Talk:Hot Fuzz/Archive 1

SOTD Reference

Just thought I would point out in the film that when Danny is looking at the DVDs in the rack (Just before Nick chases the guy in the supermarket) he throws down the DVD "Lethal Weapon" but you also see the Shaun of the dead film except it has a fat bargain label on Shauns face and SOTD is replaced with "Zombies Party"

Bill Nighy

Is anyone sure that Hot Fuzz will star Bill Nighy? AllStarZ 00:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I can't for the life of me remember the source, but I think there's a press release floating around with his name on it. HornetMike 10:40, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

He's in the trailer as the Police chief who reassigns Angel. Wiki-newbie 09:56, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

He is indeed in the film, as the Chief inspector. Fruitcake119 08:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Trailers

Should there be a description of what happens in the new trailers? e.g. mention the Shaun of the Dead refenences contained in them. George C 14:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't see what relevance they have. Unless Hot Fuzz's sole jokes are based on references to SOTD then it's just little bits of trivia. Trivia's for IMDb, not here. Cheers, HornetMike 23:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Bits of trivia shouldn't really be included if we can at all help it, as trivia isn't really important. (see Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles) If, after the movie is released there are more SOTD references, we could mention that fact but without listing the whole lot of them. -- jeffthejiff 12:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I understand that, but I do think that the fact that there are trailers available should be made more obvious, rather than just a link under the External Links section. George C 16:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Having just seen a preview screening of the film, there are definitely references to SotD throughout. There is even a brief close-up shot of the DVD of the film in a supermarket bargin bin. Nick Cooper 00:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

"Starring"

I've removed Steve Coogan, Bill Night & Martin Freeman from the infobox, as they're appearances are little more than cameos. Billie Whitelaw & Edward Woodward's parts are certainly more substantial. Nick Cooper 13:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Opening date

Whilst some cinemas may start showing Hot Fuzz on the 14th, to co-incide with Valentines or just as early previews (a lot of cinemas do this), the general release date is the 16th. Virtually all films open on a Friday in the UK, which is the 16th. And it's on all the posters. HornetMike 22:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It's been moved forward to 14th February. There are TV spots showing now that say Valentine's Day, and here are some articles that mention it: [1] [2] [3] and Working Title's own website: [4]. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Neilka (talk • contribs) 22:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

OK, I see. I've been reverting a load of IP editors who I presumed (wrongly it turns out) were vandalising for the above reasons. Co-incidentally, I saw a TV spot with Valentines yesterday and immeadiately thought of this. Apologies, HornetMike 19:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Simon Pegg on transatlantic irony

Here's the end of a great article by Simon Pegg, which could probably be assimilated into this article somewhere:

With the whole "Americans don't do irony" thing cleared up and consigned to the dustbin/garbage pail of passive/aggressive international preconception, we come to mine and Edgar Wright's latest filmic effort, Hot Fuzz. A film that we hope surfs the wave of subtle difference between our two countries, until it crashes red and frothy on to both shores. As if Tony Scott were to guest-helm an episode of Heartbeat, Hot Fuzz takes the most shamelessly histrionic excesses of American cinema and smashes them into that conservative and profoundly territorial enclave of Britishness, the country village, never once faltering in the assumption that everyone out there will understand. After all, we may all be different, but we're all capable of getting the same joke. In a world beset by prejudice and difference, how ironic is that?

The whole thing's available here, and here's a citeweb ref tag I put together: <ref name="guardianpegg">{{cite web|url=http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,2009748,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=1|title=What are you laughing at?|first=Simon|last=Pegg|publisher=[[Guardian Unlimited]]|accessdate=2007-02-10}}</ref>. Seegoon 19:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

It's a very interesting article but I'm personally just not really sure how it would fit into the article, mentions of Hot Fuzz aside. Still, if you can find a logical place to put it in, go to it! :-)--Joseph Q Publique 03:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

I see someone reverted my removal of the DVD trivia. Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles and WP:NOT state that we must avoid making articles indiscriminate collections of information. Trivia comes under this. Perhaps, knowing Pegg and Wright's style, we can put into a larger "culture references" section. But at the moment, on it's own, it's trivia. So I'm removing it again. HornetMike 21:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Technically that was me, although I hadn't seen your earlier removal, and just coincidentally put it in the same place. "Cultural references" is a good idea, but I'd clarified the subtlety of the DVD shot and tidied it up a bit. Nick Cooper 08:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks good, although I only skim read it because I haven't seen it yet! Hopefully once the rush updates finishes following the film's release I'll be able to tidy it into prose and find a couple of quotes from Pegg/Wright re: referencing stuff, there are a few around (if anyone spots any, stick 'em in!) HornetMike 15:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed: "*The security code typed in on the number pad for the evidence room in the police station is 999.", because its way to obvious, if you want to put it back at least add the fact that 999 is the Emergency Services number in Great Britain.
"*At one point you can see the camera man in the glasses of Angel's forensic's girlfriend.", non specific, if you want to put it back, find out when at least.
"and Nicholas Angel", Andel isnt a role, its a characterisation at best.
--Ferdia O'Brien (The Archiver And The Vandal Watchman) 01:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The forensics girlfriend only appears in one scene, so it's fairly obvious when it happens... mattbuck 02:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Last I checked, encyclopedias assume that the reader is interested in subject matter that they know little to nothing about, not something they have a detailed knowledge of, your average reader wont make the distinction of how many times a low grade character appears. Specifics Gentlemen --Ferdia O'Brien (The Archiver And The Vandal Watchman) 20:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Anyone have any opinions about the possibility of a new article titled Hot Fuzz (trivia)? It might be an idea.
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver And The Vandal Watchman 03:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The Trivia section says:

In the car chase scene, the car that they drive is English-made. It has the steering-wheel on the right-side of the car, but the speedometer was obviously a mistake, as it displays the mph on the outside of the speedometer and the kph on the inside, as is customary in the US. But in England, that is reversed, with the kph on the outside and the mph on the inside.

