Pulgasari (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Featured article candidates/Pulgasari/archive1

Nominator(s): Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 01:29, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Pulgasari, an absurd 1985 North Korean/Japanese/Chinese monster movie by a kidnapped South Korean filmmaker. It's been 39 years since its production, and the film has become a cult classic worldwide. I have done some major reworking of this page over the last few months, and so far it has since been listed as a good article and received a copyedit. This is my third time nominating an article for FA. Thanks in advance to anyone who offers any feedback. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 01:29, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emerging from the void to offer mt support. Looking over the article, I don't see any issues with sources or prose. The only issue would be making sure the image licenses are fully clarified as free to use and (or) have the right attributions to satisfy the WP:NFCC#8. Other than that, well done. Paleface Jack (talk) 16:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• File:Pulgasari_poster_japan.jpg has a dead source link and incomplete FUR

• File:19660529申相玉.jpg has a dead source link and is missing info on first publication

• File:Pulgasary.png has an incomplete FUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I've fixed the link and FUR problems on File:Pulgasari_poster_japan.jpg and File:Pulgasary.png but there's not much I can do for File:19660529申相玉.jpg, as that one's source appears inaccessible, not dead. Could remove that and Kim's photo and replace them with a non-free one of Shin and Kim together. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 18:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've just changed File:19660529申相玉.jpg to the Non-free use file File:Shin, Kim Il Sung, and Choi.png from the year of the film's production. I will remove it if its use is deemed unacceptable by anyone. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 01:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See my comment about this file's non-free use at User talk:Eiga-Kevin2#File:Shin, Kim Il Sung, and Choi.png for more details, but I don't think this non-free use can be justified per Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: @Marchjuly: My apologies for changing File:19660529申相玉.jpg to a non-free use file. I believe I have now done the right thing by replacing it with a fairly rare photo of Shin that is in the public domain in the United States and South Korea. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 07:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikkimaria, how is this now? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:23, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shin_Sang-ok_(1964).png: when specifically did this become PD in South Korea? Did its publication include a copyright notice? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's publication did not include a copyright notice. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 02:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is it known when it became PD in South Korea? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:30, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find anything else about the image, no republishing no nothing anywhere else. It's seemingly PD in the US regardless because it was published without copyright notice and outside the US. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 06:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why would that make it PD in the US? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per the PD template: since it was first published outside the U.S. & "before 1 March 1989 without copyright notice or before 1964 without copyright renewal or before the source country established copyright relations with the United States." Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 07:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That template requires that all three points be met, including the last: "it was in the public domain in its home country (South Korea) on the URAA date (1 January 1996)". Nikkimaria (talk) 18:14, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I've removed that image until I can find proof it was PD by 1996 in the US. Do you think all the other images' FUR are fine now by the way? Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:20, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• For romanizing South Korean author names in references, are you following the procedure in WP:KOREANNAME? Some of the romanizations are non-standard; e.g. "Kim, Joo-won" should be "Kim, Ju-won" per KOREANNAME. seefooddiet (talk) 09:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't look at KOREANNAME, I just went by consulted my Korean friend about the English spelling of them a few times and went by Google Translate elsewhere. I'll do my best to re-write the names based on WP:NCKOREAN henceforth but might need more assistance. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 17:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can try this automatic converter [1] to get the Revised Romanization spellings. The converter is sometimes incorrect though; if you give it your best effort I can go through later and correct mistakes seefooddiet (talk) 22:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that Google Translate doesn't produce the romanizations we prefer for Korean; see MOS:KO-ROMAN, second row of the table seefooddiet (talk) 22:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for not replying sooner, I've been quite busy lately. I'll fix any romanizations that are incorrect over the next few days. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 07:48, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed all of the romanizations now as far as I can tell. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 00:44, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some possible mistakes in ref romanizations. What would make these not mistakes is if you've seen these specific people using this spelling for their surnames.

• "Moon" -> "Mun" for "Moon, Seok"
• "Noh" -> "No" for "Noh, Sun-dong"
• "Choi" -> "Choe" for "Choi, Yeong-chang"
• For the Kim, Jung-ki ref I'm not seeing the author's name given on the article website. Is his name spelled 김중키 or 김중기? I suspect it's the latter; former is uncommon. If so, it should be "Kim Jung-gi".

