Talk:The Vision of Escaflowne/Archive 1

Archive 1

Reorganization and Air Cavalry Chronicles trivia

Sorry, I forgot to mark my edits. I completely reorganized this page, because to me, it looked unorganized, cluttered and unclear. I attempted to keep most of the original information there, although I may have rewritten it for clarity and ease of reading. Does anyone know for sure about that Trivia bit at the end? It seems like it would be nice to have a source on that. Matsurika 00:45, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Just thought I'd note this; the Special Edition of the Escaflowne movie sources the ACC trivia, though I don't have it with me at the moment. I've linked the MAHQ page to ACC mecha designs, which also show up in the Special Edition booklet. Virogtheconq 10:25, 15 Sept 2005 (PDT)

Didn't quite a few of the characters have some very different, pretty hilarious names in pre-production? I remember reading some of them in Animerica many years ago, so the information has to be out there somewhere . . . - Tzaquiel 02:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

There are some information about these names on the Escaflowne Compendium (eg: Van was Dai Ginga). But there is already a link to the Compendium in the article. Jomiel 13:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Technical issue

The page scrolls very slowly due I assume to all the Japanese characters, which don't display on my machine. Maybe the problem would be cured by installing the Japanese font, but I can't be the only person who has this problem...can I? Lee M 19:54, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The page shouldn't be scrolling slowly just because it uses Japanese characters and you're missing a Japanese font, which should not affect page-scrolling speed. The problem is probably related to something else. What browser are you using? —Lowellian (talk) 10:45, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

Another issue: image alignment

I'm going to take this to the discussion of images in general, but maybe someone here knows: when an image is nested in a bulleted list, or when it flows past the end of the adjoining paragraph, the next bullet item/paragraph does not always wrap around the image very nicely (as with the Hitomi image in the "Releases" section in this article. Does anyone here know some tricks for getting around this so the text wraps properly? —Tarnas 16:19, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Adult Swim Showing

I really don't think talking about showing it on Adult Swim (for a single event) is proper for this article. That'd be like saying I saw the movie at a theatre in San Francisco in early 2002 (which I did), which nobody's interested in and is ultimately useless information. Unless Adult Swim plans on making it a permanent, semi-regular addition to their repetoire (which I doubt), this needs to be removed. Virogtheconq 10:25, 15 Sept 2005 (PDT)

I disagree. It's reasonably topical and ideal to note when a show or movie was aired on broadcast television (see Nineteen Eighty-Four (TV programme) for a TV movie analogue to this issue, The Wizard of Oz for a movie saved by broadcast TV, Casablanca for note on the radio adaptation broadcast of that film). This seems especially true of anime (see FLCL, Neon Genesis Evangelion), perhaps because anime series and movies are not normally broadcast in North America on basic cable. The Adult Swim note I added back into the article isn't a large advertisement—it just states the date, programming block, and region of broadcast—and fits in with the other notes on the various TV broadcasts of the series itself. Another case might be that of Adult Swim's broadcast of the Cowboy Bebop movie: it takes up a little more space that it deserves and should be restructured with the rest of the article, but there's a lot of good information there and deleting it would be to erase that notable information. If someone wants to write a paper on the history of censoring movies on broadcast television, this Cowboy Bebop information becomes highly valuable.

The idea is to be informative and concise, and I think the Adult Swim note is both. Why block out this information? I think the fact that you saw the movie in early 2002 in San Francisco could be notable: was the movie only shown in San Francisco or in select cities upon it's release? That info would clearly be relevant. Release information is relevant in general—radio, TV, video, theatre, whatever—and it just so happens to be lacking in some ways in the Escaflowne article. —Tarnas 20:04, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I can see where you're coming from, which is appropriate. I think I would have been less confused if you had indicated that it was the N. American television premiere - I misinterpreted what you wrote as it simply being a showing of the movie. Also, there's already an Escaflowne (movie) page, so it'd probably be better to move that information there rather than have it on a page about the tv series. Virog 13:37 (PDT) 15 Sept.

Steampunk?

How is Escaflowne categorized as "Steampunk"? --nihon 08:02, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Check the definition of the Steampunk. I think it fits quite well, though that's only my opinion - the technological developments of Zaibach are way beyond the scientific level found on Gaia at the time (ie, no gunpowder). It'd be hard to find any reasonable source with a definitive yes or no answer, though.Virogtheconq 16:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I always attributed the mechs to magical means of creation, given their apparent sentience. --nihon 17:06, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

There is no evidence that ordinary guymelefs are sentient in any way. If there is anything magical about them, it is the energists themselves, but these are used (as far as is shown) mostly as a source of mechanical (or possibly electromechanical) power. It shold be cautioned that there is no clear boundry in Escaflowne between magical and scientific/technological power-- to the people of Gaia, use of energists are sources of power is commonplace and does not evoke the wonder that the term "magic" implies to us. There is no division in Gaia between science and sorcery. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.4.94 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 30 April 2006