Er, no, it isn't. At least not on any car I've ever driven. The Police car used in the chases is a Vauxhall Astra, and my Vauxhall Corsa has the kph on the inside of the speedo. Will delete unless anyone can come up with some proof of this.
EDIT: Here's a picture of a UK Astra speedo: http://www.crazyleds.co.uk/catalog/images/ASTRA%20H.jpg. QED.
The Last Man in Europe 08:59, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Cultural references

Can anyone else who saw the film back me up on the fact that there was a Back to the Future reference (the bulletproof vest) and possibly a Lethal Weapon reference (although I'm not entirely sure about it, but it may have been the ending when Angel was cradling Butterman). Should these be included? George C 11:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Well without being mean, any cultural references not sourced by other articles are not really allowed by Wikipedia as it is original research.... JulianHensey 01:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

To be pedantic, literal and unequivocal references - such as the direct mention of Straw Dogs and the appearance of the SotD DVD cover - can be referenced to the film itself. Similarly, use of music is fairly "obvious." Nick Cooper 08:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The reference to 'chunky monkey' seemed to me to refer to the Ben & Jerry's ice cream flavour with same name, especially in context of the scene it wa mentioned. Not quite sure if it makes sense to allude to a film that David Threlfall played in.

Anyone want to copy this list of crap elsewhere (ie, IMDB) before I delete it again? -- jeffthejiff 02:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I've just deleted half of it. I'd like for that half to stay deleted. Some of the references didn't even know where they were referenced from ('it might be from Jurassic Park, but it could also be from Aliens', for example). --Steve Farrell 04:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

The obvious stuff should remain, but any new vague additions should be policed rigourously. Some editors seem on a mission to rid what they arbitrarily deem to be "trivia" from some film entries on Wikipedia, but the reality is that parody and cultural referencing is integral to the work of some filmmakers. If it's clear and unequivocal, it should be documented; if those involved with the production themselves acknowledge it, it should be as well. In any case, as soon as the over-zealous remove such information in its entirety, someone else will start it up again, anyway. Better to have what should be included covered to an acceptable standard, and then cope with the less precise additions as and when they turn up. Nick Cooper 08:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, the MoS says we shouldnt include arbitrary laundry lists of trivia. Trivia really belongs in the IMDB. If particular cultural references are notable or important to the film they should really be written as continuous paragraphs, saying why they're important. Otherwise it'll just grow to a list of stupid and pointless proportions. Wright/Pegg are known for their dropping of pop culture references, but even though that fact alone is prominent, it doesnt mean that every single one should be listed. Otherwise we'd end up with a 30-page list of Spaced trivia... -- jeffthejiff 09:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Clearly 'Hot Fuzz' is based on pop culture references - it's all about taking action movie clichés and putting them in an unusual context; ie a small village with normal, very English village coppers. That's how Pegg and Wright work - Spaced was absolutely full of references to movies; there was hardly a second in the scripts that wasn't a homage to something. But that doesn't mean you should list every example. I do have a problem regarding superfluous entries to lists on Wikipedia. There are too many overly long lists in articles that aren't titled 'List of' something. I do have an urge to trim them with extreme prejudice, but I've rarely done it. --Steve Farrell 12:49, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

So none of you deleters who police this section could be bothered to copy what you cut across to the IMDB? Thanks a bunch. 82.32.238.139 20:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Glad to see the chunky monky reference was deleted. Considering that later in the film we actually see a box of Ben & Jerry's ice cream of this type in the station, the reference to the David Threlfall film seemed like a stretch. Cdpilkington 10:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

To anyone considering contributing to this section, I would suggest reading WP:A first. In particular No Original Research. -- IslaySolomon | talk 03:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I've labeled what is original research with the appropriate tag. Even if it's obvious to viewers that certain lines were taken directly from another movie, or scenes for that matter, it's still original research to attribute it to referencing that film without a reliable source confirming the makers intention.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Angel talks about his uncle Derrek/Deryck. Could it be a reference to a German police series Derrick ? MK

No, it's a reference to Simon Pegg's uncle Derek 121.208.196.123 (talk) 12:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Cultural references - remixed

I've put this section into a general chronological order, with the thematic/overarching "references" first. This shows that some scenes are claimed to be multiple references, such as the car boot (not "trunk" - we are in the UK, remember!) scene and the final fight. Someone with more familiarity with the multiple references should see if they can decide which (if any) are the most appropriate. Nick Cooper 13:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

split page

The section about all of the references in pop culture needs to be split into a new article. Most of it needs to be deleted since it's made up of uncited assumptions. Some of the stuff presented is ridiculous, like a person is really trying hard to make a connection between this movie and another movie they like. Plus, the page has too much (uncited) trivia and needs to be worked into the main body somehow. (Ghostexorcist 08:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC))

Strongly disagree about splitting it into a new article. Once I've actually seen the film (one of the bad things about living in Aberystwyth!) and can read spoilers I'll get scanning and deleting. I doubt there'll be enough there for a seperate article. Cheers, HornetMike 10:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

References needed? Surely the film itself is reference enough? If things are tenuous then they should be removed. -- Tompsci 17:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, here are a couple of examples from the “Cultural references” section that need citations:

• The fictional town of Sandford is the name used by Centrex for their genuine police promotion exercises.

