Talk:Se7en

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters 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 importance 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.

This article, category, or template is part of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to horror film and fiction 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.

A Wikipedian removed Se7en from the good article list. There are suggestions below for improving areas to satisfy the good article criteria. Once the objections are addressed, renominate the article as a good article. If you disagree with the objections, you can seek a review. Removal date: No date specified. Please edit template call function as follows: {{DelistedGA|insert date in any format here}}

Contents 1 Rearrangement 2 Texts 3 Spoiler 4 Wild Goose Chase 5 Se7en 6 NPOV 7 Seven 8 Requested move 8.1 Discussion 9 hacker? 10 Theme 11 NPOV? 12 John Doe 13 Where's Vanity? 14 Somerset's retirement 15 Pride 16 Location 17 See also 18 Lust. 19 Delisted GA 20 New addition 21 Opening credits 22 Envy & Wrath section edits from 72.138.74.56 23 DVD cover 24 The Murder of Wrath (spoilers) 25 The Innocence of Lust? 26 Power lines 27 Keeping Original Research Out

[edit] Rearrangement

The section titles for "Texts" through "NPOV" were added by me to clean up the page a bit. They might not be what those people would have chosen for themselves. -Parallel or Together? 12:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

NOTE: the film technique is called Bleach Bypassing and "increased its overall tonal quality" as a description doesn't actually mean anything.

[edit] Texts

I've havent seen the film but I would like to know which materials were employed for all the texts with which the killer accused his victims... Why? 'Cause I want to take those ideas into a distinct text and... Shouldn't the spoiler be "symmetrical"? That is... If tells "gluttony" was written with grease and "greed" with blood... It should tell the same corresponding info about the other sins he hated so much... Please... Add the info if you can.... By the way... His envious crime... That was terrible! He deserved more than just being shot tp death! (I see I'm wrath)...

[edit] Spoiler

Doesn't it seem weird to give the identity of the killer so blatantly, before the spoiler warning? It almost looks planted. -qartis

I don't think it gives away any of the plot to have it there. The story is about a killer and he doesn't show up until they've caught him, so it's not like it's a plot twist being revealed. violet/riga (t) 10:57, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I find it ironic that the killer's identity is revealed at the intro to the article, above the spoiler tag. Kevin Spacey specifically requested that his name not be included in the opening credits, so that his appearance would surprise the audience. --Madchester 20:38, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)

Kevin Spacey specifically requested that his name not appear in the opening credits, AS WELL AS all posters for the movie before it came out - he didn't even go on the publicity tour. I am removing this information from before the spoiler warning. -Parallel or Together? 12:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

So, why not move the spoiler warning up to the cast section? Or move the cast section down? Or, I realize this is odd for a Wikipedia article, obscure K.S.'s name in the link such as "*spoiler* as John Doe"? Dismas|^(talk) 18:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wild Goose Chase

I removed the "wild goose chase" comment as it was inaccurate. A "wild goose chase" is the pursuit of something impossible (or nearly impossible) to attain. In this film, they were running after a suspect and almost caught him, hardly an impossible task. --Feitclub 20:21, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Se7en

The title shown in the movie's opening credits is Se7en, not Seven. Shouldn't the listing here be the other way around - that Seven is the promotional title? --138.238.96.100 06:03, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

Although the description of the movie's plot is very good and detailed, I feel that there are too many positive comments for the movie. I liked Seven very much myself but I think that as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia should keep a NPOV in all of its articles. Bill the Greek 12:11, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Seven

imo the Seven page should link to the movie directly, and have a link to 7 (number) on top; I doubt many people will look for the number by writing it out, scrolling down the number page for the movie is inconvenient; if one wants to know what the word seven means one could use wiktionary ... of course that might break consistency with articles like six or eight - sorry if that topic was already discussed. (clem 18:59, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC))

[edit] Requested move

Seven (movie) - Se7en (movie). "Se7en" is the title's spelling used by IMDb, so should be accepted as standard. Zafiroblue05 02:05, 1 Jun 2005 (UCT)

