Talk:Lust, Caution

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 18 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ShannonHegedus, Meezoya (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Yige Liu, Cchu13, Yidanlong, Adambletcher, Weiliu777.

Meaning?[edit]

As a tourist, just passing by, I would have liked to see something about what this wonderful film MEANS. I guess meaning is something that encyclopedias don't care about, but maybe someone could at least link to some significant commentary on the film?Geneven (talk) 00:08, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anachronisms[edit]

Having had my entry about the historical errors in the film removed by Tony_Sidaway, I have reinstated them with references to the relevant primary sources: a clip from the official site of the movie showing an FX3 taxi, and a link to that taxi's manufacturer's website showing the date of manufacture. I hope this will be sufficient to avoid it being deleted again.Paul Christensen 05:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having again had this section deleted, this time by Nazamo, I have addressed his concern (see his comment to his edit of 26 March) that this is only notable if notable to a reputable critic by including a citation to an article by one such. This really is a pretty major error for a film like this to make and at least one reputable critic agrees. Paul Christensen (talk) 07:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was also shot in Hong Kong[edit]

Two scenes (a conversation in a university hallway, and the evening after) were shot at Hong Kong University. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.218.80.199 (talk) 13:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use Nanjing regime instead[edit]

I made those changes to point out that Wang Jingwei's Government was just one of the puppet states that was controlled by the Japanese. And Mr. Yee works for him. Allie Nations during WWII never recognized Wang's government. In fact, several sections of the movie mentioned about the United States trying to ship arms to Chiang Kai-shek's legitimate government in Chongqing. TheAsianGURU (talk) 01:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "Country of origin" under "Controversies"[edit]

Is it really necessary for that to be included? Isn't it a subtag for Political status of Taiwan and wanna mix politics with motion pictures? To me, seems like a propaganda section drumming for Taiwan. The movie is funded by a US Company, a Chinese Company & a Taiwanese Company so what's the argument? Furthermore, it's clearly stated in the "infor box" that Taiwan is listed under Country. Besides, it's poorly edited and does not meet wiki standards. TheAsianGURU (talk) 08:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ref #8 is not working. We should get more ref or that has to be removed. TheAsianGURU (talk) 18:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neither the sentence nor the reference need to be removed. Please read WP:DEADREF. Facts do not become untrue simply because a web page isn't accessible. David Lodge (talk) 21:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whether the argument about Taiwan is right or wrong is irrelevant. The point is there has been an argument. Hence its presence in the article. Cop 663 (talk) 22:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the Taiwan part should be taken out. Seems like some Taiwanese nationalists just want their say. It seems like too small an issue overall to be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.23.49 (talk) 05:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removing bad "etymology"[edit]

The section is mistitled. It is not about the "etymology" of the name (See Etymology for the correct meaning of the word), but instead contains someone's (?) opinion about the quality of the translation.

This opinion is uncited, and furthermore is based on an extremely contrived "pun". That "jie" primarily means "ring" is uncited and is wrong. Only a deliberate misreading of "jiezhi" (finger ring) could possibly derive the interpretation that "jie" means "ring".

If the original author wants to re-add this section, some reliable sources would be needed. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course "jie" do mean ring. It's not the primary meaning, but you have "jie zhi" (finger ring) and "jie zi" (ring) both referring to the same thing. It's in every Chinese dictionary. The word is mentioned when they were discussing ring in the film, so the use is deliberate to give the title a double meaning. 81.86.102.149 (talk) 18:25, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why would we need references when we already have a language with over 1.3 billion people (and speakers)? The words "color" and "lost" ARE indeed homophones in both Mandarin and Shanghainese: shi and shi. You may be right on about the title of the section being off, however you do not seem to understand what a homophone is. ★Dasani★ 04:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dasani, you may be surprised to learn that "homophone" is a common English word and I happen to know what it means. That two words are homophones do not mean that they are etymologically related. Even if two words are etymologically related, that does not prove the existence of a pun, or a "mistranslation".
For your information, Dasani, the character "戒" does not mean ring, except in the context of a recognised compound, such as 钻戒 ("zuanjie", diamond ring), in which case it is an abbreviation for 戒指 ("jiezhi", ring). The character "戒", outside such compound words, means the following, according to the Cihai: to protect against; being wary; command or request; fasting; prohibition. (I summarise, but I trust you have access to comprehensive Chinese dictionaries.
"戒指" ("jiezhi", finger ring) came to mean "ring", not because 戒 means "ring". Rather, the characters separately mean "prohibit/forgo" and "finger". Originally, concubines would wear a finger ring to signal to their master that they are pregnant, or are not available to the master for some other reason. Thus, literally, the name "jiezhi" means "that which is to be worn on the finger to signal prohibition".
Again, I will emphasise that the character "戒" can only mean "ring" when it is an abbreviation for 戒指, "finger ring", and that this abbreviation occurs only in recognised compounds such as "钻戒", diamond ring.
I hope that helps. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 14:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You may or may not be surprised to learn that I am full Chinese (albeit the fact that Mandarin is not my first language, I am able to speak it pretty well for being a Cantonese girl). I don't know about the "ring" thing, because many Chinese words are like this: separate meanings when not with a word. You must put them together with another one to create something. The worst part, I've found, is that when you don't know what the compound means, it's quite challenging as it just looks like another word to you (ex. in English, we can write our compounds likethis to show the distinction, but obviously Chinese doesn't have an alphabet). However, once we get to a certain level in our ability, we can tell that it's a compound (although it still might be tricky on a few).
But yes, once again, I meant the "lust" and "lost" thing, but you keep saying, "Nah, cut it out. NPOV. We don't need it." Okay. ★Dasani★ 09:52, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is really something very strange about PalaceGuard not understanding how pun or language works. The title is done in such a way so as to give it a double meaning. Simple as that. This discussion is just plain weird. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.102.149 (talk) 02:49, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reception in Japan[edit]

