that it's pretty futile to try and keep track of. The section is completely NPOV based merely off of observation and unsupported facts and needs to go. Jbetteridge 21:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• According to Cyde, some of the DVDs listed on Amazon were rated TV-MA by the MPAA. As for the rest of your argument, you have a point, since IMDb, like Wikipedia, is based strongly on user-submitted material. The certification section goes until we can back it up more accurately. Keep an eye out for 68.108.96.45 or anyone with a similar IP. He/she seems to live for certifying Samurai Champloo according to his/her own standards, and reguarly adds/removes such related material without discussion. --Antrophica 03:07, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Guys, Samurai Champloo is TV-MA becahttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Samurai_Champloo&action=edit&section=11use the violence is too strong to be anything less. I know this because I have an uncle that works for the MPAA. And as for the TV broadcast, THEY EDIT IT FOR TELEVISION. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.96.45 (talk • contribs)

• An uncle that works for the MPAA isn't enough. It has to be verifiable. There is something wrong about your facts. 16+ is a UK rating. And it hasn't been confirmed that all the DVDs were rated. The Certification section goes until we can clear all this up. Don't reinsert it until we're done here. --Antrophica 07:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• All of the DVD's are TV-MA. Some of the dvd's on amazon don't have a rating posted which does not mean it is unrated. It just means that the owners of amazon have not posted the TV-MA on the website yet but they will. Also they use the word "fuck" in episode 23 and strong violence in the rest of the episodes.Bporter28 08:00, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Oh, that's right. Who could forget about "Baseball Blues". --Antrophica 15:53, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
    • My DVDs all say 16+ on them. Geneon doesn't use the TV ratings like FUNimation and ADV Films do. --Tv's emory 22:40, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
      • 16+ is a UK rating, if I'm not mistaken. --Antrophica 02:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
        • Maybe it is, but the DVD companies like Geneon Entertainment don't have to abide by a government body or one organization for a ratings system. They can create their own ratings, or like a couple companies have started doing, use the TV ratings system. For example, the back of my Lupin the 3rd DVDs (also Geneon) say "Rated 13 UP." In Samurai Champloo's case, it says 16 UP. --Tv's emory 20:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
          • In that case, their ratings aren't worth much. We can still document them, but we'll have to state "by Geneon Entertainment." --Antrophica 02:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
        • You can't do that! Most people do not understand the anime ratings or know what they are, so you must specify the show as TV-MA in the US. Also the anime ratings are in Japan, not in the USA. 16up is equivalent to TV-MA so it's like listing the same thing, except people will understand the information moe accurately. I have already taken the liberty of editing it because TV-MA is the exact, accurate rating.Bporter28 07:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, but it's unmistakably clear that the people maintaining this certification section don't know ANYTHING about how ratings work in any country. I don't care if the source is IMDB, none of that information is accurate. None of it. Not only has Champloo never been given a TV-MA rating in any incarnation, TV-MA is not a rating given by the MPAA, nor would the MPAA even have anything to do with a TV series. The rating in the UK has never gone over "15", it was never given a rating of any kind of Japan, and the rating in Australia never went past MA-15. I see no reason to assume that the New Zealand one is accurate. All of this information needs to be taken down. It demonstrates complete and utter ignorance towards the subject. Jbetteridge 22:36, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

• It is TV-MA. I'm changing it back and anyone that edits it will be vandalizing and therefore expelled.(68.108.96.45 05:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC))

• The Certification section goes until we have explicit confirmation on its information's authenticity. --Antrophica 06:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

• All of the DVD's are TV-MA. Some of the dvd's on amazon don't have a rating posted which does not mean it is unrated. It just means that the owners of amazon have not posted the TV-MA on the website yet but they will. Also they use the word "fuck" in episode 23 and strong violence in the rest of the episodes.(68.108.96.45 17:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC))

• "Fuck" is heard only in the original Japanese dub. As for violence, they could be ripping out intenstines and wearing them around their necks in a graphic and tragicomic manner, but unless the apparent TV-MA rating includes the words "strong graphic violence" we won't cook up descriptions of our own. Given your history of posting misinformation, you can't be trusted. Search for a viable source to cite or provide proof of your own. Until then, restoring the Certification section is out of the question as far as I'm concerned. --Antrophica 08:58, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

• http://imdb.com has just recently updated their info on Samurai Champloo so it is correct. Go to imdb. Those are the real ratings and the correct ones. imdb was updated on Monday, March 20,2006.(65.41.208.138 23:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC))

• I don't think so. The last time we went along with IMDb we had about half the information wrong. Find a more credible source, if it's possible. --Antrophica 12:25, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

• That's because it was vandalized and wrong. This time it was checked by a professional editor.(68.108.96.45 00:28, 23 March 2006 (UTC))

• And you know this for a fact? You probably realize I'm not just trying to be an asshole here; there's no point to be had in documenting false information. --Antrophica 06:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

• I'm NOT TRYING to document false information! And yes I know this as a fact.(68.108.96.45 04:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC))

• Wikipedia doesn't allow original research. That's why I've been telling you we need hard proof. A screenshot or a link. Otherwise, no dice. --Antrophica 05:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Mugen

Mugen, has a capoeira-esque fighting style that resembles the breakdancing of the 1980s.

• by 'you', I mean to the person who made this entry.