• The scene where Angel uses the trolley boy's radio after knocking him out references Die Hard .

• The flock of pigeons which flies behind and around Angel in the market square references director John Woo's trademark flocks of doves

These are just a few. The first one obviously needs a citation, you can’t just use another article as a reference. The next two, though they may be true, need citations. How do we really know him using the radio is a nod to Die Hard or the Pigeons a nod to John Woo? We don’t, so some sort of citations are needed, especially one that says doves are trademarks of John Woo. It’s not what you think you know, it’s what you can proove, right?

Just a few of the uncited Triva:

• Nicholas Angel's badge number is 777, the number often referred to as the "Mark of the Angel" and the opposite of 666.

• There is a scene where Danny and Angel discuss Lethal Weapon, Stuart Wilson who plays Dr. Robin Hatcher plays the villain, Jack Travis, in Lethal Weapon 3.

• In two scenes, Danny Butterman is seen wearing a Bristol Rovers shirt, as the area of South Gloucestershire is renowned by locals for being Rovers fans.

• The Music Supervisor in Hot Fuzz is named Nick Angel, it is believed this is where the name of Pegg's character came from. Nick Angel was also the Music Supervisor in Shaun of the Dead.

It needs to be proven 777 is “often referred to as the ‘Mark of the Angel’”. Even though Stuart Wilson played the villain, using an article from Wikipedia as a source is not permitted. An external source needs to be utilized here. I’ve never heard of the Bristol Rovers because I’m not from the UK, so it needs to be proven that “[S.G.] is renowned by locals for being Rovers fans”. WHO exactly believes Pegg’s character was named after the music supervisor? Though it may be true, a source actually stating that is where the name came from needs to be presented. I’ve already deleted a great many of the uncited dubious connections.

If the Cultural references section isn’t split, it at least needs to be cited and or cut down. Wikipedia looks down on articles that use “sprawling lists”. I would consider both the references and trivia sections sprawling lists. Please read the following wikiproject page: WikiProject Laundromat. I loved the film, so don't think I'm trying to trash the page. (Ghostexorcist 20:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC))

Oh yeah, I'd get rid of most of it. If you don't I'll purge all the unreferenced stuff once I can read spoilers... HornetMike 21:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, just as a suggestion, rather than splitting the page something similar to the Shaun of the Dead 'references' section could be done - turning the list into paragraph format with a handful of the more significant or obvious references discussed instead of the list as it currently is? If the section is in list format, there seems to be more temptation to keep adding things to it than if it's in paragraphs. The fact that Wright and Pegg fill their work with cultural references is a significant part of their style that's worth mentioning (I think, anyway), but we don't need to list every single thing that something thinks might possibly be a reference to something, after all. Just a thought.--Joseph Q Publique 13:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. That was my vague plan anyway, I think I stated it somewhere up there. HornetMike 15:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I'll take the split tag down. (Ghostexorcist 00:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC))

I'd strongly advise still splitting. Cultural reference sections are like flypaper on wikipedia and this is going to require constant babysitting to keep it to a sensible length. Chris Cunningham 14:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

With regards to South Gloucestershire being renowned by locals for being Rovers fans, this is mentioned in the Bristol Rovers wiki. However, Nick Frost (Danny Butterman) is actually a West Ham fan - this is mentioned on his wiki article.Nisa Tunesque (talk) 10:29, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Chant

Article currently says:

"When Nick discovers the neighborhood vigilantes meeting in the castle, they are chanting Ad hominem repeatedly..."

It did not sound like "Ad hominem" to me. Can anybody verify what it was? Gaius Cornelius 14:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

It's not, as it's the Tibetan "jewel of the lotus" mantra: "om mani padme hum." If it's a reference to anything, it's the Doctor Who story Planet of the Spiders, which also uses it in a sinister context. Nick Cooper 00:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I was pretty sure it was 'Bonum Comune Comunitatum', which was also written on the road signs around Sandford. 80.80.187.176 08:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Bonum Comune Comunitatum is the right one, at least to the subtitles here :-) --Soetermans 21:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I would agree with that, it definately sounds like 'Bonum Comune Comunitatum' Simon Acreman 21:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Wicker Man

Nobody seems to have picked up on The Wicker Man film - I am sure there are references to this old British camp horror film - including the casting of its lead as a minor character in Hot Fuzz. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.133.79.7 (talk • contribs) 11:05, 23 March 2007

Any connection seems very tenuous to me, not least because Edward Woodward is hardly known only for The Wicker Man. Nick Cooper 12:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Just for sake of argument, it doesn't seem that tenuous to me - thematically and plot-wise, there's a few similarities at least (the outsider cop arriving in a tight-knit rural community and uncovering murderous corruption orchestrated by the village elders, certainly). Also, I seem to recall Wright and Pegg acknowledging a few links to the Wicker Man at least (unfortunately, I don't have the sources on me, but will try and check them up). Certainly, if in the new version of the cultural references section we're identifying Hot Fuzz as having thematic connections with The Frighteners, which doesn't seem to have that much connection to Hot Fuzz upon reading a summary of it (granted, I haven't seen it, so I'm not certain), then surely there's valid reason to mention Wicker Man on these grounds at least?--Joseph Q Publique 05:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