• Oppose, because the IMDb is not the final arbiter in these things. They in fact use the title that appears at the start of the credits, even if, as in this case, that is a quirky title that isn't necessarily the standard. "Seven" is used at least as much as "Se7en", and much of the use of the latter is probably because of the IMDb anyway. sjorford →•← 20:11, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Support move to Se7en (not Se7en (movie), because there are no other "Se7en"s). The movie's actual, official title should be used, regardless of whether or not it fits normal spelling or grammar. -Sean Curtin 23:10, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Take a look to the poster[1], to the Amazon entry[2] or to this other dvd cover[3]: title is seVen, not se7en. If both version are somewhat "official" I prefer seven, the only one I knew before reading se7en here. GhePeU 23:25, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose move: use common name. Jonathunder 04:02, 2005 Jun 3 (UTC)
• Support move to Se7en, as that is the title of the movie in the title card/title sequence -Acjelen 00:57, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Support move to Se7en. Present the title as it should in the titles. This reminds me of X2, on all posters and promotion it was called X2:X-Men United or X-Men2:X-Men United... but those were just promotional titles and the true name of the film is still X2, as shown in the opening credits.--Madchester 06:12, 2005 Jun 6 (UTC)

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. I'd recommend changing Se7en into a redirect to this article. violet/riga (t) 19:55, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Move to Se7en (not Se7en (movie), because there are no other "Se7en"s). The movie's actual, official title should be used, regardless of whether or not it fits normal spelling or grammar. -Sean Curtin 23:10, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

It looks to me like Seven is the official title, IMDb nonwithstanding. — Knowledge Seeker দ 00:31, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, what does official mean? "Se7en" is, after all, the title in the opening credits. That Movie posters are created by promotion teams. Opening credits are made the filmmakers. Don't the filmmakers get to choose the official title? Zafiroblue05 16:47, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

---

Use common name. Jonathunder 04:02, 2005 Jun 3 (UTC)

Personally, I think it IS the common name. I personally have seen "Se7en" used probably about 3/4 of the time (of course, other people may see "Seven" more). It's the title on the opening credits - which definitely makes it seem like the "official" title, no? Plus, searching for "Seven" goes straight to the number - one has to search for "Se7en" to find a disambiguation page to find the movie... Zafiroblue05 16:39, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Apart from the huge disambiguation list on 7 (number), you mean? sjorford →•← 22:42, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

At the *bottom* of the page... Zafiroblue05 06:27, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

---

Another thing: look at the website: http://www.newline.com/sites/seven/index.html The movie is always referred to as "Se7en" (except in the actual URL). Zafiroblue05 16:51, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

---

As a librarian, I can tell you that any respectable library catalog will have the movie under Se7en (hopefully with a cross reference from Seven) as that is the name from the title card. They teach us in library school to catalog according to the "item itself" and not the container. In a similar vein, the first movie released with the Indiana Jones character will be titled Raiders of the Lost Ark regardless of what the VHS or DVD boxes say. -Acjelen 00:57, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

FWIW, the BBFC has the film listed under the title Se7en, meaning that was the title under which it was submitted to them by the distributors. --ascorbic 22:03, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

---

I don't care what people who've obviously never watched this movie say, it belongs under Se7en. Seven is acceptable in a chatroom or an informal forum discussion, but Se7en is the universally accepted offical name. I know some people has to fight about things no matter what and can't stand to be wrong, but live with it. To those that say they prefer Seven: sorry but sites like Wikipedia are about fact, not opinion, so your preferences have no bearing here. To those that claim Seven is the official name: Declared official by who? You? Please provide sources and basis for your declarations of fact. I would think that the name as shown in the title card would be more official than anything you would find on a third-party site, even IMDB. Sorry, but that's just the way the world works: It's the people that create the product that chooses the name, not you or some know-it-all site. Thanks for reading my rant.