I am not sure whether or not it was originally intended for Mugen's style of fighting to resemble that of capoeira, but after watching samurai champloo, it does not seem so. I am assuming that you have come to this conclusion because of a predisposition to generalize characters that show a striking resemblance to Brazilians and the fact that Mugen, unlike any other character in samurai champloo uses his legs to attack/defend. I hope you have read the entry on capoeira and have seen an actual demonstration of it. Just because he uses his legs and feet to fight and has brown skin does not mean he automatically is displaying capoeira or a "capoeira-esque" fighting style, karate and tae kwon do (which bears more resemblance due to the use of hands) can be easily substituted and is more appropriate. Capoeira is more of a dance than a fighting style, does not use hands, and has a rhythmic footwork pattern. Mugen on the other hand indeed uses his legs to stick it up to opponents' buttocks, uses his hands, and is extremely erratic. Perhaps 'combat breakdancing' is a more faithful description of Mugen's style. --Boy Tusok 09:40, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• I've seen capoeira and breakdancing and they have a lot in common. In fact, if a breakdancer were to have thought about using his body as a weapon he would have invented capoeira, if the latter had not been invented first. A web search will show that it is widely agreed that Mugen's fighting style was inspired by/based on capoeira; although, admittedly, as far as I know, the producers have yet to confirm it. Nonetheless, unless the Wikipedia article on capoeira is grossly misinformed, then I think this argument ought to end here. Whatever the case, "capoeira" is head-and-shoulders better than describing Mugen's Champuru Kendo as "street brawling". I think what sort of bare-handed fighting technique Jin displays in Episode 11 ("Gamblers and Gallantry) would make a much better debate. Additionally, I have absolutely no idea what a Brazilian is. --Antrophica 14:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest "Mugen's fighting style shows similarities to both capoeira and breakdancing." --Tachikoma 22:57, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

That's a good suggestion. Go ahead and edit it in. --Antrophica 03:08, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to be a touch more exact on some of the parts for Mugen’s character. He’s such an interesting character that even though he is almost purely made up out of the minds of the creators, he still has a few bits of actual historical pertinence to him.

The part I’m addressing now is the interesting way in which he comes back to life by meeting the “Shamans” as referred to in his character profile. In the Okinawan belief system, these shamans are called “futuki” and they are the only spirits from the other world who intercede into human affairs.

These beings are generally thought to be an individual's own direct ancestors (both male and female), and the same individual's future descendants (which makes it kind of interesting that Mugen has a center place in the ongoing line of them; maybe there is something to the theory that Spike is his descendant...). Anyway, the futuki are generally masked and wear feathered cloaks, and are indistinguishable from each other, at least in this world. During one of the many interesting flashback montage’s, we see not only the long line of them, but one watching Mugen from the road through the forest, and a couple of other spots, which suggests to me that he's someone they're keeping an eye on. It would make sense by traditional Okinawan beliefs but it is pure speculation on my part.

The feathered apparel particularly have always made me wonder about that tropical looking red bird that seems to observe Mugen so closely in that grove; maybe another spirit observer? And it might also be interesting to note that the underworld where he deals with the futuki, Nirai-kanai, is represented in Okinawan folklore as an island you can only reach by swimming underwater; if you try to sail there it'll always be on the horizon no matter how far you go. I think that's why everything there appears upside down, you have to "sink to rise" there, so to speak; and Mugen "falls back to the surface" when he leaves that place.

I know this is an encyclopedia but a lot of that info couldn’t be found here, so I just wanted to put it here to get some feedback on what other people think. -- Makaio 04:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I've been interested in the "Okinawan Underworld" for a while now and couldn't find it documented on WP either. I would create an article about it, but the research would be too time-consuming for me at present. Go on ahead and elaborate on it once the List of Samurai Champloo characters article is reopened. You ought to consider creating an article on the "Okinawan Underworld" as well, if you can find the time. --14:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if it's worth mentioning in the article, but Spike Spiegel in the Cowboy Bebop movie also seems to be killed and then come back to life thanks to the intercession of a shaman (in this case, someone who looks like a Native American). I don't know if the director of Bebop and Champloo is trying to say something by that, or if he merely likes the idea. --Tachikoma 20:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Exactly what I was thinking, but I didn't want to be too quick with the decision to add it on. After all, they closed that article up over a single incomplete sentence. As for creating an article on the Okinawan afterlife, I'd like to do it but it took a long time just to find out who the "futuki" were, much less find a reliable source as to what the Okinawan belief system on death is. I know it's worth mentioning though, so i'm sure it'll get done gradually. -- 21:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I found an article on the general subject. Ryukyuan religion. Of course it doesn't have some of the things I've found, but we're editors after all... -- Makaio 23:16, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to talk about mugen's sword rather then his fighting style. I belive it resembels a shamshir (as suggested on mugen's character page), personaly i would like to know all your thoughts on what you think his sword is. In the samurai champloo vid. it's called a typhoon swell (as you all probably already know) but I want to know what you guys think it is as related to an actuall sword. And if it can't be related to anything else besides a shamshir then shouldn't it just be considerd one? As apposed to being an unknown sword.-- 1:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

The blade resembles that of a shamshir, but the grip resembles a sai's. --Antrophica 12:07, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm just ganna call it a shamshir, untill i get reasenable proof that it's anything else. -- 20:29 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Mugen's blade (Typhoon Swell) is likely a combination of more than one style of sword. It's not curved enough to be a shamshir... perhaps it's more along the lines of a sabre and a sai.Melissia 11:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Addendum: Basing my judgement off of the image on the Shamshir page.Melissia 11:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Samurai Champloo Commercial

Can someone tell me what the name of the song for the latest commerical called. the one that ends in the green screen.