You would call the original Wicker-Man camp? I take it that you have never seen it then... --82.9.195.14 22:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Clean-up

Right, I saw this on Monday - thanks to the person who spoiled a major part of it by sticking a massive spoiler in an edit summary - so I can get back to looking after this article. Just done a big bit of clean-up. The changes made:

• Various bits of grammar and correct form - Nick to Angel, Simon to Pegg etc.
• Changed from a lengthy table to two columned bullets of principals and then paragraphs listing other cast memeners - this uses space better, and it means we don't have a load of cameos listed alongside the principals with no way to discern between them. I realise perhaps that listing Billie Whitelaw ahead of some of the rest of NWA, or listing Adam Buxton alongside Robert Popper is a bit unfair on a few people, but I think this works a lot better.
• Got rid of the trivia, intergrating the best bits
• Turned the references section into a prose paragraph. I've tried to use the most likely references to build-up a decent over-view of how things are homaged in the film.

I think this makes the article considerably better, and stops it failing a number of Wikipedia's policies. HornetMike 18:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Plot warning

Do we really need the 'overly long plot' warning label? The summary could possibly be trimmed here and there a bit, granted, but it seems a decent enough length to me, and not nearly as long or detailed as a lot of other film articles out there.--Joseph Q Publique 07:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, its really not all that long, at least not nearly as long as most plot summaries on Wikipedia. --Fearfulsymmetry 03:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I think also that if people really dont want to find out what a movie is about till they see it... then they would stay away from looking it up on Wikipedia, let alone reading something that says "Plot". A plot warning in wikipedia just seems pointless. MattyC3350 (talk) 06:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Aaron A. Aaronson

I was wondering if the name of the little kid in the end, called Aaron A. Aaronson is reference to the Simpsons. In episodes Sideshow Bob Roberts and again in And Maggie Makes Three the name is mentioned. It could, of course, be coincidence. --Soetermans 23:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm assuming its just the fact that the name is a joke in a number of things as the first name in the phonebook/random lists/etc. -Fearfulsymmetry 03:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Said joke is made by the Andies earlier in the film. Pegg and Wright's DVD commentary notes that The Simpsons has already done "every" joke, so the chances of repetition are unavoidable (here in reference to the "Judge Judy" joke) - 90.241.147.75 19:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Simpsons doing every single joke? Reminds me of that South Park episode. Shougunner (talk) 20:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Critical acclaim compared to SOTD

"Critically, the movie received generally positive reviews from critics, although slightly less than the critically-acclaimed Shaun of the Dead.[12"

I don't see the need for this. SOTD has a score of 76 on Metacritic, while HF has 80. There's a one percent difference in the Rotten Tomatoes score. I think something that says "...much like the earlier Shaun of the Dead".

Kazmarov 04:16, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Soundtrack

The soundtack listed is the US/Canada version. Not the UK version. The UK version was released by Island Records (part of Universal) and contains 22 tracks. I will try and fix this. Kensuke Aida 02:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Budget

Does anyone know the budget for this film? Or know anywhere to find out? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Andrew Hawryluk (talk • contribs) 03:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC).

Reception

I've removed the Rotten Tomatoes user rating, as you shouldn't include it (per WikiProject Film's MOS for reception). If that IMDb rating is that star rating that it refers to directly, then it will have to go. The reasoning behind this is that online polls are extremely unreliable, and biased. The people that vote on them are the same ones that vote on every other film. There is not randomization to it, and the sample size is no where near high enough to be able to actually attribute any kind of real statistic.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

AV Club Interview

Interview with Pegg, Frost, and Wright might be a good source.

http://www.avclub.com/content/interview/nick_frost_simon_pegg_and

Also, they mention this wikipedia article. - Logotu 15:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Jackie Chan reference?

Sorry, this is going to be very obscure on my part, but I could swear they reference a Jackie Chan movie when Angel picks up a waste basket with his foot and throws it at one of the NWA. In support, when the two are looking at action movies in the supermarket, apart from Bad Boys II, they also look at a Jackie Chan movie. Anyone care to remember the information for me? heh.--Charibdis 22:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The Jackie Chan movie in the supermarket was "Supercop," but I don't remember if that's the movie with the relevant scene or if they just picked it because of the title. Strephon 16:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Munsters Reference? Both Shaun of The Dead

Hello. I just watched Shaun of The Dead, and I remember that in the first scene, the game that Nick Frost is playing plays the theme song for the Munsters. In the shootout in the restaurant(Hot Fuzz), you can also here the Munsters theme, if I'm not mistaken. Am I the only one who noticed?

Nishad 00:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Style of Article

I hate to sound pickey, but the language/structure/style of this article seems kind of unprofessional (no ofense to who ever wrote it, but there are a few "X is seen. It's So and so and he's..."). I think a shorter summary/rewrite may be advisable, but it's just a suggestion.--Romulus 03:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree; I've replaced the plot summary with a shorter one from a previous edit that (I think, anyway) sums up the important details of the plot without going into unnecessarily detailed "Angel did this, and then a bunch of shots are seen..."-type exposition. I also removed the spoiler notes, since current Wikipedia guidelines state that a section marked 'plot' doesn't need them.

