Talk:The Seventh Seal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article has been identified as a core article. Large improvements may make editors eligible for awards.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chess. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	Chess Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-Importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Old talk 2 Split Synopsis and Criticism? 3 Crusade 4 Kite 5 Pictures 6 Rescreening 7 WikiProject class rating

[edit] Old talk

It's a little ridiculous that the longest section in this article is on parodies of the film... (anon)

Quite. I've been bold and cut it back to what seem to be the three most notable parodies. The chess game with Death is such an iconic and common-referenced scene that it seems meaningless to catalogue every single parody reference to it; all the ones I've cut were just single scenes in cartoons or comedy shows. --McGeddon 14:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair point on that! I think that even kids' shows have parodied it is perhaps a bit of a testament to its influence, but it's hard to draw the line as to how far one should go with these things. - Vianello (talk) 20:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The following text was deleted from this page, it had a leading space and therefore went all on one line. It might be useful to someone who wishes to write a decent article on this film.

Wild strawberries and cream make a delightfull luncheon for our heros as they meet on a summers day,be6tween chess matches on the journey that intersects the knight and his squire with the montblank troubadors who perform the (danse macabre).

Mintguy

I find it quite ironic that the English Wikipedia's article about The Seventh Seal is longer than the Swedish Wikipedia's.

Isn't Pablo Picasso in this movie, in the last part for like 2 seconds? i think he is, maybe it's another movie i'm thinking of. Amirman 05:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Split Synopsis and Criticism?

Do we want the criticism woven right in with the synopsis? I find it annoying - the criticism seems better suited to be moved to a later separate section. I think having it woven in actually makes it more difficult to understand precisely what happens in the film for someone like myself, just looking to refresh my memory of the film's major plot points.

Jordanp (talk) 03:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Crusade

Is it ever mentioned that Block was on one of the Crusades to the Holy Land? Being Swedish, could he not have been on one of the later, Baltic crusades? Mon Vier 13:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, Swedish Wikipedia also mentions the Holy Land. The route of Block's crusade was most probably NOT meant to have been in Estonia or Latvia.E.J. 14:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Is the Historical accuracy section applicable for this film? The Crusader plays chess this the deeth! This is not a documentary. Alternatively we shuld add some lines about accarcy of this chess game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.224.9.75 (talk) 10:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I find the entire "Historical Accuracy" section to be quite comical and inappropriate. This is not a historical piece, it is philosophical one. We studied this in film history course I took, and the historicity of the depiction is in no way relevant to the purpose of the piece. I don't know if there are any criteria for deletion that would be applicable, but I would advise it personally. Or perhaps editing the section and titling it "Anachronisms," which is perhaps more relevant in terms of film criticism or film history. Yamahasixstring (talk) 08:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad I'm not the only person who found the statement "The medieval Sweden portrayed in this movie is not totally accurate" unintentionally hilarious. I have no doubt that those who watch the film hoping to learn more about daily life in Sweden in the Middle Ages will be disappointed . . . not to mention very, very confused :-) Mardiste (talk) 13:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kite

An editor has changed "a hovering vulture is quite obviously a kite" to "a hovering bird is quite obviously suspended by wires" - there hasn't been any misunderstanding as to what "kite" means in this sentence, has there? I don't remember the scene, but the original sentence may be claiming that footage of a kite is reacted to by characters as if it were a vulture, rather than that wires are visible. --McGeddon 08:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

It is in fact a sea eagle, and it's not at all obvious to me that it's suspended by wires, probably because it isn't. The fact of its being there is simply commented on by Peter Cowie on the commentary on the Criterion disc, and had it been set up in that way I can't imagine that he wouldn't have mentioned it. I don't wish to seem rude, but has the person who made the original edit ever actually seen a hovering bird? --Stephen Burnett 09:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I did look around for sources to check whether it was documented as being a bird-of-prey kite rather than a vulture, and couldn't find anything - it should be removed as original research, if there's no source for it. --McGeddon 09:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed - I have done so. --Stephen Burnett 13:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

i had changed it to 'suspended by wires'. i've reviewed the film, and while wires are not visible, it still does not appear animate - there's no motion of the feathers, even as it sways about, which suggests it is a model, not a real bird. the suggestion by mr. cowie that it is a 'sea eagle' is no more or less fanciful than the suggestion that it is a vulture or a kite, absent a specific statement from bergman himself. the species of bird cannot be determined, nor is it relevant in any way that i can ascertain. i scanned through the movie at high speed, as i'd thought there was another scene with a hovering bird where the wires were visible, but could find none. in any event, this falls within the realm of trivia, and is hardly of any import to an encyclopedic entry, so it is indeed for the best that it simply be removed. Anastrophe 17:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

I really think It would be necassery to include some pictures of the film, like when Death first meets Antonius on the beach, or when thet are playing chess, since those image are very iconic and people reading the article will have a better understanding of the film's influence.

~~M.Komar~~

I believe the picture shown is misidentified as death, but is actually the monk leading the burning of the girl. Death had a robe hood which fit tightly around his head, rather than the loose-fitting hood shown on the monk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.154.140.246 (talk) 04:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

No, it is Death - he talks to Block in that scene. He's already appeared disguised as a monk earlier, in the church confession scene, when he tricks Block into revealing his plans to defeat him in the chess game. --Stephen Burnett 10:46, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rescreening

This film is being re released at the moment, should this be mentioned?

perfectblue 16:02, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Where and when? If it's just one screening somewhere, then no. But if its a nationwide rerelease then perhaps. Cop 663 19:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 08:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)