Talk:The Reaping

	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 American cinema task force.

Horror

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Crank, James A. (August 31, 2011). "An Aesthetic of Play: A Contemporary Cinema of South-Sploitation". Southerners on Film: Essays on Hollywood Portrayals Since the 1970s. McFarland. Retrieved May 5, 2021.
Collins, Brian; Tobey, Kristen (June 2018). From Middlemarch to The Da Vinci Code: Portrayals of Religious Studies in Popular Culture (PDF). Vol. 44. pp. 173–182. Retrieved May 5, 2021. {{cite book}}: |journal= ignored (help)
Columpar, Corinn (October 19, 2011). "A Postfeminist Primer: Maggie Gyllenhaal, Hilary Swank, and Renée Zellweger". Shining in Shadows. Rutgers University Press. Retrieved May 5, 2021.
Walsh, Richard (Fall 2010). "The Horror, The Horror: What Kind of (Horror) Movie is the Apocalypse?". Journal of Religion and Popular Culture. 22 (3): 1–27. Retrieved May 5, 2021.
Dawson, Angela (April 5, 2007). "For Hilary Swank, a grim 'Reaping'; Life imitates art during filming in Big Easy". The Record. p. F06. Retrieved May 5, 2021.
Portman, Jamie (April 4, 2007). "Swank fell for surprisingly 'smart' thriller; The Reaping turns out to be horror with a few twists". The Ottawa Citizen. p. F1. Retrieved May 5, 2021 – via Newspapers.com.
Scott, Jamie S. (July 2008). "Missions and Film". International Bulletin of Missionary Research. 32 (3): 115–118, 120. Retrieved May 5, 2021.
Fakhry, Pascale (Spring 2012). "Active woman and housewife in the American woman's horror film from the 2000s: ambivalences, contradictions and post-feminist impasse". Revue d'études cinématographiques (in French). 22 (2–3). Retrieved May 5, 2021.

Genre[edit]

I've only seen trailers for this movie, but is this really science fiction? --...Wikiwøw 17:15, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to say until we find out how it ends. Maybe there's a twist. 69.248.140.84 18:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poster[edit]

Anyone know where an updated poster can be found? The current one features a release date in November 2006.Gunslinger 03:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen about 4 posters for the show now, River of Blood, Locusts, Storms of Fire and Death of First Born, so is there really one poster that trumps them all? Anung Mwka 21:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation for use[edit]

Thomas J. McLean (2007-04-05). "The gang: Revisiting the Plagues in 3D". VFXWorld. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

Visual effects coverage. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 18:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a good sign[edit]

I've seen the TV commercials for this movie. While they do feature scenes with Hillary Swank in them, there is NO promotional material at all that mentions her name. Did she refuse to allow this? If so, why? Is the movie that much of a dog? I don't think this movie is going to do any box-office reaping.

that has nothing to do with anything

What a stupid movie. Even dumber, I thought 'Loren' was a Wkipedia typo done out of ignorance, but no...the idiots that wrote this movie don't even know the difference between the MASCULINE name 'Loren' and the FEMININE 'Lauren'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.186.13 (talk) 03:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As if there has never been a girl named "Loren". Those writers must be idiots. Wkipedia typo.

Chile[edit]

I am removing the following from the Trivia section of the article:

The film shows Concepción, Chile as a typical Central American town, which isn't really so. In fact, Concepción is the second major city on a relative developed country in South America. It shows the city as a place full of contamination and plenty of poor people almost dying on the streets, wich is quite far from the actual city. Other two wrong features about the scenes in Chile is the high amount of black individuals in it, while in Chile there is a very small population of persons of African heritage, and most of the ones you can see are American tourists. Moreover the "Native" people who speak in the movie possess an extremely prominent Caribbean accent thatcould not be more diffent than Chilean-spoken Spanish. No scene was filmed there.

In my opinion, this post belongs in the sandbox, rather than what is supposed to be an encyclopedic article. If a controversy about the film's portrayal of Chile is noted (i.e. a "group" of some sort highlighting the problems through the media), it may be appropriate to add an edited version of the above post into the article. Phimu222 18:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Text edited. Rdgo fdez 19:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the section in question, someone seems to have readded it to the article. Zrekhan 22:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. It should not be there. Simply because the demographics shown in a film are not representative of the region as a whole does not make it a factual error. samwaltz 00:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vile Warlock 14:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)it should be, the demographics are all wrong, there is no black population in chile, only mestizo and european ....this is outrageous....and the religious fanatics!?!?!? a saint in the church? come on....we have a cathedral and no known preserved saints or industries or poor quality of living, IM POSTING FROM CONCEPCION AND THERE IS -1 C of temperature! not a tropical city[reply]

I think it should be. Maybe not in the trivia section, but it has to be somewhere. Concepción is now formally offended by the way the city is depicted in the movie (the city mayor is sending a letter to the movie producers) which ceirtanly demonstrates that it is a big error. FeniB84 16:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the above can be cited, I would suggest adding a separate category for "controversy" rather than sticking it back into "trivia." For example, something like this could be added:

Mayor (add name) of Concepcion, Chile formally objected to the movie's portrayal of the city. In a letter to producers Mayor (last name) stated " . . . "

Follow this with a source citation. Phimu222 19:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just added the new category and will update it as soon as Mayor Jacqueline van Rysselberghe makes public her letter. Rodrigo Fernández 16:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright issues with MovieSpoiler?[edit]

The entire plot description added for this movie since its release appears to be almost completely ripped from MovieSpoiler: http://www.themoviespoiler.com/Spoilers/reaping.html, although there are minor edits (removal of certain 1st person sections mainly) large sections appear to just be C&P without any citation of MovieSpoiler. As I understand MovieSpoiler to rely on email submissions it isn't clear who the initial author was, or perhaps the same author wrote both sections under different names - either way, the original author is not being appropriately cited in at least one place, what do people think we should do with the Wikipedia article? 158.130.10.4 00:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

heavy editing- it's too long, has no spoiler warning, and basically retells the movie. When a movie is still in theaters, I don't think people want to hear the ending, or a play-by-play.--Nelliebellie 03:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-I've basically chopped off most of the plot description as being a description of the movie- that being a spoiler, as well as a possible copyright description. I don't think my overview is particularly good, so anyone who can write something better feel free. But the long drawn out "this is everything that happened and oh here's the ending" was driving me crazy.--Nelliebellie 01:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page has gone into "decay" for about a year now so I've revised the entire plot summary (1400+ words down to 1000) and I'm making other changes as well (getting rid of original research, trivia, and uncited statements and research). Also the plot summary ALWAYS contains spoilers per WP:PLOT, wikipedia is a encyclopedia not a fan page thus all relevant information is included. (Deftonesderrick (talk) 11:02, 25 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Plagues[edit]

The 10 plagues don't match up with the other Wiki page on the 10 plagues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.83.33.189 (talk) 00:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DVD REALEASE[edit]

WHEN DID THE DVD COME OUT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.254.162.225 (talk) 03:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]