Also - is there by any chance anything we can do to get rid of that massive gap between the heading 'plot' and the actual plot summary? It just makes the article look really empty.--Joseph Q Publique 14:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Good job on the plot summary! I have no idea how to get rid of the space, though.--Romulus 03:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't the plot section be bracketed by 'spoiler alert' tags? I'd put them in myself but I can't seem to find the proper code for them. Kob zilla 02:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Generally speaking, spoiler tags aren't used in areas where spoilers are obvious (such as a section labeled "Plot"). EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Point Break and Bad Boys II

Do we really need to specify that the boys watch Point Break and Bad Boys II? I think that the phrase "action films" covers it nicely. -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 08:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Without mention of the full-circle gag of Nick Frost firing his gun into the air after refusing to take down his dad, it doesn't merit mention. Alientraveller (talk) 12:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I also agree that "action films" is enough in the plot summary. The films are mentioned in the homage section. This constant uneccessary expansion of the plot really has to stop!

Yeah I agree, I mean lets face it people coming to this article are trying to find out its details but I shouldnt think they really care about what movies the character see's in a very brief seen. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 13:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I think its turrning into a bit of an "My Article" discussion here. Personally I dont see any difference in either placing "Action films" or the names of "2" films they were watching. It would be a different story if someone decided to list all the movies that were shown in his house. MattyC3350 (talk) 06:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Normally, I'd say saying "action films" is enough, and I'll admit to not having seen Hot Fuzz in about 4-5 months, but I seem to recall multiple ongoing verbal and visual references to Point Break and Bad Boys II: in the pub during the initial lunch with Pegg and the department; one of the ice cream lunches; when Pegg finally gets sloshed at the bar; the actual scene when they watch Point Break and Boy Boys II during Hot Fuzz; during the tearful conversation in the road when Pegg appears to leave; the video counter at the gas station; and the various homages to Point Break and Bad Boys II during the endless action scene that makes up the last 10-15 minutes of Hot Fuzz. There may even be more that I'm forgetting. I'd say that it's fine to mention to both films. rootology (T) 12:40, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Action/comedy

I don't think "2007 action/comedy film" is good enough. I think it should be called here an action parody, as it is referred to as such everywhere else. 81.145.242.136 15:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Everywhere else, as in...? Sources? A good chunk of the comedy does not come from parodying action films. Geoff B 15:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Plenty of magazines and critics have called it so, and some of the comedy does come from parodying action films. 81.145.242.136 16:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I can't see this film getting classed as Parody as well. Fair enough there are a few cases in the film that either resemble scenes from other films of made to look like it. But as a whole I would class the film as Action/Comedy before placing Parody in it. MattyC3350 (talk) 06:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't class it as a parody - what you're suggesting is tight pigeon-holing; genres are pigeon-holing enough without the need to go further in my opinion. I'm not sure where you get this "everywhere else". IMDb lists it as Action Comedy, RT lists it as "Action/Adventure" and AllMovie lists it as "Action Comedy" Halfabeet (talk) 01:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

A Self-Reference

There is something not mentioned on the article which I feel should be, I just don't know how to implement it.
Earlier on in the film, Frost asks Pegg the following:

• Have you ever fired two guns while jumping through the air?
• Have you ever fired one gun while jumping through the air?
• Have you ever fired a gun whilst being involved in a high speed car chase?

Later on in the film, Pegg gets a chance to do all of these things, while Frost gets to also 'Be involved in a high speed car chase'.

Could anyone implement this or is it not worthy of inclusion? Cheers. Tr33zon 05:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, that would just fall under the heading of "gags in the movie"; we don't need to highlight every joke in the movie, as it isn't encyclopedic (and would ruin the jokes). EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but to be honest, I only just realised it this morning and I watched the movie last night. As the gap between these events is so large, it's not your normal gag. Tr33zon 16:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Not to be too pert, but a gap in one person's thinking doesn't necessarily mean it's an unusual gag.

Well, there are a couple more, including 'have you ever shot a gun into the air and and gone "aaargh!"?' (reference to bad boys II? also, the clip is shown breifly to complete the link) which comes 'round again when Danny decides against firing at his father. But no, i don't think the jokes should be anywhere but the film.

Either people will spot it or people wont. I agree with the comment that we dont need to highlight every joke in a film. My sugestion is to pay more attention when watching movies. MattyC3350 (talk) 06:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The gags listed above could be seen as noteworthy since they run on from Shaun Of The Dead - when Ed is consoling Shaun in the pub and lists what they will do, the items become metaphors for what later happens; so the action-cliché gags noted above could be mentioned in that context. Halfabeet (talk) 00:58, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Other pop culture references

To me this was obvious and I'm surprised it's not mentioned. When the black robed murder is on top of the church, it appears to be a fairly direct reference to the Weathertop scene of LoTR: Fellowship. The music distinctly changes to Howard Shore's 'Nazgul' theme. That one was pretty clear, especially since Peter Jackson had an uncredited cameo. Some others that may or may not be:

• Very end of Romeo and Juliet: Camelot scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail
• Pub scene in the market shootout: Classic Robert Rodriguez, especially Desperado

I'm drawing a blank now but those are the ones that come to mind initially. Jlbrightbill 07:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I actually was just thinking that the Lovefool bit could be in reference to the 1996 movie William Shakespeare's Romeo + Juliet since that was what made the song a hit.Thinkbui (talk) 00:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Dispute over wording of plot

Myself (and 86.165.81.180) are in dispute with Geoff B about the wording of the plot. I think my edits make the story clearer. Not the most important issue in the sceme of things but see which version you like better: --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

GeoffB's, apart from the description of Dalton's character, who I wouldn't describe as "smarmy". Been watching this from afar, I would advise in future disputes like this come to the talk page a lot sooner. Regards, HornetMike (talk) 18:35, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

catching a stray swan - the swan is 'escaped', this is the actual word used in the film. shown to the audience but unseen by the villagers - redundant. smarmy - not as I understand it, meaning servile or obsequious. for the murders, the victims of which have all been involved in a lucrative property deal. - previous version (it's not 'my' version, many editors have worked on it) is clearer. smoothly - redundant adverb, his character has been discussed previously.