Other comment:

• Cast and production section also need to be romanized per WP:KOREANNAME. These spelling systems will unfortunately vary by person, depending on who is North Korean and who is South Korean. North Koreans use McCune–Reischauer, South Koreans Revised Romanization. If you don't know a person's nationality, I think assuming North Korean by default is fine.

seefooddiet (talk) 01:09, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changed "Moon", "Noh", and "Choi" per your suggestions. Kim Jung-ki's name is spelled 金重基 in the source and I've found it hard to directly translate. And for the staff and cast, I've already done some research on most of them and it seems Shin is the only one whose nationality is confirmed to be South Korean (IMDb does claim the film's star, Chang Son-hui, was born in South Korea but I can't find their source for that and a source in this article indicates otherwise). So probably keeping their names as McCune–Reischauer translations would be fine I presume. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 03:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[2] 基 -> "gi". Unfortunately "重" can be read either 중 (jung) or 동 (dong). I can't find for certain what his name is through googling, but I suspect it is "Jung-gi". Think it's minimally harmful to put that down.

The MR for the cast and production crew are incorrect; I'll fix them. I'll just leave Shin Sang-ok's name as it is. seefooddiet (talk) 21:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gave it a pass; you'll need to verify that the new spellings are consistent throughout the article although I gave it a solid try.

Notes:

• I try to avoid putting Korean text glosses in infoboxes; some of the names in there are not in the body of the article and effectively unsourced I think. Once you also put them in the body, you should also move the glosses to the body too.
• It's possible that 유경애 (Yu Kyŏngae)'s surname should be changed. It's reasonably common for the surname 柳 to be written 류 (ryu) in North Korea and 유 (yu) in South Korea due to dialect (similar to how 李 is 리 (ri) in North Korea and 이 (i) in South Korea), although this is not universal practice. Some South Koreans use Ryu and probably vice versa. South Korean sources sometimes South Koreanize these surnames by default, regardless of the personal preference of the person, although they did give "리" consistently. Tl;dr to be extra correct this person's name could be researched; probably a North Korean poster with Korean writing would work.

seefooddiet (talk) 21:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These translations seem mostly fine but I think Chŏng Kŏnjo should be changed back to Chong Gon-jo since that's what Satsuma and Western sources call him. Also, maybe we could hide the translations within the article's source (using the <!-- --> thing) and use those translations featured on the English-langauge poster instead? Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 01:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for long answer, romanizing Korean is complicated.

• Yes you can change back "Chong Gon-jo" if you have know of wide attestation to that spelling, per step #1 of WP:KOREANNAME.
• For your second use of "translations", do you mean the orig Hangul text? See here for an explanation of why we would want to display Hangul. Also few non-Wikipedians know about invisible comments (<!-- -->), which is why we generally display Korean text in article.
• It's nice that we have an English-language poster, but some complications. Korean romanization is such a mess that a single attestation is often not enough to be confident in what spelling to use. E.g. on that poster it says "Pulgasary" on top; do we use that spelling? Instead of using the ad-hoc romanizations on the poster and risking confusion, it's often safer to default to a systematic romanization. This is what the community has settled on so far.
• The above confusion is why we have the steps laid out in WP:KOREANNAME. Chong Gon-jo meets step #1, I'm not sure if the poster is sufficient evidence of step #2; it may be, but often enough romanizations for people names differ by appearance or even across time so it's hard to be sure.

seefooddiet (talk) 02:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright understood;

• I've changed the co-director's name back to Chong Gon-jo and added sources for this.
• Yes I meant the Hangul text. I think it's fine to have them on display, and was mostly asking because I'm just not a fan of them being in the infobox if the translations are mentioned elsewhere on the article.
• As for the poster text, it coincides with how some older sources give the film the English title of "Pulgasary" so I'm thinking of mentioning that in the note for the film's title. And I don't think the name spellings on the poster apply with step #2 of WP:KOREANNAME after checking.

Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 03:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sounds good, thank you for working with me! Romanization of Korean is unfortunately complicated. If you ever run into a similar situation with Korean feel free to poke me.

On another note, I think the footnotes subsection and the citations subsection should possibly be merged; they're functionally the same thing. seefooddiet (talk) 20:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. Will notify you if I experience any further problems romanizing Korean. And I've considered merging those sections btw, but the GA reviewer and a friend of mine seemed to like how the References section is formated (also it's something pages like Mission: Impossible – Fallout feature). Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 07:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to say—I support this article's FA nom. seefooddiet (talk) 06:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm correct, if this passes FAC, this might be one of the first North Korea-focussed article (outside of those related to the Korean War) to be given the bronze star. Let me have a look.

Lead:

• Shin and his wife had remained in North Korea since 1978, when their kidnapping was initiated by Kim Jong Il, the country's heir apparent. – This wording is a bit odd, probably especially the use of "remained" as though the couple voluntarily stayed in North Korea. I might reword as: Shin and his wife were in captivity in North Korea since their kidnapping by Kim Jong Il in 1978. or another wording, if you prefer. Also wikilink their abduction.
• Pulgasari was submitted in February 1985 – submitted to who and what for? Did Shin propose the film and submit it to Kim for approval? Also reading later, I would add "The pitch for Pulgasari was submitted..."
• Its Japanese critical reception was positive... – Critical reception in Japan was positive...

I don't as much comments for the plot and cast list.

Production:

• A collection of around 15,000[11][32] to 20,000[7][34] titles was reported to be in Kim's possession. New releases from around the globe were typically added to his collection shortly after opening in theaters. – Kim was reported to have a collection of 15,000 to 20,000 titles of Shin's films. Every new release from around the globe were typically added to his collection shortly after their opening in theaters.
• the film industry there – the country's film industry
• while a larger studio was under construction for the film. – while a larger studio was constructed for the film.
• The Japanese crew developed the Pulgasari suit at Toho from April 28 to late May. Nobuyuki Yasumaru was in charge of modeling it – The Japanese crew developed the Pulgasari suit at Toho from April 28 to late May, with Nobuyuki Yasumaru in charge of modeling it
• loved the reboot so much he sought – loved the reboot so much that he sought
• Shin recalled that Kim had suggested making the monster resemble a cow. – Shin recalled Kim’s suggestion to design the monster resembling a cow.
• For the sentence Pulgasari was ultimately set in Goryeo but..., I think it's a bit too long and could be split such that ...was based on the Forbidden City complex in Beijing. The special effects crew...
• which covered approximately 20,000 pyeong – I think a conversion to SI units might be in order here. Especially for other mentions of pyeong.
• Satsuma said about the destruction of the palace in the Pulgasari suit for the film, he was "impressed that the Chinese government could allow such an ambitious filming, even if it was just a movie". – Satsuma mentioned he was "impressed that the Chinese government could allow such an ambitious filming, even if it was just a movie" when talking about the destruction of the palace in the Pulgasari suit for the film.

Release:

• According to many retrospective sources, the film was, however, banned both in North Korea and overseas in the wake of Shin and Choi escaping North Korean supervisors in Vienna on March 12 and subsequently fleeing to the United States. – According to many retrospective sources, the film was, however, banned both in North Korea and overseas when Shin and Choi escaped their North Korean supervisors in Vienna on March 12 and subsequently fled to the United States.
• On January 21, 1995, Twin released Pulgasari on VHS in Japan – I was initially confused what is "Twin". Might clarify that.
• but were all turned down. – but all were turned down
• due to a cultural exchange agreement for the June 15th North–South Joint Declaration – Shouldn't it be "in the June 15th..." or "as part of the..."
• Johannes Schönherr said contemporaneous publications cited many reasons – "...said... cited..." I might just say Johannes Schönherr cited many reasons or reword in another manner like Johannes Schönherr cited reasonings by contemporaneous publications on its failure in South Korea.

Reception:

• South Korean reviewers also criticized the acting. – can further elaborate in what way from the source?
• Shin rejected interpretations the film may have conveyed a message about North Korea's contemporaneous class conflict. – Shin rejected interpretations about the film's messages on North Korea's contemporaneous class conflict.