---

This should clearly be at Seven (film). According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks): "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment" - Fredrik | talk 01:35, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

---

I disagree that the title should be "Seven (film)" as this isn't an issue of formatting or capitalization, but the spelling. Also, most of the time a film title is not a trademark (except in cases like Harry Potter, etc.) I vote for "Se7en". --Fallout boy 06:44, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

---

It has to be Se7en. That is the name of the film. It is not now, nor has it ever been Seven. IMDB has it as Se7en, the Platinum DVD has it as Se7en, libraries have it as Se7en, the BBFC has it as Se7en, New Line Cinema has it as Se7en, the movie itself uses Se7en... and wikipedia has it as Seven. No. I don't understand how we don't have consensus on this yet? Looks like it has been discussed for a while. I urge people to agree on Se7en. So far the opinion splits like this:

Se7en

• Sean Curtin
• Zafiroblue05
• Acjelen
• Fallout boy
• Parallel or Together?
• The JPS 18:43, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
• Jscarle 02:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Seven

• Knowledge Seeker দ
• Jonathunder
• Fredrik | talk

Parallel or Together? 12:05, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

So, based on the credits of 'Annie Hall', we should also misspell Christopher Walken's name in Wikipedia? I'm really curious how people are supposed to pronounce the alleged title of this movie, apparently "seh-sev-en-en". Sounds pretty stupid to me. Also, if we're going to go with "Se7en" as the title, shouldn't there be a picture up which reflects that? The poster clearly spells the word correctly. ThatGuamGuy 19:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)sean

As noted above, it isn't just based on a mistake in the credits. It's more the fact that it's New Line's movie, so the title is what they say it is. And they seem to say the written title is "SE7EN". With the notable exception of the one-sheet you mention, everything else they have put out, that has the title written, has it like that. Mwelch 20:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

A screencap of the title card in the movie probably should be added to the article, but as the pic in the infobox or somewhere in the main body of the article? Also, to answer ThatGuamGuy: The movie's title is simply said "Seven", despite the funky spelling. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 03:14, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hacker?

What about an article about the hacker named se7en?

[edit] Theme

I added the subtitle of theme and tried to incorporate what I believe was the main theme of the movie--RZeidan 14:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

The subtitle of cinematography was added inorder to give the audience an appreciation of how Director David Fincher created an envirornment which was conducive for this thrilling movie.--RZeidan 14:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV?

It's about time the POV adulatory critical comments were either backed up or removed. The article has had NPOV sitting on it for far too long. Neocapitalist 03:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

As a start, I just took out the Public Response response section. This whole article is POV, really. I'm at a loss at how to fix it without a re-write. Brian Schlosser42 20:00, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

The critical sections were the only POV, I thought. It doesn't read as POV now, so I'm taking off the neutrality disputed tag. Neocapitalist 15:56, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] John Doe

John Doe the killer is a fascinating character and may warrant an entry of his own. Hannibal Lector has one after all.70.59.142.151 22:48, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• Possibly, but Lecter was a principal character in three books which were made into movies, whereas John Doe is only featured in one movie. I added a reference to Doe to the Popular culture section in the article on serial killers, but didn't expound on him.

[edit] Where's Vanity?

I think there's something missing in this article...where's vanity?

Didn't the disfigured model who commits suicide represent vanity? The article lists this as "pride". [[UserNope. Don't think so.

Vanity is missing from the article, leaving this entry with six deadly sins and not Se7en.

Now...which murder represents pride?

Edit: okay, I take it back.

Vanity is not one of the seven deadly sins. This is what I get for getting my entire religious education from the Dudley Moore/Peter Cook film "Bedazzled". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:Helenabucket talk • contribs|Helenabucket talk • contribs]] ([[User talk:Helenabucket talk • contribs|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Helenabucket talk • contribs|contribs]]).