Additionally, 86.165.81.180 is also 86.170.16.43, who just reverts and doesn't take part in discussions, the latter IP was blocked for breaking 3RR on The Thing (film), so I'd expect the same here. Geoff B (talk) 20:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks like I'm out voted. --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Before I go I'll defend

• use of the word "smarmy". which is defined on the first google definition hit I got as "unpleasantly and excessively suave or ingratiating," which matches Dalton I think, and
• describing the swan as escaped "from a farm" (judged "redundant" by Geoff B in an earlier revert if I remember correctly) helps explain where a swan could be escaped from for those who haven't seen the movie and live in parts of the world where swans are almost always found wild and not kept on farms. --BoogaLouie (talk) 14:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough on smarmy, it saves a word or two as well. Geoff B (talk) 14:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

"Life on Mars"?

The film seems to share many themes and character types with the "good cop trapped in a world he didn't make" BBC television series Life on Mars. Are there any legitimate sources that would confirm the influence of Life on Mars on this film? MisterJayEm (talk) 14:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Seems dubious. This film came out before that series ended. Given how long films take to film, produce and distribute, the connection seems tenuous at best. On the other hand, there's always a probability that you could find a reliable source about it (I'm just guessing that it's an extremely low probability). DP76764 (Talk) 15:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if someone could identify a common source of the shared look of the protagonists' smirking, mustachioed coworkers/antagonists. MisterJayEm (talk) 15:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Sandford merger

Apparantly, there is an article on Sandford, the fictional town in this film. It is a small article that certainly does not need its own article. Maybe if the town was important outside of the film or something like that, I might reconsider, but it's not. The article is comprised of a combination of trivia and information that is already on this, the main article. This is mostly a formality, putting this here, but I'm proposing a merger of that article to this one; either that, or it could just be deleted. Thoughts? -Platypus Man | Talk 05:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Merging it into the "Hot Fuzz" article would be good. Having its own page is over the top I do agree. MattyC3350 (talk) 06:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Would someone consider making a description of 'Sandford' that it is indeed the name of the fictional town used in the training of British police officers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.91.5.72 (talk) 05:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

If you could find enough references to determine its notability, the article may be able to be recreated. It isn't really relevant for inclusion in this article, but again, with enough information it may warrant its own article. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 05:11, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

As an ex police officer I can confirm that Sandford is indeed the fictional town used in police officer training and part 2 of the OSPRE promotion exam in england and Wales for promotion to Sergeant and Inspector 82.34.53.193 (talk) 14:35, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The above is true, Sandford is the fictional town used in UK Police recruitment tests. I'm afraid I haven't got a source for this but I'm sure someone reading this will be dedicated enough as to try and find one.... Coolug (talk) 23:03, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Ah bugger it, I googled it and found a nice reputable source noting the 'village' of Sandford at a police training centre somewhere in northern england - http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/northwest/series2/police_village_chesire_training_crime_sandford_officers.shtml Coolug (talk) 23:06, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Cast

The cast list is a nearly full one, so there is no need for the additional information which repeats much of the same. Dyingswansong 20:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

GAC nomination

For the last two days I have added multiple sources and several new sections of information. I nominated the article at GAC, so please look the article over and see if there are any problems before another editor reviews the article which could be over the next few days or weeks. Good work to everybody that contributed to the article and added sources. --Nehrams2020 06:57, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Kill Bill reference

at the part of the movie when Danny opens the trunk door to get Nicholas out, the camera angle and lighting is setup like in Kill Bill when The Bride gets Sophie out of the trunk. I made an image to show Image Here

Just to clarify, it's not just Kill Bill. Thats Quentin Tarantino's signature "trunk shot". This can also be seen in Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. Give it a mention, then. 81.145.241.51 19:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I know its His signature "trunk shot" but I only mentioned Kill Bill because of the lighting, same shade of red.Magikmm 18:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I removed the addition about the information of the possible allusion to Kill Bill or any Quentin Tarantino trunk shot. The information needs to be sourced, as it may otherwise be seen as speculation or original research. I also think they look similar, but without an actor or director or somebody else directly saying it, I don't think we can use it. Good job with creating the image though. --Nehrams2020 23:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok I got it, its cool. and thanks for the image comment :D -Magikmm 00:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:LE tag removal

Ir emoved the WP:LE tag becasue "fictional police" do not fall with in the scope of the project. PLease discuss here before replacing the tag if yo disagree.EMT1871 06:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Question?

How is this movie Preceded by Shaun of the Dead? —— Ryan ^(t)•(c) 09:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

It's part of the Blood and Ice Cream trilogy. Apparently. Geoff B (talk) 09:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The less important things

I was thinking that maybe Someone could add the less important details on the plot. Examples: The Trip to the Andes scene, The boy commiting public urination, ETC. Like all of the funny things. -Kyle

The plot section is only there to give a brief synopsis of the film, not detail everything. It's actually too long as it is, I think. Geoff B (talk) 04:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok I was just wondering. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.90.174.173 (talk) 00:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Hot fuss?

What is that at the top of the page? "Not to be confused with Hot Fuss"? What is that about.