Mugen

When I looked at that pic with the three characters in the wiki page, I thought Mugen was a negro, but when I watched the 2nd episode on SBS last night, I found out he was just a tanned dude. Well, I love the show, it's real good anime, and the dubbing its kind of awesome! Darkroom Danny 05:55, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Plot Section

...needs serious work. It doesn't give any sort of information about the plot whatsoever, it's more of a short essay listing instances of "you can't run away from the past", an opinion as to the theme. Its reading requires a LARGE amount of knowledge about the series. It's all about this person's opinion of the theme, again. --Naruttebayo 06:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree. Someone does need to pretty much redo the plot-- the plot is actually fairly simple, to a degree, yet the section doesn't get that across well. --Melissia 20:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to dispute a part of the plot section; currently, it is written that Mugen flips the coin and then Fuu tells them that it ends up as tails, but both Mugen and Jin look at the coin when it lands on her forehead first, so both already knew the result of the flip, without her telling them --HaikenEdge

I have been redoing the plot. I just happened to take a 3-month long Wiki-break. The old plot section was terrible so I'm rewriting it as an event-by-event description. It is not the author's place to discuss the themes that s/he thinks are there. It should simply be a history of the story. ask123 (talk) 20:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Director Trademarks

I think that director trademarks should be removed and instead put into Watanabe's own page. I haven't changed anything because I wanted to get a second opinion first.

I would have to agree with you. I don't exactly know what are you referring to when you say "director trademarks" though. (Just back from long Wiki break so I'm totally out of the loop!) Are they in the "Influences and Cultural References" section"? As a bit of background on that section, there was a little dispute over it since it comes dangerously close to original research. Following this, I am going to delete the word, "Influences," from the name of that section. Citing influences without citations would be absolutely original research. However, if the writing is just of observations -- factual observations -- that should be fine. I, personally, have not touched the section since I am now revising the "Plot" section. I'll tackle it once I finish that. ask123 (talk) 20:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Video Game

The article states that the video game was scheduled for release yesterday. Did it come out? And if so, this shouldn't go in the article, but is it any good?  :) ~--Resister 03:59, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

The reviews so far are quite positive, which is a bit of a surprise as I never expect too much out of videogame adaptations of anime. --Antrophica 06:09, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I own the videogame: it's a very unique game, to say the least. I don't feel like writing a review for it, though... however, you may use swords other than Jin's katana and Mugen's Typhoon Swell, though they have limited durability. I believe they're all supposed to be more powerful than the origonal swords, in some way or another. One weapon, "Silver Axe", allows you to collect money faster, for instance. Another thing is, and this being the most unique one, you can buy vinyl records, which you can change during the game to alter what combos, attacks, and fightingstances you have. You equip two of them at a time, and change between them any time during combat. That's about as in depth as I feel like going into it, for now. The story is designed so that it could easilly be a real episode (or several episodes). Melissia 11:34, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

It's a videogame, so maybe it deserves its own article. I'd get down to writing one, if I weren't having problems with my PS2 at the moment. --Antrophica 14:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I own the game, but I'm not exactly sure if I want to make an article about it. That paragraph above is probably the longest description I can immagine without giving spoilers, and I haven't actually completed the game, myself....Melissia 11:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

If we can't write enough about the game we'll just make it a section of this article. --Antrophica 14:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

If the videogame becomes extremely popular, then perhaps it does deserve it's own article. But, in typical instances, video game adaptations (or any adaptations of an original work for that matter) do not get their own articles. As with all adaptations, it's article should be included within the article on the original work, as stated in various per Wiki policies on the subject. Hope this helps! ask123 (talk) 20:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

On neutrality, comparisons with Cowboy Bebop and describing Watanabe as "famous"

Here it is. I have absolutely NO IDEA waht this is a about, but... --M1ss1ontomars2k4 | T | C | @ 22:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

"rw. - unless reality bended while I was asleep, comparisons may be made in an encyclopedia if they're constructive and unbiased"

Sorry, but comparing art is not the station of an encyclopaedia. Drawing similarities between Samurai Champloo and Cowboy Bebop, however self-evident they may be to you, is still interpretation. Comparative statements in art differ from, say, comparative statements in science which this is clearly not.

59.167.29.120

When your show has been playing on one station for five straight years because of high ratings, then you are famous. When your next project is greenlighted and licensed by a foreign distributor before it has even begun production, then you are famous. And I don't think we're comparing art so much as we're comparing fact. If anything qualifies for deletion because its interpretation, it's the "Visual metaphors" section, which I probably should never have written. --Antrophica 00:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

The visual metaphors are fun though... just saying. -- Makaio 20:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I thought so, too, that's why I created the section, but they probably go against WP rules as personal interpretation is fancruft. --Antrophica 23:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

1. Sorry, you didn't give a reasoned response to my statement. I said "Drawing similarities between Samurai Champloo and Cowboy Bebop, however self-evident they may be to you, is still interpretation". Your response was "no they're not." You haven't given any reasons why such comparisons should be made. I remind you that reverting articles due to dogma is against Wikipedia standards.