That's all I have. Great work for this article so far.--ZKang123 (talk) 09:29, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've just revised everything here based on your suggestions, clarified that Kim's film collection was not just of Shin's movies, and specified what kind of company Twin is. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 19:23, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to support. Additionally, I found another review by a freelance journalist on the film. --ZKang123 (talk) 12:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123: Thanks! I've recently added that content from that review btw Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 03:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing this version. What makes "レイジング・サンダー・ホームページ""大怪獣プルガサリ", "북한영화를 아십니까", アジア映画にみる日本", Incheon Ilbo, II Maeil Shinmun, www.fromthefrontrow.net and vantagepointinterviews.com a reliable source? The first three non-English sources also need some extra information on who is the publisher etc. Also, not necessarily an issue, but some citations are throwing incorrect "sfn error: no target: " errors. Spot-check:

• 4 This needs a Japanese reader.
• 6 Why does our article say republished?

  OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 10 This needs a Japanese reader.
• 12 Doesn't have that much to say about politics.
• 17 "Satsuma later said he adored Pulgasari and that he fondly remembered performing in it" doesn't show here. Everything else OK, but I note this source says that the film premiered in Osaka and Tokyo, not just Tokyo

  OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 22 OK
• 23 OK
• 26 This needs a Japanese reader who has access to the book.
• 30 Assuming that Google Translate is translating this correctly: Doesn't mention Raging Thunder or the under-1000?
• 39 Doesn't say that Pulgasari was the seventh.

  OK now. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 40 OK
• 63 This one uses a different page number format than the other sources. OK assuming that Google Translate isn't making stuff up.
• 65 OK
• 67 OK
• 81 OK - I figure our article saying "controversial ideology" is a reasonable reading.
• 86 This needs a Japanese reader who has access to the book.
• 87 OK
• 90 OK I guess.
• 94 OK
• 95 OK

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorting out most of these now. The main issue is most of the Japanese publications are out of print. That's why I decided to translate their contents from Google Books. I've been learning Japanese for a while now and tried my best to make these things as accurate as I could. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 19:30, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, "レイジング・サンダー・ホームページ" is Raging Thunder's official website; "大怪獣プルガサリ" is the PDF of the film's 1995 flyer available on the Japanese archival website for movie flyers; "북한영화를 아십니까" is an article from the magazine Cine21 (which is generally conisdered reliable); アジア映画にみる日本" is a book by Takashi Monma (who's a critic and professor at Meiji Gakuin University); many articles also use Incheon Ilbo and Maeil Shinmun as sources because these are major newspapers in South Korea; fromthefrontrow.net is by a freelance journalist and was suggested by @ZKang123: in their review here; and vantagepointinterviews.com is a nonprofit site by very prolific interviewer Brett Homenick. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:05, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've also just added publisher info for the first few non-English sources. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eiga-Kevin2, is this ready for Jo-Jo to relook at? If it is, could you ping them. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. @Jo-Jo Eumerus please take a look over the references again and my remarks. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 18:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marked some, but others still need review by someone who has source and language access. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I very much doubt that anyone will have physical access to all these sources tbh but ok. I just used Google Books for most of the non-English ones. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 19:12, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus do you suggest I go ahead and remove some of the non-English books I've cited but only could access via Google Books since we can't verify directly? Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 19:16, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I'd prefer if someone checked them directly. I don't think verification convenience is a good reason to exclude sources. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eiga-Kevin2, if there are English language sources which cover much the same material as a foreign language source and are HQ RSs you are required to give preference to the English language source. See WP:NOENG "English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when they are available and of equal quality and relevance." Gog the Mild (talk) 17:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that policy is what I had in mind when removing the non-English books yesterday Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:07, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eiga-Kevin2 I think you need native or near-native speakers to endorse the non-English sources and translations to pass a source review. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "that also depicts an eponymous creature from Korean folklore": the use of "eponymous" is not helpful here since the two films have slightly different names. Suggest "that also depicts the Pulgasari, a creature from Korean folklore".