-Kyle

Hot Fuss is an album by The Killers, the little note at the top is to alert page crawlers not to mistake this article for the album article. —— Ryan ^(t)•(c) 15:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism or the real ending?

I have not seen the movie, but I did notice this edit, and it seems rather nonsensical to me. Could someone who has seen the film confirm or revert it? Diff of the edit Thanks! Willscrlt (Talk) 14:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I have seen it, believe me its vandalism. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 16:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea it's vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylesenior (talk • contribs) 10:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Date conventions

Last night, I changed the dates to a British format- this being a British film. For some reason, it has all been converted back but with no explanation. If you're going to revert it, please explain why. 80.7.186.169 (talk) 16:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Dates are automatically formatted when they're wikilinked; what you did broke the formatting (I'm assuming that's why you were reverted; Nehrams2020 didn't specify in his edit). if you register an account, you can change how they are displayed for you (14 February versus February 14). EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:46, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

But I made it, for example, [August 21|21st August] so that it linked to 'August 21' in wikipedia, but displayed 21st August. I do actually have an account; it's just too much effort to bother logging in.... laziness to the extreme 80.7.186.169 (talk) 23:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

It was reverted to remain with the current formatting of the article. Like EVula mentioned above, the account will modify it to be set up as the viewer wants. Use of the 21st isn't really that necessary, so it should be fine as is. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of August 8, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Good, just a few things

*"The three have worked together previously: - But you listed four people; this needs to be clarified

It is only three people, even though Simon Pegg is listed twice; however, it was changed to "they".

• "Soon after Angel's arrival, however, a series of grisly deaths rock the village, all committed by an individual in a black hood and cloak. Increasingly convinced that Sandford is not what it seems and that the victims of the 'accidents' were murdered," - There is logical conflict here: first, "a series of grisly deaths" is mentioned - fine. Then it says they were "committed", which means there is murder (not just death). Then the paragraphs says "victims of the 'accidents'". This has to be resolved. It would be better to refer to them as accidents and then move the hooded info, or let us know that the audience knows about the hooded guy, and the town doesn't - something. But its current wording is in conflict.

Done. As a side note, should we refer to the accidents as collisions, as per Nicholas Angel?

I haven't seen the movie, so I cannot say for sure, but I would imagine collision would be preferable, so that the reader can most accurately match the thought process of the character.

It was just a joke from the film, I guess I assumed you had seen the movie. It should be fine as it is.

• ""two films he and Danny - "two films that he and Danny"

Done.

• the date in the soundtrack infobox needs to be wikilinked fully

Done

• The reception and box office section should be merged and be called simply reception. See WP:FILM

Done; I had split it yesterday, forgot about the guideline.

Guideline look to me like it should be split for clarity and structure. -- Horkana (talk) 01:29, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

• "contains 22 tracks, and the US/Canada release has 14." - spell out twenty-two and fourteen
• "Film dialogue extracts featuring Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are included," - passive-voice use obscures the meaning. Rephrase it to say "The soundtrack includes film dialogue extracts featuring Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, "

Done. — WiseKwai 14:54, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

2. Factually accurate?: Well-referenced. However, the author names and print dates have been omitted from the inlince citations - that should be fixed.

Will be working on this right now, shouldn't take too long. --Nehrams2020 22:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. --Nehrams2020 23:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

3. Broad in coverage?: Good.

*Why is the movie called "Hot Fuzz"?

I read about it in one of the sources but didn't know where to include it. I'll find the info and maybe include it in the plot or production section.

I added information about it in the first section of the production heading. --Nehrams2020 23:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

That looks good. I am guessing (from the article) that "fuzz" must be UK slang for the police.--Esprit15d 12:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

• The promotion section could definitely be expanded, but since this is just a GA nom, I'll pass it.

4. Neutral point of view?: good

5. Article stability? good

6. Images?: Great job here.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. — Esprit15d 19:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Everything has been adressed so im going to pass this, good work on the article --Childzy ^{(Talk|Images)} 11:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Soundtrack section

Found here: Hot_Fuzz#Soundtrack, does it need to be so big? Seeing as how there is an article on the soundtrack, I personally think a tracklist (and the picture of the CD) isn't needed here. What does everyone else think about this? RobJ1981 09:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

If we're going to have a separate article, it seems a bit excessive to duplicate it here, but the soundtrack article doesn't seem to have much more info than what is already in the Hot Fuzz aricle... Geoff B 09:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

The soundtrack section doesn't need to contain the track listing, which is duplicated on the soundtrack stub (which can always be expanded). Instead, the soundtrack section on this article could be a one-paragraph prose summary of some of the musical genres, songs, and artists featured. I am happy to contribute to this if it doesn't step on anyone's toes. — WiseKwai 10:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I only added the track listing as the current soundtrack section at the time was just a few sentences. I don't think it takes up too much room, but if you think it should be removed, go for it. Many soundtrack articles I have seen are all stubs and are rarely expanded, and I usually don't think their necessary. But again, I was just adding information to help expand the article, and if you want to develop the prose more that would be great. --Nehrams2020 23:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I think in the case of this film, having a separate article listing the soundtrack songs makes sense, since there have been two releases (bit of a rip-off for US/Canada fans ;) ), and listing them both here might make the article a bit too listy for some people's tastes. — WiseKwai 06:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

If we did want to list the soundtrack here, we could just list the 22 tracks and asterisk the ones not included in the US version, adding a note at the bottom. Just an idea. Geoff B 12:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Shortened it to just 2 paragraphs, the third was interesting but non-essential and almost verbatim to what was included in the Soundtrack article. -- Horkana (talk) 01:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Spacing