Most hilarious post made on a discussion page thus far this year. 65.145.212.173 09:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Somerset's retirement

In regards to the changes made by Mwelch: The movie doesn't appear to give any definite indication that Somerset is re-considering his retirement. Is this to be inferred from the dialogue and the Hemingway quote? Willbyr 04:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

- He also tells his boss that "he'll be around", hinting that he isnt leaving. He quotes hemmingway's "The world is a great place, and worth fighting for" and says he agrees only with the second part. Thus, he states that he wants to fight for the world, despite it being so horrible. A change in opinion from earlier in the movie. This means he wishes to stay on the force, and keep "fighting". - SMOOTHMEDIA

While this may be true, without something official to back up the supposition it remains a supposition and thus really isn't appropriate for inclusion. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Then is it also not appropriate for inclusion that Tracy's head was in the box? We never saw it. No one ever said, "Tracy's head was in that box." It remains a supposition.

But of course it's obvious that her head was in the box. That is the whole point of all of the characters' subsequent reactions that we see. So it would be silly not to include it here.

I'd submit Somerset's non-retirement is also obvious. That is the whole point of the subsequent Hemingway quote that we hear him give us. What does the final Hemingway quote mean, in Somerset's context, if it doesn't mean that? Is there any other plausible explanation? Mwelch 21:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pride

Doesn't it appear very similar to the suicide of pornstar Savannah, who recieved severe facial damage in a car accident(driving under cocain) and an hour later shot herself? -cthulhoid

[edit] Location

There is one other indication in the film as to the location: Near the end, after Somerset has stopped the deliveryman, and opened the box, he yells into his microphone (talking to the SWAT team in the helicopter), "California, don't come in here, John Doe is holding all the cards!" The setting, and this comment would seem to indicate they are somewhere in southern California. --Charles 18:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

"California" is just the character's name (like Joaquin Phoenix's character in another Andy Walker screenplay, 8MM); it doesn't mean he's either from or in California. It's just a name.Lontano 02:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The appearance of the Chester Williams Bldg (as Somerset leaves the site of the foot chase) is far more specific. As for the nickname "California" it could be argued that this in fact indicates the SWAT leader is from elsewhere. --203.110.28.218 11:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

You lost me with the reference to the Chester Williams Building. Tell me more. --Charles 20:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

In the scene with Tracy and Somerset talking at a diner, she says things are very different "upstate" as though that's where she and Mills lived before. This makes me think of New York. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.239.85.198 (talk • contribs) on 03:53, January 3, 2007 (UTC); Please sign your posts!

[edit] See also

Are either of the listings in the See also section really relevant? Do we really need to go read the article on the number 7? --Charles 06:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lust.

The section on Lust mentions that the audience doesn't see the instrument used for this killing. However, I have seen a version where the veiwers are shown the instrument. It takes place during the interrogation scene back at the police station. For about two or three frames (similar to the length of time Gwyneth Paltrow's head is shown at the end), a polaroid flashed onto the screen showing a strap-on dildo-like instrument, with a machete in place of the phallus. The article mentions this, but I'm still not sure if the author has made it clear as to whether the audience has seen this.

I was wondering about this myself, because I clearly remembered seeing the instrument at some point in the movie. The article should be edited accordingly. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 20:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I thought the article said we don't see the polaroid while in the leather shop, which we don't. We do see the polaroid while in the police station. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.239.85.198 (talk) 03:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Delisted GA

I delisted the article from GA nom for the following reasons

1. Plot summarry is way too long and takes up most of the article
2. Trivia section should be removed or merged to the article, as it's mostly uncyclopedic
3. Soundtrack should be on an seperate article, or removed
4. Nothing on crtictism, reviews, how the cast was formed?
5. Clear lack of refs
6. images has no fair use rationales

Article needs some heavy work see Halloween (film) for a good example of an movie FA. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 06:44, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New addition

The added section about John Doe is an interesting read, but is heavily POV and sounds like original research. If it's taken from somewhere, it needs citations and sources. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 02:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Opening credits