2. On the subject of "famous", I shall justify myself since you have mentioned it. Famous is a loaded term. What is famous? George Bush is famous. Would the guy at the bus station know of Shirichiro Watanabe? Maybe not, but he might know of George Bush. But then again, he might not also. You see my point, it is ambiguous.

Perhaps we qualify it: "of Cowboy Bebop fame, where fame means he is known to people within Japan." But would a Japanese rice farmer with no television know of Shirichiro Watanabe? Perhaps not. But perhaps yes. how about "where fame means he is known within the anime community?" But how do you presume to know (where to know = fact), the collective tastes of the (so-called) anime community? You see my point, "famous" is ambiguous and is not fact and based on supposition and opinion. Therefore, we should not make this judgment call of referring to Watanabe as having "fame".

203.10.77.190

He's famous in the anime medium. That's enough. I'm not calling Watanabe famous out of dogma. I'm calling him famous because he is famous and your edits make those portions of the article so boring it'd put a hyperactive kid with a mouthful of chocolate to sleep. If you've got a problem with Watanabe being famous for Cowboy Bebop, then reword the sentence more interestingly. To me, this isn't a problem with whether we call Watanabe famous, because he is, so it doesn't matter if we state it or not. My problem is with your banal paragraphs that drain the vivacity out out of an interesting lead. This may be an encyclopedia, but it doesn't mean we're striving for pedantic terseness.

Additionally, you haven't explained why you think the comparison between Bebop and Champloo is artistic. "There's no running from the past" is a simple, clear cut formula of Watanabe's. It's like comparing Pulp Fiction to Reservoir Dogs.

--Antrophica 05:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

1. Sorry, you didn't respond to my statement. I said "famous is a loaded term" and "famous is ambiguous" which invites you to respond by showing that 1. famous is not a loaded term but a defined one and 2. that we can apply this definition to Watanabe. You didn't try to define fame for me, nor did you give any reasons why Watabe should be considered famous. You said he is famous within the anime medium but my previous argument addressed the issue of trying to qualify fame by imparting it to niche communities.

To use a present example, you argue that Champloo is famous because it has been playing for five straight years. What if it had been playing for four years? Would it still be famous? Or three? Or two? Or four months? How many years must a series run before it is "famous"? At what point does fame cease? Where is the line between what is famous and what is not and why? You see my point, it is ambiguous.

You also contradicted yourself by saying "I'm not calling Watanabe famous out of dogma...I'm calling him famous because he is famous." Your general argument seems to be that he is famous because he is. That is dogma. I should report you to the Wikipedia admin.

2. The comparison between Champloo and Bebop is artistic because they are both works of art (I assumed this was self-evident). They are certainly not science. Art comparisons belong in comparative literature or art criticism publications, specialist media sites or fan sites. You should not, for example, see an encyclopaedia comparing the narrative structures of Shakespeare to Chaucer or the appearing briefcase in Pulp Fiction to the one in Reservoir Dogs. These kinds of statements derive from interpretation, not fact. Hence, I don't think they are appropriate for an encyclopaedia entry.

You seem to have a problem with the article because, in your opinion, it is boring, uninteresting and pedantic. In that case, I suggest you start a fansite of your own where you may indulge in florid, esoteric descriptions with as much vivacity as you like. But (and I speak for only myself and what I think, I do not speak on behalf of Wiki or anyone) I think it is inappropriate for an encyclopaedia to be written primarily with entertainment value in mind and with a greater priority than factual accuracy or neutrality. Facts and neutrality come first. Factual, neutral writing can be engaging but it should not sacrifice factual accuracy or neutrality to do so.

203.10.77.190

There's no need to keep apologizing me, even though this might seem like a mistake on your part once it's over. I'm a supporter of the genenral nonexistence of fancruft, so I'm not exactly the kind of person who would build a florid fan site. Part of the criteria for Featured Articles is that the article is well-written and compelling. The Samurai Champloo article certainly could use an overhaul, but while I'm trying to give it a fighting chance you're taking it away by reducing paragraphs to stubs because they compare elements of a director's previous work to another. Ridiculous. We may acknowledge identical elements separately, but not compare them within one article? Your pedantic terseness is a menace to the prose of this article. --Antrophica 06:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I see. Then I wish you the best in your project to acquire featured article status for the Samurai Champloo entry.

203.10.77.190

Gracias. --Antrophica 07:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. I especially look forward to seeing you present your case for featured status to the the Wiki community who will no doubt accept nothing less than reasonable, logical, undogmatic persuasion. Our discussion has shown me your level of rational debate and willingness to cooperate with other Wiki members and accept their input without insulting them. I am sure the kinds of statement you have made above will go down really well with the Wiki community when you ask them to bestow featured status on this article. Meanwhile, the article continues to...expand. 203.10.77.190

I'm glad you hold me in such high regard. --Antrophica 23:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

You know, I have never seen anyone attract so much crap from people who are arguing over nothing. It's like your name acts as a magnet for bitching. --Makaio 03:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Or perhaps it's the same person who's got my number! --Antrophica 05:05, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

This issue has remained unresolved, the one who raised it storming off in righteous anger, seeking confirmation of own rather than a utilizing a constructive approach. In hope of engaging dialogue: Fame would be recognition and acclaim within one's activity, both of which Cowboy Bebop enjoys in good measure, having received a prestigious award and a long running time, along with international succes. The article says "of Cowboy Bebop fame," therefore it is evident that the fame is related to his previous anime work and therefore applies to people who are to some degree familiar to anime. The phrase also states the fame of the series, not the director. I disagree that the phrase in use is loaded and/or ambiguous, as it merely informs of the author's most influential previous work by which he is most likely to be recognized. Just what are the connotations the phrase is "loaded" with? Do tell, sir, since so far you have only expressed your opinion without explaining anything. You, rascal, you.