Since this have been reverted several times, it's best for the edit summary discussion to be moved here as I'd rather focus on the improvement of the article rather than the back-and-forth spacing. Based on this change there seems to be no effect on the layout of the article (as a side note, it removes more characters to help with loading, but it's obviously minimal). I visited several sites, and saw both uses of <br /> and <br/>. It appears both methods are based on preference/ease of use/tradition, and is the equivalent of using "File:"/"Image:" before an image path or American/British English. I don't really see why it is necessary to change it, but if it is impacting how the article looks to readers or prevents editors from being unable to edit a section, then it should be changed. If that's the case, then it should be pointed out in the guidelines the rationale for why one method is used over the other. Otherwise, it seems we're focusing on something so minuscule, when we can instead be further improving the article to focus on the prose and/or expanding it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Using spacing gives greater clarity and readability. Using spacing in source code or wiki source makes it easier to use the Control key (Ctrl) and arrow keys to jump through sentences without having to waste the time of switch context off the keyboard to use the mouse. The Template:Infobox film uses the same spacing <br /> and if someone wants to do differently they need to justify the difference, the formatting I use has precedence. There are also dull historical programming reason to format <br /> pedantically in XML but HTML has less strict rules so not many people have the habit of doing it the more correct way. -- Horkana (talk) 13:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a readability difference when viewing the article in either version. For browsers, we now have the convenience of the Find function, which renders the use of the control key unnecessary (well, except to do Ctrl+F). I couldn't see somebody using the control and arrow keys from the beginning of the article to find something half way down the article, for example. In addition, I'd think the majority of editors don't use the control and arrows (or are aware of it) for searching, especially if they needed to change something that is in the first frame of the edit window. If there was an issue with this, I would figure that there would be complaints on the talk page detailing any issues that arose. Wikipedia provides a variety of options for different coding (such as how <b></b> and '''''' are both allowable for bolding text). The use on the infobox film page provides an option on the spacing, if it was deemed important that only one method could be used, there would be documentation stating why one method cannot be used over the other. It is based on an example provided, some other infoboxes don't include this detailed documentation (fortunately we do to help editors in preparing the infobox for articles). For example, Template:Infobox Television film makes use of the method I use, (I checked the edit history to see if I was the one who added that documentation, but was surprised to see somebody else had). I'm still not seeing how it is anything more than preference. Since we have these less strict rules, I'm sure there is no lasting harmful effect on the article using either method. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm talking about readability of the source for editors. The indentation and pretty printing is not some weird browser behaviour thing intended for formatting of the page as the reader sees it. I can and do use use Ctrl+F for searching but on a simpler level indentation and spacing in the wiki source does make it easier to move around too and makes it just a little bit easier to spot and correct mistakes.

You give the example of (<b></b> and '''''' are both allowable for bolding text) but I'm fairly sure that is intended as a convenience to beginners and in most cases the use of html would be quickly "improved" to use strictly follow wiki code. Similarly I'm formatting what is acceptable using the most strictly correct XHTML formatting. I don't expect you to change your way of doing work you add I'm just asking that you do not revert what is strictly speaking a more correct way of formatting it.

That's the important thing but I'll risk boring you with the technical details. The strict formatting can be helpful since sometime really dumb software will choke trying to figure out too many poorly formatted tags, even worse programs try look at the blob in between the angle brackets and fail to see "br" and "br/" are in fact the same but that's old programming history and largely incidental. I fully expect phones and mobile devices to have lots of very bad software written for them that attempt to do interesting things with wikipedia, stricter formatting that is easier for machines to read is generally a good idea. Getting more machines and automated tools to do the cleanup is an even better idea. Hope that makes it slightly clearer and not just more verbose. -- Horkana (talk) 02:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011

Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the {{Allmusic}} template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links:

• http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Abi6cmqp39f6o

--CactusBot (talk) 09:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Aliens reference?

I'm wondering if I'm stretching it a little, but the last scene where the swan attacks Danny's father from the back seat of the car reminds me a lot of the scene in Aliens where an alien attacks Ferro, the drop ship pilot. 217.155.104.92 14:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that might be a bit of a stretch. Hopefully we can get a better list of references once the DVD comes out; I'd assume that they'd mention some of the references in either the commentary or special features. EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:57, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually it is a reference to aliens but it also references Kingdom of the spiders.203.53.167.180 05:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was supposed to be a reference to the Dilophosaurus attack on Nedry in Jurassic Park.--68.6.182.39 (talk) 23:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

NWA

... Neighbourhood Watch Alliance (NWA, a play on the name of the westcoast hip-hop group N.W.A) ...

I'd like to see some hint of evidence that such an allusion was intended; does it point up some parallel that I missed? The TLA seems to be in use in the real England. Sometimes a namespace collision is only a namespace collision. —Tamfang (talk) 21:39, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

He doesn't work for the Metropolitan Police Service

As a point of order, although Peel House at Hendon was used in the backdrop there has only ever been one licensed use of the Metropolitan Police name and that was in The Bill. Although he's suppposed to be a cop in a London police force the MPS has defended the use of it's name and brand in unauthorised fashion hence why it's specifically avoided being named in the film (presumably as part of the agreement to assist with filming). It would be correct to say "London Police Service" even if that is synonymous with the Met. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.228.82.172 (talk) 08:59, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

From Nicholas Angel's opening monologue: "graduated with distinction into the Metropolitan Police Service".BananaBork (talk) 12:30, 7 September 2015 (UTC)