  Pulgasari is used in North Korea to refer to the monster (based on how the cast pronounced the name within the film) and Bulgasari in the South. Sources on the creature's article suggest it is called Bulgasari. I think eponymous is fine since it isn't inaccurate. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I now realize there are two romanizations used for transliterating Korean, and per Bulgasari (creature) the creature's name can be rendered in the Latin alphabet as Bulgasari or Pulgasari. Are we relying on the cast's speech to pick "Pulgasari" for this article, or does the film have a standard transliteration in reliable sources that uses the "P"? And re "eponymous", since it mean "giving its name to something", I think it's confusing because it's not yet clear to the reader that Bulgasari and Pulgasari are the same creature -- in fact that sentence is how we tell the reader that, but it relies on them understanding that "eponymous" refers to both. You're certainly right that it's not inaccurate, but I think it's not clear to the reader what is meant. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It's not just the cast saying "Pulgasari" that I'm replying upon here. Western sources covering the film's plot and other details usually say Pulgasari when refering to the legendary creature the monster is based upon as well as the film's title. Sources just covering the legend of the creature itself call it "Bulgasari". I could write "that also depicts the Bulgasari/Pulgasari, a creature from Korean folklore" Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 22:10, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I think that would be better than the current wording. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:50, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Alright, done. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "who brings to life a metal-eating monster her late father envisioned": judging from the plot summary, he didn't just envision it, he created a figurine of it.

  Changed "envisioned" to "created" Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "Shin and his wife, Choi Eun-hee, were in captivity in North Korea since their kidnapping by Kim Jong Il in 1978.": Suggest "Shin and his wife, Choi Eun-hee, were kidnapped in 1978 by agents of Kim Jong Il, and held captive in North Korea." It wasn't Kim Jong Il who kidnapped them after all, and I think it's clearer to give the kidnapping and subsequent captivity in chronological order.

  Done. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "Pulgasari was pitched in February 1985": "pitched" is a word from the film industry with the wrong connotations here -- it implies there was a pitch meeting at which a production company assessed the likely commercial success of the movie before deciding whether to make it. In fact it appears the movie was made under Kim Jong Il's direct orders, so there was no pitching involved. However, I do see further references to the pitch in the body of the article. If that's correct, who was it pitched to? Kim Jong Il?

  Changed "pitched" to "put forward" & the source directly says "The project was proposed in mid-February 1985" but never specifies who pitched it and who to. I could change it to say that's when development started. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I think it would be worth mentioning in the lead that there are doubts over whether Chong Gon-Jo really did finish the film; currently you say "allegedly" but I think it would be better to make it clear that it's not definite.

  Added "some sources suggest" Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "With an estimated ¥200–300 million ($2–3 million) budget": I think the "¥" sign is used for both yuan and yen, so I can't tell what currency this is in, but why isn't it in North Korean won? And is the dollar amount based on 1985 exchange rates or has it been inflated to give the current value? If not I think we should do that.

  Added link to the yen page; source never specifies if the $2-3m is based on contemporary exchange rates or inflated. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "is imprisoned and forced to starve for defending his people": "forced to starve" is an odd thing to say: to force someone to do something implies they must actively do whatever they're being forced to do, but starving is not active. Suggest just "is imprisoned and starved to death for defending his people. Shortly before he dies, ...". That's assuming his death is from starvation, as seems to be the case.

  Ok I've changed that. Yes the character dies of starvation in the film. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "Pulgasari shares a special bond with Ami; after eating a farmer's tools, it turns into a powerful figure." The first half of this sentence appears to be unconnected to the second half; any reason to put these two details in the same sentence?

  Fixed Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "The peasants become fed up with being penurious and suffering": "penurious" is too formal a word for this context -- "... with their poverty and suffering" would do.

  Done Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "The monster lets itself be trapped and is set ablaze to save Ami". The generals set it ablaze, and they don't do so to save Ami; the monster lets itself be trapped to save Ami.

  Changed to "The monster lets itself be trapped to save Ami and is set ablaze"

• "which its enemies readily provide for hostilities": odd phrasing -- I think you mean that the weapons are often made of metal.