It seems that there should be some discussion (probably under the section about the "look" of the film) about the innovative opening credits sequence, with the collage of film and still images, since this was very innovative at the time. The man who did them went on to do the opening credits on a number of other films. I would argue it is an important feature of the film. ---Charles 19:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Envy & Wrath section edits from 72.138.74.56

Would any other users care to offer opinions on this repeated edit offered by 72.138.74.56? I'm not sure what the user's reasoning is for preferring it since the user is not offering any edit summaries. Regardless, though, I think there have been enough reverts back and forth that the time has come to try to reach a community consensus as to whether it's an improvement. Mwelch 05:32, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The version that you prefer is, IMO, better for the page. Here's a suggested rewrite (changes are bolded):

When they arrive at Doe's prearranged location, dry and desert-like with rows of electrical transmission towers, a delivery van soon arrives. Somerset stops the van several hundred yards from their location and confronts the driver, who says that he was to deliver a box to their location. The box is addressed to Mills, but Somerset decides to open it. He recoils from the box in horror, and yells to Mills, who is struggling to ignore Doe's comments, to put his gun down and to not come near the box. As Somerset runs back to Mills and Doe, Doe reveals to Mills that he had visited Tracy after Mills left for work and tried to "play husband." The independently wealthy Doe envied the fruits of a common man's life and is thus guilty of ENVY. Doe then discloses that he killed Tracy and her unborn baby, and implies that the box contains Tracy's severed head; he also taunts Mills when he realizes that Mills was unaware of her pregnancy. Enraged, horrified, and grief-stricken, Mills dramatically contemplates killing Doe. Somerset tries to stop him, arguing that Doe's revelations only stand if he is killed for his sin of Envy and if Mills is the one who kills him and so becomes the embodiment of WRATH. "If you kill him, he will win," says Somerset. However, the distraught and emotional Mills shoots Doe in the head, empties his gun into Doe's body, and from the viewpoint of their helicopter watching them is shown walking away from Somerset and Doe's corpse in the direction of the box.

In the final scene, Mills is driven away in a police cruiser, while the captain assures Somerset that Mills will be taken care of. Somerset offers that if Mills needs anything, Somerset will want to help. However, given Somerset's impending retirement, the captain is unsure how he would contact Somerset if need be. The captain asks, "Where are you going to be?" Somerset wearily replies, "I'll be around," suggesting that he might not go through with his long-awaited retirement.

The film concludes when, in voice-over, with sirens wailing in the background, Somerset explains why: "Ernest Hemingway once wrote: 'The world is a fine place and worth fighting for.' I agree with the second part."

What do you think? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 13:11, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Well . . . as I've already mentioned in my edit summary, I do not like that wording of "might" that you've left there, given that the statement about Somerset's retirement has already been softened to say "suggesting". His suggestion is not that he might not retire; his suggestion is that he will not retire. If he was suggesting he might not retire, then he would have said "I might be around," and, "I might just decide that I agree with the second part." But he didn't offer any such equivocation on either point. So I really don't like that "might" being there.

But hey . . . if I'm the only one who feels that way, I'll back off.

As for the rest, I'd change the wording just a little bit regarding Doe's initial revelation about killing Tracy.

I'm almost certain that Doe does not mention the baby at that moment. The first time he mentions it (and thus the first time Mills finds about the baby) is after Somerset has completed his run back and rejoined the two of them. I'm just about sure of that because when Doe does mention it ("She begged for her life . . . and the life of the child within her" or something like that), he observes Mills' reaction, then realizes that Mills was unaware Tracy was pregnant and then turns to Somerset and says, "He didn't know." So Somerset was definitely already back with them at the time the revelation was made, not still with the box, nor still back running toward them.

So maybe something like (bold indicates changes from what you proposed above):

Doe then discloses that he killed Tracy and took her severed head as a "souvenir". As Somerset returns, Mills comprehends Doe's implication. Desperate for a reason not to believe Doe's claims, Mills repeatedly demands that Somerset reveal what was in the box. Somerset's refusal to directly answer the question leaves Mills with little doubt as to the contents of the box and the truth of Doe's words. Doe then taunts Mills when he realizes that Mills was unaware of Tracy's pregnancy.

