Talk:Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Korean cinema task force.

Korea Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Korean cinema task force.

Wiki Words[edit]

I don't think such common words as capitalist, torture, black market, anesthesia and electricity need to be wikified. Everybody knows what they means and the linked articles won't really help someone understand the movie. Only relevant links, which will really enhance a reader's understanding, should be linked. For example not everybody will understand the significance of cutting a person's Achilles tendon, so that was a good link. I think in a plot description it is very distracting to see links.--ThreeAnswers 22:46, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the re-linking I did is sufficiently minimal so that it does not hinder the reading of the article, and feel that they do enhance the article to a small degree. In response to your statement that "Only relevant links, which will really enhance a reader's understanding, should be linked":

Firstly, this is a guideline, not a "rule".
It's not like every other word in the article is linked - in a Plot section of about 470 words, only 8 are linked. I don't believe this makes it any harder to read whatsoever.
Although the words are relatively common, it is conceivable that readers may not fully understand terms like capitalist or black market. I suspect more people actually understand the nature of Achilles tendons than understand the nature of capitalism.
If you were to describe the film to someone, you would almost certainly use terms like torture and black market. These are decent articles with a plenty of info beyond dictionary definitions.

What to link is a judgement call, and I made mine by reinstating a reduced number of those links you had removed. I agreed that I initially overwikified, and after reading the guidelines I still felt it was appropriate to have some of those links.

We could argue about the relative merits of each link - e.g. I certainly think polemic should be linked, but although Electricty is a piped link to Electric shock, I concede that it could be simply re-worded in the article rather than being linked. I understand your point of view, but ultimately, I have no desire to go back and forth with this. In my opinion it's not an important enough issue for us to seek consensus from the other wikipedians. If you really want to unlink them, do what you feel is best. Gram 10:40, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Perhaps someone could write a bit about the plot and involves important moral and class struggle undertones? Just a thought. I think having only the plot is a little weak, or maybe have a sypnosis or something that someone can read without spoiling the movie for themselves.

Incorrect Plot Summary[edit]

Has anyone noticed that the plot summary is glaringly incorrect? Ryu does not kidnap his own boss's daughter, as he explains to Cha Yeong-mi, they would immediately come looking for him. They kidnap the daughter of his boss's friend, Park Dong-jin.

I altered the original text as little as possible, just to correct the plot errors without making a complete rewrite. Also, I removed the word "polemic" from the final paragraph, it was a very awkward use and the connotation was wrong.

Improvements - More Critical Reviews[edit]

I've started on some references but the "Reception" section needs much more work. More critical reviews and analysis of the movie by critics will flesh out the article.

Also any information on the production of the movie? e.g. how long it took to shoot, edit etc. Stextc (talk) 10:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]