Talk:The Isle

	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 Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Korean cinema task force.

SO MANY ERRORS[edit]

Wow, please do not write an article about the film if you can't get the facts right. It needs a major re-write from the current bad/shallow article of this disturbing film.

-The female lead IS NOT A PIMP!! She herself offers prostitution services, but NOT prostitutes to her customers.

-She is not a mute. Mutes cannot scream out in pain due to inability of their voice box. Female lead in the movie has shown to be able to make sounds (implied in a scene) and scream out loudly in pain. So this can conclude in either error by the director or it is implied by him that she is NOT a mute.

-She does NOT kill the prostitute, who comes to visit the male lead character. In fit of jealousy, female lead ties up and gags the prostitute and throws her inside the hut, where later, the prostitute trying to escape, falls in the water and dies. How can anyone get this wrong and write about it as it has is beyond me.

-Rape never takes place. Just aggressive sex on his part - besides him trying to force himself on her, which she repels him. But many signs of their abusive relationship.

-Ending is a parable that fails in many area - but death of main character is not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.80.55.221 (talk) 13:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article never stated that she was a pimp, only that she provided prostitutes to the customers, which she does, by taking them to the floats with her boat.
For the mute thing, read the section right below this one.
The article doesn't say she killed her.
I don't know what you mean with the last two statements, could you reword those please?

You're very welcome to make changes to the article if you think there's something wrong with it, but please read it afterwards so that it will make sense. You removed the mention of the younger prostitute who was called in for Hyun-shik, and the next sentence "The two developing relationships between Hyun-shik and the prostitute and Hyun-shik and Hee-jin move the plot." was incomprehensible as a result, so I reverted it. - Bobet 07:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Corrections[edit]

Having just watched the film, I believe the following comments in the article are inaccurate or plain wrong: "Jung Suh plays the mute Hee-jin" - does she? One of her clients says "I heard you moan, so you must be able to speak", and half wway through the film she is seen through a closed window _on_the_telephone_ [phoning the prostitute], so, how does a mute use a telephone?

She is mute in the sense that she doesn't utter a single word during the entire film. It doesn't take sound to operate a telephone. If she is mute, pretty much the only reason she would call a prostitute would be to get her to come to the place, and the prostitute would know this. But if you want, you can change it to say she doesn't speak during the entire film but might or might not be mute, much like for any other 'mute' character in Kim Ki-duk's films.

"The prostitute's pimp, who comes to find out what's happening, is also killed by Hee-jin." - he cannot be _also_ killed, because Hee-jin didn't kill the prostitute, she tied her up, and the woman fell overboard; a niggling point, but Hee-jin is totally shocked to find her dead, only intending to imprison her to warn her away from Hyun-Shik.

The prostitute's death would count as involuntary manslaughter in a court of law, since Hee-jin's actions were the direct cause of her death. There might not be an intent to kill, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

"Hyun-shik rapes Hee-Jin, then takes the boat and is set to leave." No he doesn't, he hits her, but she just keeps smiling at him, and they make love.. watch her arms go round him -- and it's because she is contentedly asleep next morning that allows him to "escape";

I haven't watched the film in a while and can't remember how it happened. You (or anyone else) can change the wording if you like.

"The divers discover the bodies of the prostitute and the pimp" -- no, they discover the moped; the implication is that will lead to the discovery of the bodies, but the couple up-stakes as soon as the moped is trawled up;

Same as previous, except I'm pretty sure a team of divers wouldn't happen along to look for a moped. But again, I forget why the divers were there in the first place, and anyone who knows better can fix it.

"The film concludes in enigmatic fashion, with Hyun-shik shown alone in the middle of a lake and naked Hee-jin dead in her boat." -- no, Hyun-Shik is shown "waking up" in the middle of a shallow lake and wading into a bed of reeds that viewed from above by the camera turns out to be the pubic hair of Hee-jin, laying under water in her boat.. the boat she cast off and which drifted away when she escaped on the houseboat.. there are many implications you can take from it, but the "fact" is that the whole sequence is a dream by one of the couple (Hyun-Shik, I think), from the moment Hyun-Shik "opens his eyes". I take it that Hee-Jin _is_ "The Isle" to him -- a body of land mostly underwater but with nourishing vegetation which sustains him. Extremely romantic.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.68.2 (talk • contribs)

My name is Robert and I would like to add the followng remarks. The above discussion points are exact and true. And as a seeker of knowledge, these facts provide satisfaction. Of great importance to me is the enigmatic ending. On the one hand the movie could have ended in three places. First, leaving the yellow floater in an ocean-then END. Second, ending the movie with the island of bullrushes and mist, then END. But the final ending is very ambiguous, and few, if any reviewers have tackled this discussion point. I would like to add my agreement to the User about the romantic dream sequence ending; and after reading it and watching the movie again it offers great satisffaction and closure.

This one's original research, and stating that it's a "fact" that it was a dream is just wrong. It's a movie, it doesn't have to make sense, and it can be open to interpretation. It's just not the job of an encyclopedia to posit original interpretations. If you have a source for the statement, you can add an analysis section (or something similar) and list it there along with this source. And also, you can edit any other part of the article, this is a wiki, anyone can edit. - Bobet 12:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:The Isle Poster.jpg[edit]

Image:The Isle Poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 09:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:NFCC#10c issue has been addressed. MURGH ^disc. 11:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hee-jin and the fish hooks[edit]

Whether Hee-jin tried to commit suicide with the fish hooks or not is up to the viewer to decide, but in that scene it is never shown where she attaches them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.234.180 (talk) 11:40, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Budget[edit]

According to director Kim himself, the budget of the movie was $50000 and not $1000000 as stated in the article. This is said in the interview that citation 2 links to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.234.180 (talk) 12:13, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]