On art comparisons: This is a Wikipedia article on art. Your logic seems to indicate that there is no place in an enciclopedia for articles which are not built on mathematically based scientific facts. Guess what, science exists outside maths, and comparative literary critique (and social sciences) are methodic sciences just as well, their interpretative nature notwithstanding. If you go and claim that literary comparison belongs into specialized publications, go ahead and undogmatically reason this silly claim, because I could on equal grounds claim that mathematical scientific fact belongs to specialited publications because, it is self evident, and thus not really a science at all. At least I offer a semblance of a (stupid) explanation. Your argument goes: Both are art, so comparison must be necessarily be artistic, therefore not science. Ad absurdum: Gauss's algorhytm is sooo less cool than integrating. Both algorhytms are science, so the comparison I made is necessarily scientific. You fail.

Comparison of two works of art can just as well be scientific, if by scientific you mean methodic and objective. Narrative approaches, plot devices and such are objective, discernible literary FACTS and their comparison is objective. Since both works in question are similar in many points and in a chronologically successive order of creation, a comparison can be interesting and informative. How resources should be cited is beyond me, since plot devices and narrative approaches are in the work itself and evident therefrom. Whether identifying them is original research or not, that is the question here. --Rover Segundo 12:48, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, you're right, Rover; the issues aren't exactly resolved. Whether you like it or not, the word, "fame" is loaded. But it is not wrong. He isn't famous by the stanards of most people. Rather, he is well known within the anime community and has a distinct following. You are right to point out that the reader might be ill-informed if he did not know of this fact. But it must be presented properly as not to sound as if trying to pursuade the reader one way or another. It must also try not to be informal in tone. It is Wikipedia policy (and I happen to agree with it) that all entries must be encyclopedic and neutral -- in fact, one might say that rule is paramount among all others on this site. You do not want to give off the slightest air of trying to draw the reader into an opinion of bias or to pursuade them to like or dislike something. Convincing should not be required if the thing you're writting about is actually intereting. In this case, that opinion that is being offered is that Watanabe is "famous." What is meant is "famous in the anime community." There are many ways of saying that with specificity and in a way that will evaporate ambiuty. For instance:

It was directed by Shinichiro Watanabe, whose Cowboy Bebop earned him renown in the anime commuity<reference>. It was produced by the studio, Manglobe, Inc.

At the <reference> note, you can cite an article that indicates how well-known Watanabe really is in the anime community and beyond. That's just one way of doing it. But whatever way it's done, the word "famous" mucks things up. Yes, it's true, to anyone that knows anime, Watanabe's famous. He's famous in the sub-industry (japanese animation) he works in (as opposed to he global film & tv business) and even a good distance beyond that (i.e. global animation, comics, Japanese televison and movies), but "famous" to most people means something less than "famous" that you are indicating. Also, regarding this sentence, the phrase "so and so of _________ fame" is a succinct way of getting your point across, but it's also tonally informal and clunky for an encyclopedic entry. In any event, readers also get the link to his page, that I'm sure is full of accolades and plaudits. :)

The section on North American Broadcasting has a similar problem. People should not have to take for granted your recounting of the events that led to the various North American distribution deals. I, too, heard that the show made its way West in a similar manner, but that does not mean that this particular story is true (or wholly true). Also, the section is written in a way that makes the reader feel as if s/he's trying to be pursuaded of something. I'm sure that Geneon did in fact liscense the show early and it was probably beause of the success of Watanabe's prior show, Cowboy Bebop, but why not find a source anyway?

Also, it is just incorrect to say that any decision is solely based on anything. There are so many factors that go into most decision making that saying this particuar factor was the lone force this decion is a highly improbable statement, physchologically speaking. (It's also a statistical improbability. It would be almost impossible for it to go down that way without any other influences, no matter how small they were.) Therefore, that sentence strains credulity. For example, if Watanabe had wanted to create an avante-garde show that had little commercial appeal to children or adults, Geneon would probably not have licensed it. Following that, although his reputation may certainly have played a large role in the decision, it was not his reputation alone that led to it. Reading on, the Cartoon Network info seem fine, but, again, some quick citations to the various pages on which you found those data would make the article stronger.

The problems in the first paragraph have been fixed. Now moving on to the rest of the article. ask123 21:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that guy was right. This article is not yet up to the standards exhibited by other Featured Articles. Whoever it was that started this article -- it sounds like it was you, Antrophica -- the page looks great, but there will always be changes and tweaks that will need to be made. We are all fans of this show, but, that notwithstanding, I'm sure we can collectiely come up with an impartial (to everyone) article that's so good it won't have to do any selling at all.

ask123 02:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

If nobody responds on this talk page in the next day or two to these neutrality and sourcing issues and the breaches (although they are few) of basic encyclopedic standards, I am just going to just be bold and fix them in the article myself. If these problems are not fixed, this article will continue to have a small, but significant number of embarassing faults. I mean it's a great article until you come accross these sentences that reek of pursuasion -- as if you're being be sold on something. And the funny thing is that the things you feel like you're being sold on are most likely true (or at least I think they are). The sales pitch isn't needed! All that's required is proper phrasing and reliable sources. And the fact that some of the editors here don't see that (as far as I can tell from the above thread) is hard to believe. With all due respect, anyone that thinks the aforementioned sections are fine as they are currently written has no clue of what encyclopedic tone and content entails (and needs to pick up a Brittanica for his or her reference). I love Samurai Champloo, but I won't let my passion for the show muck up an encyclopedic article on the show that could be a gateway for future fans. If the problems persist, then the article looses all credibility, regardless of whether the information it contains is true or not. ask123 02:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Episodes

Should we start considering making episode summaries? Cause I'm going to make a page so we can start working on them. --Makaio 04:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, I made a new archive. Hurray! --Makaio 04:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know, I came here hoping Wikipedia had a Samurai Champloo episode summary. So...get on it!

The first 12 episodes now have complete summaries with no pictures, while some pictures have been added onto summaries 13-26 to see the effect. The effect looks good so we'll probably add pictures to the first 12 summaries. -- Makaio 22:11, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Ms. "In Need of Ep Summaries," if you sign your posts with four tildes, then we will know who we're talking to! Thanks! Cheers, ask123 17:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete cast section

WP:ANIME says: "A listing of the main characters follows the plot summary, with basic character descriptions and voice actor credits (if applicable; see Voiced by: {{{1}}}) There is no need to create a separate voice actor section." We surely do not need every single minor cast member listed for the english dub. If these are mentioned on the characters pages, it can be removed. If they're not listed then can be added and then removed. --Kunzite 02:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. --Miss Ethereal 14:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Weak Agree. I came to this discussion page to say that it's really distracting. If someone (like me) is reading from top-to-bottom, the Cast page is useless. It should be moved to the bottom or deleted, with an external link pointing to the list elsewhere on the Internet. –Gunslinger47 05:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Deleted. –Gunslinger47 19:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Haven't the voices been added already? -- Makaio 22:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Censorship methods

Moving the censorship methods section to the episode page because it has to do with the episodes and it doesn't need to be mentioned but once. -- Makaio 07:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Major revision on October 2, 2006

Okay, I just removed a fairly large percentage of the article in one stroke, so I feel I should justify my actions. Suffice to say, I think the article was headed in the wrong direction as far as adhering to GA and FA standards. The article has no mention of critical or fan reception, influence, production, translation, or other sections normally found in GAs and FAs. I haven't found anything analagous to the "Visual metaphor" section in any other high-quality articles about television shows. We were approaching something like a section on themes, which is of course acceptable, but we weren't looking at the series as a whole, instead listing minor symbols as they appear in episodes. We might be on to something with the Fire/Water=Mugen/Jin thing, but even that seems more applicable to the character page.

I'd really like to help this article on a great series become a great article. I hope this initial step can lead us in that direction. El Cid 05:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Follow up revisions

As an avid fan of the show, I was inspired when I saw this post, but discouraged that there wasn't much of a follow up to it. I noticed that Samurai Champloo's entry is missing many of the elements found in other anime pages and likewise wanted "to help this article on a great series become a great article." To that end I've cleaned it up a bit. I've added a section on the style and setting and another on distribution and reception. These were constructed using elements that were originally in, what seemed to me, an overly long introduction. I've also added a few things. I'm hoping to make this article a little more manageable and also a little broader in its depth. SpiderMMB 19:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The lack of references is disturbing(?)

Please add them to the article where needed. Otherwise, parts of the article maybe deleted due to non-compliance.--293.xx.xxx.xx 09:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• I have just run through the article as it appears today - 5 December 2006 (UTC) - and it is currently referenced. If you aren't used to editing articles from motion pictures, anime, etc., it may not seem it - any unreferenced information in this article comes directly from the anime itself. I have added a note to this effect. --User:AsukaSeagull

Not good enough. You need specifics, and some of the stuff is dangerously close to being original research. --293.xx.xxx.xx 07:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

It would be a stupid rule, if you couldn't directly reference the thing which the article is talking about. But you can. Please, though, feel free to flag those sections which you believe need references. --Melissia 16:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

On a side note, Around 100 percent (give or take 0 percent) of articles about anime, movie, and Tv series reference the origonal material. It's much like saying: "You can't quote from Hamlet. you can only quote from things OTHER PEOPLE have said about Hamlet." --Melissia 22:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

As there has been no response from the user who flagged it in a resonable amount of tiem, and since I believe the article itself does not need to be flagged as origonal research, I'm removing the flag. Instead, If you wish to continue protesting the supposed origonal research, please flag specific sections that you believe need sources, and those interested will look them up. Much the same as you would reference Macbeth itself when making an article about Macbeth, much of, if not all of this article references the Anime itself.

As I said, however, please feel free to flag appropriate SECTIONS of this article that you think is origonal research. --Melissia 21:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

How is it "unreasonable time" when all you did was removed them and you gave me less than a day to justify, no less alert me via the talk page? I've given a month for people to verify items on Cowboy Bebop. A month is more than reasonable enough to find sources. Nobody gave sources, so it was deleted.

Also, you can't be serious in stating that "Around 100 percent (give or take 0 percent) of articles about anime, movie, and Tv series reference the original material." Ever heard of artistic license?? --293.xx.xxx.xx 08:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

(Off Topic) Broadcast over Free-TV Germany

I appologize for posting the comment here, but I do find it important for viewers of Germany who might be reading this discussion not to loose a good opportunity.

Interesting for those living in Germany: Samurai Champloo is currently running on Thursdays around midnight (in other words, thursday through to friday). TV Channel is "VOX", the actually primary adult-anime broadcaster (RTL2 shows animes for younger audience, for your information).

Next batch of episodes will be broadcasted on the 8th of March 2007.

Another offtopic remark. LupinIII will be the next coming on Friday in the so-called DHCP-Nachtklub, featuring a batch of episodes starting from Friday through Saturday. Jackpayback 13:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Currency (Mon)

I am trying to actually write a book similiar to this but I need the basis of Mon in Samurai Champloo. Can anyone help? Vladimir Stalin 09:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

This page is for discussions relating to the Wikipedia article Samurai Champloo only. Thanks. Cheers, ask123 02:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Fuu's father?

There needs to be an update on who Fuu fahter actually was Moni(lilium) 17:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Third Opinion Query

A few months back, I asked for references on a section of samurai Champloo, as it seemed to violate Wikipedia: original research and Wikipedia: Trivia. After a time, I come back, and find this:

Influences and cultural references

• The recurring character Manzo the Saw, who both appears in and narrates several episodes, is a parody of the titular character from the Hanzo the Razor movies.
• Samurai Champloo is an example of the popular chambara film and television genre--the trademarks are a setting in the Edo Period, a focus on samurai or other swordsman characters, and lots and lots of thrilling, dramatic fights. Chambara was used in the early days of Japanese cinema (when government political censorship ran high) as a way of expressing veiled social critiques, and it is possible to read Champloo as a satire of contemporary Japanese society. The show features cameos by other protagonists of the genre, such as Mito Kōmon in "Evanescent Encounter, Part 1", Ogami Daigorō from Lone Wolf and Cub in "Elegy of Entrapment, Part 1" and "Evanescent Encounter, Part 1", and Lone Wolf and Cub themselves in "Cosmic Collisions".
• In episode 5 (Artistic Anarchy), Mugen is heard to mutter (in the English dub of the series only) "damn, doing it with a squid" while looking at a book of ukiyo-e art. This is probably a reference to a Katsuhika Hokusai piece entitled Kinoe no Komatsu (The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife).
• In episode 13 (Misguided Miscreants, Part 1), Mugen's old pirating partner Mukuro has two ship mates named Ken and Ryu. The names Ryu and Ken together may be a hidden reference to the word Ryukan, which is their and Mugen's ethnicity, though it may also be a joke by the animators and script writers on the hit fighting game Street Fighter which has Ryu and Ken as the main characters.
• In episode 14 (Misguided Miscreants, Part 2), Jin's sword-against-gun battle with Mukuro is reminiscent of Sanjuro and Unosuke during the climactic final battle in Akira Kurosawa's Yojimbo.
• In episode 3, Jin's introduction of his sword-skill attacking the 3 members of the Nagatomi Clan and his offer to Sousuke as a 'yojimbo', the 2 powerful opposing clans in the Village has a strong reseemblance to the setting in Akira Kurosawa's Yojimbo, with Jin's entry at the town resembling the scene of Toshiro Mifune's appearance in restaurant the movie Yojimbo.
• A character named "Sabini" is featured in the zombie-filled episode 22 (“Cosmic Collisions”), a possible reference to actor Tom Savini, most famous for his appearances in George Romero's classic zombie films.
• Watanabe has stated that the movies Zatoichi and Enter the Dragon influenced his work. Mugen using his scabbard as a walking stick as well as his inverted grip of the sword at the end of episode 14 may be a reference to similar practices used in Zatoichi. Also, in episode 25 (Evanescent Encounter, Part 2) Mugen's face is scarred after being slashed by Denkibou's claws, bearing a strong resemblance to a similar Bruce Lee scar in Enter the Dragon. Also, while from a distance his hair retains its trademark spiky shape, in the close-ups of Mugen, his hair has become decidedly "Bruce Lee-esque".

Following Wikipedia: Trivia, Wikipedia: Verifiability and the Manual of Style, I edited it like thus:

Influences and cultural references

Samurai Champloo is an example of the popular chambara film and television genre--the trademarks are a setting in the Edo Period, a focus on samurai or other swordsman characters, and lots and lots of thrilling, dramatic fights. Chambara was used in the early days of Japanese cinema (when government political censorship ran high) as a way of expressing veiled social critiques, and it is possible to read Champloo as a satire of contemporary Japanese society. The show features cameos by other protagonists of the genre, such as Mito Kōmon in "Evanescent Encounter, Part 1", Ogami Daigorō from Lone Wolf and Cub in "Elegy of Entrapment, Part 1" and "Evanescent Encounter, Part 1", and Lone Wolf and Cub themselves in "Cosmic Collisions".

In episode 5 (Artistic Anarchy), Mugen is heard to mutter (in the English dub of the series only) "damn, doing it with a squid" while looking at a book of ukiyo-e art. This is probably a reference to a Katsuhika Hokusai piece entitled Kinoe no Komatsu (The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife).

