This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I removed the words "Christian-themed" from the description in the lede. Just because the movie features Christians and Satanists doesn't make it a Christian themed movie, just like most Kung-Fu flicks aren't Buddhist-themed just because they feature Shaolin monks. The Exorcist films actually do attempt to address some theological stuff, and they aren't considered "Christian themed." This is basically Blood, the movie. I do plan on seeing the movie when it comes out (loved the game, been reading the comic), but come on. Ian.thomson ( talk) 19:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
The show *IS* "Christian-themed", in the sense that a huge part of the show is about the absolute power and corruption of the Catholic Church in the movie world. It's not a religious movie by any means though. It just uses the Catholic Church as a very strong background and writer's tool. Jasonred79 ( talk) 23:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
There is very likely going to be visual effects coverage of the film. A list of possible resources can be found here. If you find anything that can be used, please implement it in the article or list it here. Erik ( talk | contribs) 18:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure the capitalization of priest, in the article, is always correct. The lead character is called Priest (uppercase), but he is also a priest (lowercase). In the text he is commonly referred to as 'the Priest' and I think this is incorrect - it should be just 'Priest' or 'the priest'. Thoughts anyone? Obscurasky ( talk) 19:51, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
The article does need a bit of cleanup in regards to the capitalization. Maybe do away with using "Priest" in any context but the character's name (and potentially the other three characters that are also priests), and use "(member of a/the) priesthood" instead? Given that it's the character's only given name, title, profession, and general way of life, without having seen the entire film I'm probably not the person to make the distinction between the two, but it's just a thought. Shotgunmaniac ( talk) 03:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
It was too short! I was adding in important plot details. 24.187.168.103 ( talk) 00:40, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
This movie was very well done. I'm also saying this from a christian perspective. There are a lot of secular movies that are pretty immoral sexually or content or what not...but this movie was able to hold the values and intergrity and simulatneously cast forth greatness. This has become an instant favorite of mine. Because there are stories in the ancient scriptures of men, like Samson, that we're truly blessed and touched by God...and were able to single handedly destroy armies. In these current times, we humans are being suppressed, but someday, through prayer fasting and sacrifice we can obtain the ancient holiness and power that our dear Father wants to give us. So even though this movie was a Hollywood creation, it is relative to a reality of the true Priests of True Light. § AndreOnate ( talk) 23:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Don't know if and where to add it to the article, but one thing that really struck me is the careless continuity on the priests' cross-shaped face tattoos. It's everything from freshly-done to rather faded and back of the neck of the nose to below the nosetip, on the same characters. Even with 'the' priest it changes from shot to shot. 84.63.56.223 ( talk) 21:26, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm currently seeing the title of this article as " (2011 film)" instead of including the word 'Priest'. Why is that. 82.4.129.255 ( talk) 08:29, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Was there ever any talk, mention, or hint of a sequel?
If so, that needs to be part of the article.
Given how the movie ended, a sequel seems natural.
Just curious. 2600:8800:784:8F00:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D ( talk) 08:35, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I removed the words "Christian-themed" from the description in the lede. Just because the movie features Christians and Satanists doesn't make it a Christian themed movie, just like most Kung-Fu flicks aren't Buddhist-themed just because they feature Shaolin monks. The Exorcist films actually do attempt to address some theological stuff, and they aren't considered "Christian themed." This is basically Blood, the movie. I do plan on seeing the movie when it comes out (loved the game, been reading the comic), but come on. Ian.thomson ( talk) 19:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
The show *IS* "Christian-themed", in the sense that a huge part of the show is about the absolute power and corruption of the Catholic Church in the movie world. It's not a religious movie by any means though. It just uses the Catholic Church as a very strong background and writer's tool. Jasonred79 ( talk) 23:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
There is very likely going to be visual effects coverage of the film. A list of possible resources can be found here. If you find anything that can be used, please implement it in the article or list it here. Erik ( talk | contribs) 18:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure the capitalization of priest, in the article, is always correct. The lead character is called Priest (uppercase), but he is also a priest (lowercase). In the text he is commonly referred to as 'the Priest' and I think this is incorrect - it should be just 'Priest' or 'the priest'. Thoughts anyone? Obscurasky ( talk) 19:51, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
The article does need a bit of cleanup in regards to the capitalization. Maybe do away with using "Priest" in any context but the character's name (and potentially the other three characters that are also priests), and use "(member of a/the) priesthood" instead? Given that it's the character's only given name, title, profession, and general way of life, without having seen the entire film I'm probably not the person to make the distinction between the two, but it's just a thought. Shotgunmaniac ( talk) 03:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
It was too short! I was adding in important plot details. 24.187.168.103 ( talk) 00:40, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
This movie was very well done. I'm also saying this from a christian perspective. There are a lot of secular movies that are pretty immoral sexually or content or what not...but this movie was able to hold the values and intergrity and simulatneously cast forth greatness. This has become an instant favorite of mine. Because there are stories in the ancient scriptures of men, like Samson, that we're truly blessed and touched by God...and were able to single handedly destroy armies. In these current times, we humans are being suppressed, but someday, through prayer fasting and sacrifice we can obtain the ancient holiness and power that our dear Father wants to give us. So even though this movie was a Hollywood creation, it is relative to a reality of the true Priests of True Light. § AndreOnate ( talk) 23:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Don't know if and where to add it to the article, but one thing that really struck me is the careless continuity on the priests' cross-shaped face tattoos. It's everything from freshly-done to rather faded and back of the neck of the nose to below the nosetip, on the same characters. Even with 'the' priest it changes from shot to shot. 84.63.56.223 ( talk) 21:26, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm currently seeing the title of this article as " (2011 film)" instead of including the word 'Priest'. Why is that. 82.4.129.255 ( talk) 08:29, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Was there ever any talk, mention, or hint of a sequel?
If so, that needs to be part of the article.
Given how the movie ended, a sequel seems natural.
Just curious. 2600:8800:784:8F00:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D ( talk) 08:35, 3 November 2019 (UTC)