What was the reception of the film in Japan and how were the boxoffice takings? An interesting question. The answer would make a useful addition to the main article. Pnelnik (talk) 11:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More poster and images needed[edit]

Hi, I think this page needs more posters and images of scenes in the movie. I will try to find some donated pictures of this movie from WikiCommons to help westerners learn better about this movie of Ang Lee. --Llljoyce (talk) 22:52, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 12 November 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. The consensus is that the film is the primary topic. Supporters (Timmyshin, Erik, Born2cycle, Dohn joe, Film Fan, Zanhe) please ensure all incoming links to Special:WhatLinksHere/Lust, Caution are fixed. Jenks24 (talk) 14:22, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


– Film better known than the original novella on which it was based, should be considered WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Novella page currently receives only ~1/9 of the film page's traffic, despite occupying the primary topic slot. Same situation as Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon being occupied by the film and not the novel. Timmyshin (talk) 14:17, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. While the film is primary with respect to usage, the film being based on the novella warranted investigating to see which topic is primary with respect to long-term significance. My review of results in Google Books, Google Scholar, and WorldCat.org shows that much more has been written about the film than has been the novella, so I would endorse the film being the primary topic in both respects. If the novella had more long-term significance, I may have opposed this. Similar setups to this are the film Brokeback Mountain vs. Brokeback Mountain (short story) and the film Road to Perdition vs. Road to Perdition (comics). Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 15:40, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose removal of (film), support addition of (novela) 180 flip flops are a bad idea. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:13, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Why are they a bad idea? Links can be fixed easily. Applying policy, do you disagree that the film is the primary topic? If so, why? Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 19:23, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:Erik. Because of external links, off Wikipedia. No I don't believe there is a primary topic here. 色,戒 (1979) was well known and notable as a book long before the film (2007). In ictu oculi (talk) 05:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a way to verify that the novella was well-known and notable long before the film? The brunt of search results I found studied the film and not the novella. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 15:14, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC by the traditional PT usage criteria (I disagree with a need for the relatively new long-term significance criteria, but that arguably supports the film in this case anyway, per Erik). People who oppose because they disagree with PRIMARYTOPIC should state this explicitly in their opposing !vote comments. Just saying... --В²C ☎ 02:47, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Dohn joe (talk) 14:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Film Fan 12:09, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. -Zanhe (talk) 21:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lust, Caution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:32, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lust, Caution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:01, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lust, Caution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:53, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UVIC edits[edit]

I've added some information regarding the soundtrack of this film. I also added a section looking at how female sexuality is portrayed by Lee Ang in this film. I'm new to this so I hope I haven't mixed anything up on this Wiki! ShannonHegedus (talk) 01:59, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

unsimulated sex scene not confirmed[edit]

The source used for the sentence is not reliable - the statement is only used as a title and opener in the source by the writer, most probably to attract readership. Nowhere in the source or in any other reliable source does Ang Lee give an official statement on whether the scenes were real. This statement is also contradicting the wiki production section, where the actors gave vague responses to whether the scenes were unstimulated, so it remains unconfirmed. DCD331 (talk) 19:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

being described as an 'erotic' film[edit]

I'm not sure that this film should be described as an 'erotic' film, or at least not in the lead line, unless that is some specific term that is used for any movie that is rated NC-17. There are some graphic sex scenes that may go on just a bit too long, but I wouldn't say the plot is mainly just about sex or a sexual relationship. It's mostly about conspiracy and espionage. Sysiphis (talk) 03:14, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lust,_Caution&oldid=1208631449"