How does that seem? (I'm fine with the rest of your modifications above, and I guess I'll grumble and grit my teeth over the "might" thing.) Mwelch 02:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I like your edits a little better. As far as the "might" goes, that's not that big an issue to me. Saying "...suggesting he will not go through with his long-awaited retirement" is fine with me; as you said, "suggesting" is enough of an implication. One thing that just occured to me is that it might work better to use Doe's actual words in the sentence about killing Tracy:

Doe discloses that he killed Tracy, then adds, "I took a souvenir...her pretty head."

Willbyr (talk | contribs) 04:48, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Excellent idea. I think that works very well. Mwelch 20:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DVD cover

Should the cover of the 2-disc Special Edition be used in the article along with the original DVD cover, to show the contrast between the titles? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 18:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Murder of Wrath (spoilers)

All seven of the Deadly Sins was covered by the film, but only six of them were punished by death. The gluttenous man was force fed until he exploded; the greedy man was bled to death from a wound he was made to cut; the slothful man was tortured for a year, but kept alive in agony; the lustful woman had her genitals sliced up with a knife; the proud woman was marred, suiciding out of shame; and the envious man was shot by the very man he admired. As John Doe put it "every sin was turned against the sinner". But what of wrath? Detective Mills had his wife and unborn child murdered. This was his primary motivation for killing Doe, but was it also his punishment? Was the punishment of wrath to have your love ones die, while you remain alive in brooding hatred? Is wrath itself a punishment? Either way, Mills was the only sinner to remain alive. This needs to be adressed in the analysis and discussion of the article. And more importantly John Doe's own article. It is a fundemental aspect in interpreting his "masterpiece", and understanding him as one of literature's most interesting villains. I have 3 theories on the matter: (1) that living in wrath is a greater punishment than death; (2) that Mill's was punished by the death of his loved ones; or (3) Mill's will be so shattered that he will commit suicide. I think the third theory is the most likely. --Dark_Wolf101 11:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

There is also an unlikely fourth theory that mills will be given the death sentence.22:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Innocence of Lust?

Was the prostitute really a sinner, at least in the extreme circumstances that John Doe's other victims were? She was killed by having her genitals sliced up (from the inside) by the blade of a knife, wielded by her client at the orders of Doe. She was killed because she commited the sin of lust. But ironically, it was her client, the man who paid to have sex with her, that was lustful. She was, in effect, only doing her job, and it is doubtful that she harboured any physical attractions to her clients. Yet, she was selected by Doe for brutal murder. This lends credibility to the idea that Doe possessed a level of mysogonism; blaming the woman for luring innocent men into her lair to be corrupted. This aspect of Doe's killings should probably be explored more in Doe's own article, rather the wider "Se7en" article. But it is worth consideration. --Dark_Wolf101 11:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Still, he didn't seem to show any other sign of misogyny apart from this, and even then it is debatable whether his act was truly sexist. Although he did seem to blame the prostitute personally for tempting men, near the end of the film he referred to her as a "disease spreading whore", I don't recall him showing any hatred of women in general.66.24.235.78 02:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Power lines

In the Religious imagery section, there are two references to power lines, yet no explanation as to what the religious symbolism of those power lines is? Jscarle 03:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that's referring to the shape of the electrical towers themselves. It's a bit of a stretch in either case. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 13:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Keeping Original Research Out

SpartanPhalanx8588, I've reverted your addition,[4] and you have put it back. Your entry is entirely speculative and original research. You have no citation for your material. Your own words (generally accepted, just about anywhere, that policemen, regardless of the particular agency they work for, will look out for and "do the right thing for") are weasel words. If you review these guidelines, and still believe your entry is helpful, please bring it to this talk page. Thanks. The undertow 04:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC)