Talk:The Host (2006 film)

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: Korean

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Korean cinema task force.

Korea Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Korean cinema task force.

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Section sizes

Section size for The Host (2006 film) (28 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	6,894	6,894
Plot	3,903	3,903
Cast	3,630	3,630
Production	15	9,181
Development	5,668	5,668
Filming	679	679
Visual effects	2,819	2,819
Release	5,447	5,447
Reception	15	10,720
Critical response	6,296	6,296
Accolades	3,140	3,140
Plagiarism controversy	1,269	1,269
Post-release	18	8,146
Unproduced sequel and remake	35	7,492
The Host 2	5,518	5,518
American remake	1,939	1,939
Home media	430	430
3D remaster	206	206
Themes	2,000	2,000
Legacy	13	9,063
Cultural influence	2,127	2,127
Later reception	6,923	6,923
References	15	356
Notes	37	37
Citations	29	29
Works cited	275	275
Further reading	656	656
External links	2,278	2,278
Total	62,274	62,274

Go Ah-Sung

I haven't seen any sources that list the actress as Go Ah-Sung.

Many list her as Ko Ah-Sung, or Ah-Sung Ko.

I'll change it back unless someone can point to a viable source.--Joel Lindley 06:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I found it.

I'm assuming it's the correct way to say it in Korean?--Joel Lindley 06:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American military bases in Korea

I'm going to reword the bit about the impact of the dumping incidents. As far as I can tell, there are no sources for the following claims, which may in fact be not true:

59 bases were returned to Korea. The citation only states that there are ongoing talks to do so.
Toxic wastes covered up by cement. Unsourced, and may not be true, given that the above has not yet occurred.
Great environmental problems. It would be foolish to say that there was no impact at all, or that it did not negatively impact South Korean perception of the US presence. However, "great" is a qualifier I think that is not warranted here.

John Sheu 08:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, USA fanboy!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.19.130.171 (talk • contribs) 21:30, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Writing factually correct information is "fanboying"..? You know what, feel free to be an ignorant scum-bag liar. The rest of us use this site for actual information. 03:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

"USA fanboy"? Quite the intellectual you seem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.105.101.232 (talk) 22:05, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sentence unclear

"In addition to its environmental impact, this has added some antagonism against the United States" - What does this mean? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kdammers (talk • contribs) 02:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The plot summary

Anyone want to go over the plot summary (I hate writing them)? For one, it's about twice as long as it should be, and for another, it still only covers the first 20 minutes or so of the film. Scene by scene analysis really isn't necessary. - Bobet 18:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's sloppy to have something that detailed at the start and then a signle sentence for that much of the movie afterwards. I'm doing a lot at the moment, but I may have time a couple weeks from now to write up a summary. Boter 05:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree, and am going to work on this today, since I've seen just seen the movie. It goes into painful unnecessary detail about the first 5 minutes, and then drops off to nothing after that. I'm going to have to weed out some of the less important stuff from the beginning (90% of it) and add more of the major plot points following that. Also, I am taking out the part about the man who committed suicide "presumably" being turned into the monster, as this isn't supported by the plot at all (in the following scene you see them fishing his body out of the river). Please improve mine as you see fit also. Great movie... WETA did an excellent job. --64.253.48.73 14:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, finished this, but it's still on the long side. I can't really condense it more without losing what I feel are important plot points, though, so I'll leave it. I did cut down the over-detailed opening scenes, though, and just stuck to important developments. Hopefully the article can be re-rated at some point? --64.253.48.73 21:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've cut it down some more. It's still too long, but it's slowly getting there. Geoff B 23:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The plot summary is a tad miss matched. In some circumastances it has placed events in the wrong order-ie the scene where Gang-du finds the feeding pit is listed before the point where Nam-il wakes to find himself tended to a homeless man. This section could do with a bit of revision. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.200.52 (talk) 00:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed plenty more extraneous details, but it could still use another set of eyes to pair it down even more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.78.96.107 (talk) 00:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Viral Marketing Campaign

If someone feels like it, maybe there should be a section added about the "cryptidtruth" (youtube) and "thinginthewater" video and photo viral marketing campaign for this movie going on right now. It's traceable back to www.mosterhunterclub.com. Gh05t 00:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two small continuity questions

I rewrote the plot summary, per my comment above; it now encompasses the entire movie instead of focusing on extraneous details from just the first 5 minutes. I did have two questions, though--what was the point in the suicide scene? As my comment above noted, I don't thnk that man was meant to be what transformed into the monster (would not make any sense with the fisherman/small mutant scene, also they show his body being pulled out of the Han in a bodybag on the news). Was this just metaphorical? Also, was the American Donald that was a hero in the beginning the same Donald who was a US soldier on the news who "fought heroically against the monster"? I thought so at first, but having rewatched that scene, it looked like the first Donald was being eaten when Gang-Du smashed the signpost on the monster's tail, and not like he got away with just an arm amputated. --64.253.48.73 18:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The suicide scene is just a bit of foreshadowing that there's something unusual in the river, AFAIK. And yes, the Donald is the same one. There's no other American in the film that we see fight the monster. Although in the process of being chewed on, Gang-Du interrupted IIRC. Geoff B 19:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the foreshadowing idea, but I still wonder about Donald being the same one (it could have been another off-screen Donald). We see the monster swallowing a man in the scene following the street sign. Also, that Donald had dyed hair, and that's not allowed in the US Army (of which I am a member). --64.253.48.73 19:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a couple of days since I watched it on DVD, so my memory of the scene isn't 100%, but I think it's the same one. The chances of a South Korean national knowing US Army grooming regulations is fairly slim, I think. Geoff B 20:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, the Korean Army has even stricter standards... there's no way someone with bright, half-blond hair would keep it. But yeah, I guess anything's possible, and the filmmaker just didn't care. --64.253.48.73 20:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Korean man committing suicide is parodying, or at least referring to, the fact that many Koreans that rank high in the business world commit suicide when too much pressure is put on them. If you research a bit, the Korean suicide rate is unusually high. I don't think too much should be made of it. DRaGZ 04:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

one small continuity question

how does gangdu know which tunnel hyun-seo is in? is it because nam-il sent an email to both nam-joo and gangdu? I just dont remember him checking his phone, but it seems plausible that the director just assumed the audience would make the assumption.

After Nam-Joo gets the text message, she calls Gang-Du at the quarantine center because she couldn't reach Nam-Il. That's how he knew which bridge his daughter was under.76.64.188.144 03:22, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation available?

I removed this uncited clause (", though the injections also included inoculation against blood-sucking tapeworms that inhabit the sewers") because it makes no sense (tapeworms aren't free-living sewer-dwelling blood-suckers) -- however, it's possible something related to the statement did happen. Citation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iayork (talk • contribs) 18:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Politics

I wonder why they didn't make a film about North Korea's nuclear test causing a monster, instead of making a big deal about a little formeldahyde. --Scorpionman (talk) 18:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify this for others. Its not about North Korea as there are other issues in South Korea than this. America's billeting of troops in South Korea is quite a debated issue in South Korea, and thus the writers wished to pick up on this subtlely. There's plenty of films made in South Korea that give the North a bad face, but that's not to say that there are not those that choose to pick up on non cliche ideas-the nuclear testing things been done so many times before, and anyhow it'd be a bit weird for all thatfFallout to somehow effect a town kilometres away in the South.=P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.200.52 (talk) 00:36, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat ordinary people with somewhat ordinary problems, facing a monster created by ordinary chemicals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.196.135.60 (talk) 04:00, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:C9841-01.jpg

Image:C9841-01.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remake

What do you have to say about this? http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=50659 24.76.185.79 (talk) 23:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation for the hallucination/dream scene?

Where the grandpa, the uncle, the aunt, and the father stop in their own snack food shop for some food and rest--and while they're eating, the daughter appears all of a sudden and they wordlessly share their food with her? As far as I can tell, there's no other hallucination or dream sequence in the rest of the movie, and I was quite baffled at this point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.77.76.147 (talk) 01:40, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow gas

Is there any reason as to how the family didn't suffer the same fate as the rest of the people in the area when the Yellow gas went off, at least those without the proper protection. I mean the couching up blood and dying, which seemed to have effect everyone withing moments of its release. Yes it'd be a bit of a flop if the main characters suddenly died like this, but it would help if this irrationality had been explained a little. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.200.52 (talk) 00:40, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Romanization of 괴물

I think the romanization of the title "괴물" should be "goemul" instead of gwoemul, or am I wrong? --Christian140 (talk) 16:38, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]