Talk:Begotten (film)/Archive 1

December 2006

Remember the original VHS box said "Makes 'Eraserhead' look like 'Ernest Saves Christmas'!", but don't know who contributed the quote.=65.122.209.165 04:19, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Critic's choice, Time Magazine; Minute 2:57 of this trailer; http://youtube.com/watch?v=C_72--eXB6o Nagelfar 16:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Restored a removed item

66.188.87.251 has removed the following content: [1]

Relatively obvious Christian myths are present in the impregnation of Mother Earth by God, akin to the Immaculate Conception and the virgin birth of Jesus. The same myth is partly present in ancient Egyptian mythology, where Isis impregnates herself with the penis of the killed god Osiris and gives birth to Horus.

This is replaced in the edit by:

, such as the ancient Egyptian myth, in which Isis impregnates herself with the penis of the killed god Osiris and gives birth to Horus.

The edit summary was "Impregnating mother earth isn't even close to a christian belief, and calling christianity a myth is an obvious attack".

I've reverted this removal because I believe both grounds cited are inadequate.

The term "immaculate conception", however, is incorrect here. The doctrine of the immaculate conception relates to the Virgin Mary being conceived without original sin, but the name is often conflated (as here) with the doctrine of the Virgin Birth. --Tony Sidaway 12:53, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism?

The phrase "The weasel word" appears to be a snarky addition here: "The weasel word for the 'Rorschach test for the adventurous eye' is a quote from Richard Corliss (TIME magazine). It was featured in the trailer for the film." Relgif (talk) 02:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I thought it was questionably as well, so I removed it. Backtable _{Speak to me}^{concerning my deeds.} 20:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

"Weasel word" does have a negative connotation, but "Rorchach test for the eye" is inherently inane and may need some form fo qualification other than "it has been called... in the trailer." Calling something a "Rorschach test for the eye" is like calling something a "Hearing test for the ears"... 214.29.65.248 (talk) 17:28, 4 June 2012 (UTC)Steve

Umm, the rorschach test INVOLVES eyes, but it doesn't TEST them. You should look up the entry on the test and "edumicate" yourselfs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.212.149.75 (talk) 16:07, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Citing and expansion

This article does not cite its sources, this should be fixed. Also the reception section can be expanded in more detail with quotes from notable critics who reviewed the film should be added.--Paleface Jack (talk) 04:57, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm finding a fair of coverage in sources. I haven't read through all of these yet, but I'm working on it:

1. A New Pot of Gold: Hollywood Under the Electronic Rainbow, 1980-1989. It would be helpful to see the previous page, but this extract has a few useful bits of critical commentary. Pages are missing from Google Books so we will have to find an actual copy of the book.--Paleface Jack (talk) 17:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
2. Contemporary North American Film Directors: A Wallflower Critical Guide. Short and sweet. This concise biographical entry has some useful critical commentary mixed in.
3. The Avant-Garde Feature Film: A Critical History. This is much longer and more in-depth. I haven't finished reading it yet. Pages are missing from Google Books so we will have to find an actual copy of the book.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
4. The Pleasure and Pain of Cult Horror Films: An Historical Survey. I've use this source for other articles, and it's usually pretty good. I haven't read this yet. Pages are missing from Google Books so we will have to find an actual copy of the book.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
5. "SUNRISE, SUNSET" from Filmmaker. This interview is mostly about Shadow of the Vampire, but it's got some useful digressions into Begotten.
6. "Interview: Elias Merhige (Begotten)" from HorrorNews.Net. Pretty extensive interview about Begotten. Have a copy of the interview that I'm using.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
7. A Critical Cinema 3: Interviews with Independent Filmmakers. Some pages are missing from the preview, but this is fairly in-depth. Still reading it.

These are the most obvious hits I got, but I'm still looking. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:48, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Cool, I found some more coverage on the film, I am going to start working on expanding the production section soon.--Paleface Jack (talk) 21:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

I was able to get the book and photocopy the pages on Merhige's interview.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Here are some great links to information that I found on the film:

http://www.moviehabit.com/essay.php?story=merhige_04

Interview with the films director E. Elias Merhige (This covers alot of information including development of the film and other information on the films production- http://horrornews.net/13347/interview-elias-merhige-begotten/

Chicago Reader, provides minor information on the film including some dates- http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/begotten/Film?oid=1070839 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paleface Jack (talk • contribs) 18:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I get distracted easily. I still need to finish reading the stuff I listed, but I checked a few more sources, including Highbeam Research, JSTOR, etc. I didn't see anything really compelling. Do we have a source for the budget, or is that quoted from the IMDb? The IMDb is notoriously unreliable for budgets, so we should try to find a better source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:03, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

I am currently working on expanding the article again, however I need someone to work on expanding the release section since there is more information regarding both its theatrical and home media releases. Especially since the film has been released in multiple film festivals over the years including recently, and the background for both releases to theaters and home media. If anyone can work on this as well as adding information and citations from some of the google books references I would appreciate it.--Paleface Jack (talk) 20:28, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Merger proposal

In May 2017, it was proposed by User:Paleface Jack that Din of Celestial Birds be merged with Begotten (film). While at first glance I disagree with this merger proposal, I would like to hear Jack's reasoning before I officially move to support or oppose the merger. Other users are, of course, also welcome to discuss the proposal and announce their support or opposition accordingly. Please discuss! –Matthew - (talk) 20:02, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

I am currently working on expanding the article on this film's predecessor Begotten which includes a little bit of information on this film in its "Legacy" section. As per my whole routine when I expand article, I usually look at information on all related subjects such as sequels, reboots and the like before adding them to an article when appropriate. Looking at Din of Celestial Birds, most of its sources are only passing mentions of the film that really don't go into any great detail and usually these sources all mention the same thing that this film is an unofficial sequel to Begotten. The most detailed source that covers a great amount of information is also from one of the only external links found on the film which would be classified and tagged as primary sourcing. Although I would love to see this article being able to retail its own page, unfortunately the over-abundance of primary sources and lack of more detailed information apart from one of its solo external link make this highly unlikely that this should be given its own page hence why I requested a merger with Begotten. However, if more sources that give more than just a passing mention of the article are found and added then my opinion on this film not being merged with Begotten might change.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:06, 17 July 2017 (UTC)