  Changed to "The king runs into Pulgasari, who wins many battles against his army because it devours their metal weapons." Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "After defeating the king, Pulgasari becomes problematic; it starts eating the rebels' weapons and farmers' tools": "problematic" is the wrong word here. It might be easiest to cut the descriptive phrase and just say it starts eating the rebels' weapons and the farmers' tools.

  Agreed, done. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "Kim Jong Il, the heir apparent of North Korea": suggest "Kim Jong Il, the heir apparent to Kim Il Sung, the ruler of North Korea".

  Done Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "Shin and Miyanishi stated that the film's story is based around Pulgasari or Bulgasari, a creature from Korean folklore." Do we need to attribute this inline? It's not as if there's any doubt about it, is it? Similarly, do we need "Furthermore, according to retrospective sources" in the next sentence? The titles alone and the existence of the folklore creature seem to make this clear enough.

  That's there because Shin nor anyone on the production team said anything about it being a remake, at least as far as I can find. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  But the sentence doesn't say anything about whether it's a remake; it only refers to the mythical creature, which (at least per our article on it) can be spelt either way. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Alright. I've removed the "Shin and Miyanishi stated that" bit Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 06:00, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there any coverage of why Toho decided to work on the film, despite Shin's involvement, or of the media reaction? I would have thought anyone apparently condoning Shin's kidnapping would be subject to a lot of media criticism.

  Can't find anything as to why they did but Satsuma seemed excited that he was going to work overseas. Nobody seemed to know Shin was kidnapped at the time. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  If there's nothing in the sources there's nothing you can do, but it's surprising. Particularly as I see that the announcement that Shin and his wife had been kidnapped (rather than were just missing) came less than a year earlier; you'd think South Koreans would have been very aware of the situation. Anyway, I've struck the point. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "The planning of Pulgasari was accredited to Shin": I think you just mean "credited".

  Done. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "Shin showed no apparent interest": "showed" is redundant with "apparent"; you only need one or the other.

  Removed "apparent". Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "to design the monster resembling a cow": poor syntax. Perhaps "to design the monster to resemble a cow", or "that the monster should resemble a cow".

  Went with the latter. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "to set the film in China during the Three Kingdoms period if the historical research and costumes made it match": I don't know what "made it match" means. The Pulgasari is a folklore creature, so what historical research are we talking about? And what would the costumes have to match?

  Idk source spell that out. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• What does Shin mean by "ask the Chinese side to adjust it accordingly"?

  Source also doesn't spell that out. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  For both this and the point above I don't think we can use material we don't understand. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:28, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Fair point. Removed them. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "Through his Japanese office, Shin invited": but Shin was trapped in North Korea, so in what sense could he still be working with a Japanese office? And why "his" -- did he have an independent business in Japan that still existed?

  Shin was allowed to travel so long as he was supervised by North Korean bodyguards. He set up several offices (i.e. branchs of his North Korean company Shin Films that he and Kim set up) in other countries during his abduction. I've somewhat noted he had a branch in Vienna on the article already too. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "Satsuma allegedly became the first foreigner to appear in a North Korean film." Why "allegedly"? Is there some doubt about the reliability of the source?

  Changed to "Satsuma believed that he became the first foreigner to appear in a North Korean film". Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The body qualifies the 13,000 extras with "some sources" but the lead doesn't qualify the number. If there's genuinely some doubt about it I think the lead should reflect that, or the number should be removed from the lead. And the body sources the comment about the Korean People's Army and the number of extras separately, so can I just check that the source does say those 13,000 came from the army? I had a look via Google Translate and as far as I can tell it doesn't say that.

  The army contributing the extras was based on Satsuma's statement underneath that sentence. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Struck, since you've cut it from the lead and changed it in the body, but I don't think Satsuma's comment does support it -- rather the reverse, in fact, since he says the army would go and get the people, implying the people they brought were not in the army. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The 20,000 pyeong figure needs an inline equivalent in square yards or acres or something similar.

  Will sort that out shortly Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Converted it to sq m & sq ft Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:24, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "filmed the Pulgasari suit wandering around a miniature village": the suit containing Satsuma? Or claymation or other animation?