Watanabe has stated that the movies Zatoichi and Enter the Dragon influenced his work. Mugen using his scabbard as a walking stick as well as his inverted grip of the sword at the end of episode 14 may be a reference to similar practices used in Zatoichi. Also, in episode 25 (Evanescent Encounter, Part 2) Mugen's face is scarred after being slashed by Denkibou's claws, bearing a strong resemblance to a similar Bruce Lee scar in Enter the Dragon.

I edited it like thus because several reference marks were questionable, as they did not mention Samurai Champloo and seemed like they were there to support unsubstantiated original research a/or trivia. User: SpiderMMB disagrees with me and had made several reverts back to the original version above, claiming on my talk page that the references he included are appropiate, citing "It's an obvious parody by Watanabe" and "The references in question are not that doubtful in my opinion, they are pretty obvious." The references are listed below:

References

Several only reference either summary pages of the listed non-Samurai Champloo works, one goes to a official site of some director or actor, and another appears to go to a fansite of some sort. I deleted one book reference, and the other I held off for further verification. --293.xx.xxx.xx 06:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that there's not going to be anything on the web that says, "these things in Samurai Champloo are references to this." I've looked on the internet and it didn't turn up much. However, the reason that I think the references might not be an OR problem is because of the way the section is phrased. Many of the references say "a possible reference," or "maybe a reference," or "reminiscent of." I think that as long as the sentences are structured like this, then it shouldn't be a problem. There a few that say "this is," but we can just change those to have more ambiguous language. I think anyone who actually clicks on the link could see that these are possible references(i.e. click Thomas Savini and you can learn about his relationship to zombie movies). These are reasonable and not outlandish to anyone who follows the links. I think as long as the language is not definitive, and we let the reader reach their own conclusion, then it's OK to keep it. SpiderMMB 19:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that there's not going to be anything on the web that says, "these things in Samurai Champloo are references to this." I've looked on the internet and it didn't turn up much. While Internet sources are a hit or miss, books and magazines are actually more stable, to the point where someone can at least go back to them. Unfortunately, none that I have mention some of the films and whatnot already listed here, but they do have a very interesting section on possible influences. But I can't make the edits to reflect this until the current dispute is settled. --293.xx.xxx.xx 20:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that may be one of the reasons why trivia lists are discouraged. At the same time, however, I do (secretly) disagree that they should not be a part of the article, as that's one of my favorite parts of articles on films, novels and the like. I think the unofficial informality of wikipedia is a blessing, as well as its lenient oversight. Otherwise, there might be some bot that comes along deleting any section with the word trivia in it. I would say leave any of the references that are not too outlandish or wacky. If something is too strange, there is no problem deleting it per se, because the entire section is technically not supposed to be in the article. Hope this helps :) DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

If you have references from books and magazines that talk about cultural references, by all means add them to the article. You don't have to wait until this dispute is resolved. I'm not against things in the references and trivia section being cited, I'm concerned about the section disappearing completely (which is what happened to Cowboy Bebop). Please feel free to add whatever you want, and we'll keep the current dispute to whether what you removed should be included or not. SpiderMMB 23:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Then add RELEVANT sources, not "Oh, it seems like it, ergo, put it in" type of deal then. Put in sources that say "Oh, Episode XX of Champloo is a take-off to Zatochi or whatever."--293.xx.xxx.xx 10:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Wait, you just offered to rewrite the section, because you had books and magazines with "interesting sections on possible influences." You said the only thing standing in your way was this dispute, and I am saying to you that this dispute is a non-issue. Go ahead and rewrite the section. I won't stop you; in fact, I look forward to reading it. SpiderMMB 01:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you DRosenbach and agree that there are problems with these types of lists. It should, at the very least, be shortened to "Cultural References" for now and then each bullet point evaluated for sober factuality. An embedded list within a prose article is not against any Wikipedia rules. The only requirment is that each cultural reference be noted without partiality. Also, there is no claim that any particular reference was intended (but in most cases it would be hard to believe that it wasn't). For example, there is nothing incorrect about the first bullet point except for the claim of parody. (By the way, there is no such thing as obvious parody -- it must be cited!) It may indeed have been meant to be that, but the simple and only fact that should be noted here is that the Manzo the Saw character is the same as the titular character from the Hanzo the Razor films. There should be no un-cited analysis. Just observation.

ask123 03:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Intro Reworked

Just spat out a 1st draft of a pretty substantial reworking of the intro. I think it's more informative (i.e. "meaty") than before. I also took care of the conflict over the word "fame" (see above). Now it's more specific and (hopefully) more encyclopedic.

One important note: I had to kinda guess the end date of the show's airing on Fuji TV, so if anyone has more specific info on that, please speak up! Cheers, ask123 21:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Added Detail to the Plot Section

Just added more detail to the plot section but I only got halfway. More to go... ask123 21:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Comparison to Kung Faux

Deleted the comparison to Kung Faux, since there are many cross-genre works of media out there. Simply being cross-genre does not warrant a comparison to Samurai Champloo. Furthermore, the pop music used in Kung Faux is mainstream 90s hip-hop by artists like Queen Latifah and RZA. Champloo uses mostly hip-hop/electronic music from lesser-known, hip-hop-inspired artists. The point is that their music styles are totally different. They are not very similar aside from their being in the "pop" genre and being either "hip-hop" or "hip-hop influenced." And since so many works' soundtracks fall into those categories, it is not that special. Kung Faux's music is more like Afro Samurai. Those two shows would warrant a comparison, particularly since they both share many soundtrack artists (unlike here). ask123 02:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)