  Unspecified in source Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "which the Chinese crew had already been creating": we haven't been told about the Chinese before this -- is this Beijing Film Studio? What was their role?

  Just specified in the pre-production section Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "due in part to electrical constraints and equipment theft": what were the electrical constraints? And more details about the problems with theft might be interesting, if the source says more about it.

  Electrical constraints aren't clear but one of those two sources mentions a power outage. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "Satsuma named a scene in which Pulgasari rises over a hill while the rebels and king's army fight below the "Marusan", which he said is the name of the mound at which they filmed it." Why is this worth including? Is this just Satsuma's own name for the scene, or is it a famous scene in some way, with the name used by others?

  Not that notable so removed it altogether. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "purportedly reluctant to publicize Shin was the director": I think you mean "reportedly", not "purportedly", and perhaps "reluctant for Shin to be acknowledged as" would be better.

  Done Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I'm going to stop here and oppose. I'm only halfway through the article and this is a fairly long list of issues. Some are cosmetic and I've suggested fixes where I can see an easy solution, but some might be harder to fix. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Many of sentences you've asked me to change I'd previously changed based on the suggestions of other reviewers here and they seemed fine with them btw. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That has to be frustrating for a nominator, I agree. If you can point me at a couple of examples I'll see if I agree with them or if I can justify why I don't. I've struck a few points above and will go back through and reply to or strike the others, today if I have time. I have also struck the oppose for now since you've been quick about responding and have fixed many of the issues, and I wouldn't want to see this archived while we're going through the remaining points. I do still need to go through the rest of the article too, though I don't know how much time I'll have over the next couple of days. By the way, you might take a look at WP:INDENTMIX -- I corrected the indent syntax for your replies. For sighted editors it makes no differences, but editors who have to use a screen reader find mixed indent syntax very disruptive, so it's worth getting right. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More comments from reading the remainder of the article:

• Did MBC broadcast Pulgasari on TV once the judge decided the broadcasting rights belonged to the production company? We don't actually say whether they did or not. And if they did so in 1999, that would have been before the ruling on whether the film contained Juche -- is that right? That is, the ministry has to rule on whether a film contains Juche before it can be distributed in theatres, but not before it airs on TV?

  No, I couldn't find anything to say they did show it on TV or not in the end. Seems like they gave up on that idea and decided to move on to try and show it in theaters. Yes, it all happened before the ruling anyway. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "and was under consideration to acquire screen quotas": I don't follow this -- this was a proposal to have a minimum quota for North Korean films? That seems unlikely.

  Specified it was being considered for screen quotas benefits in case they decided to handle films from the North like something of a domestic release. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I see. How about making it ".. was attracting controversy on whether films from North Korea should be handled as foreign or domestic distributions, and that it was being considered for classification as a domestic film, which would lead to it benefitting from the South Korean screen quota system"? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Done Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 18:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Is the Muju Film Festival worth a redlink? Currently it's an empty section in Muju County; probably not worth linking to that.

  Gave it a redlink for now. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "the book was also published in April 1994": I would cut this unless you have a reason why the reader needs to know the book was reprinted.

  Rewrote and removed the date. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "suggested that Pulgasari was more evocative of": I don't think you need "more".

  I think the fully sentence it's apart of [i.e. "Pulgasari was more evocative of The Golem: How He Came into the World (1920) than the Godzilla series, which it is commonly compared to"] won't make sense with "more" because the reviewer is saying they think it is more like that movie than Godzilla. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  You're right; I misread that. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Why do we can that Ryu Deok-hwan watched the film? We don't report his opinion of it.

  Source just says (per DeepL Translator): "To play Dong-gu, [Ryu] watched over 70 movies, including Billy Elliot and Hana and Alice [...] He even watched/studied the North Korean movie Pulgasari in case it would help." Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Without that context the mention in the article seems random. Given that he watched scores of movies in preparation, and that there's no reason given as to why he thought this film would be helpful, I would just cut this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:04, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Alright, done. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 18:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:28, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. All the issues I was concerned about have been addressed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]