Homages to Frank Herbert's Dune

The focus on prescience, a would-be emperor, an energy monopoly, a fighting style reminiscent of the Weirding Way from the Dune chronicles, backwardly advanced technology (i.e. Enormous mecha that aren't run on conventional fuel or controlled/powered by electricity), shape-shifters. There's no place where this connection could be cited but it's so there. Also, whose a fan of both Dune and Escaflowne? Not many people, I assume. Qa Plar

Find a citable source so that we know this isn't just your original research and we can add that to the article. Tani unit 00:36, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm a fan of both (only have read the original series, won't touch the prequels), but I disagree with the notion it was a homage. Escaflowne came out during a time when fortune-telling was popular among Japanese teenagers, so it was natural to include it in a series aimed at that age group. I wouldn't really call any of the fighting similar to the Weirding Way, but I think Herbert was deliberately nebulous with it, other than its ultimate effects. Shapeshifters and technically advanced feudal societies can be found in a number of sources unrelated to Herbert's work, both before and after Dune was published. Besides, Escaflowne started out as a concept similar to Macross, which has even less in common with Dune. Virogtheconq 00:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I also disagree with its relationship to Dune. If anything, Esca has a lot more adherence to Atlantis research. I'm sure the Esca team read about Edgar Cayce's version of Atlantis destruction by overcharging the crystal and his accounts of how Atlantis had ships and aircrafts powered by energy crystals. Jomiel 13:26, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

2004 Re-Release

Article states that the re-release includes the movie. Is this accurate? Are we saying that both were re-released as one or two separate products? From what I can tell, the new slim boxed set does not include the movie, and the text in the article is ambiguous. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.212.61 (talk • contribs) 00:41, 20 November 2006

I own the blue slim box release, and I can confirm that it does indeed include the movie. --Junior612 18:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Fox Kids US did not air episode 1?

I'm watching through the show again and am pretty darn sure Fox did air episode 1, or at least major parts of it when it premiered. In fact, it's a quite clear memory. Can anyone else confirm?

If I remember right, they took bits from the first and second episodes and spliced them together. -Tacubus (talk) 22:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

They did not air episode 1. What they did was start with was episode 2, and spread out clips from episode 1 across multiple episodes, although I'd say 75% of the first episode was still cut out. When it aired in Canada, the first episode was played immediately after the final episode. Never got that far in America unfortunately. Quiddity99 (talk) 22:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Quiddity99

"Foxcaflowne?"

A Google search for this term reveals nothing except the article text. Despite the fact that the FOX dub was horrendous, the term "Foxcaflowne" seems like "original research" to me. Gregly 18:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, mostly I just see it refered to the Foxkids version. I listed as a dubious assertion. If no one objects I'll remove that line in a week or so.68.70.149.142 15:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I say get rid of it, there is nothing of the sort to be found anywheer except in the article. Tani unit 00:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Seconded. A search for "Foxaflowne" may turn up some hits (I distinctly remember some members of fora in which I participated using that term), but that was a long time ago. Virogtheconq 01:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Well this all seems to be fairly moot now, since all references to the FOX airing seem to have been *expunged*. Can someone rationalize this change? Escaflowne may not have been particularly well dubbed in its FOX outing but it was certainly noteworthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.11.107 (talk) 10:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Sources are needed. I'll see if I can find the necessary sources for including it. AnmaFinotera (talk) 14:57, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite Needed

Someone please tag this article for a complete rewrite. It needs one pretty badly. There are far too many problems with it for me to take the time to list it, and I think anyone can plainly see the problems in question (grammar, tone, relevance... it goes on). I don't know how to tag the article myself, or I would. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.82.255 (talk • contribs) 06:21, 27 May 2007

Yeah also its missing a article explaining aspects of this series like what are Guymelefs? And what are the different types? Flosting Rocks? U know the techs of the mechs in Escaflowne --AKIRA70 (talk) 06:30, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

That sort of excessive fan detail doesn't go in Wikipedia. We don't focus on the fictional elements. Also, why answer a post over a year old? The problem that IP was talking about has long since been taken care of. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 06:42, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

• Okay sorry for answering an old post, however with all due respect why is it that Wiki does not include a page for the Guymelefs or at least a expanded topic in the artcle? I mean they basically do the same thing for Gundam, Macross, Patlabor ,Evangelion, etc. and other anime franchises on Wikipedia and there are more examples. So whats the distinction? Is there a distinction? Help me understand.--AKIRA70 (talk) 23:59, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Because it isn't notable and there are no reliable, third party sources and significant real world coverage to support them. The distinct on the others is some do have those sources, and others are bad articles that need to be merged or deleted. I believe there actually were some for Escaflowne, and they were found to fail all guidelines for being articles and were either deleted or merged. Readers unfamiliar with the series do no tneed an indepth article on what a Guymelef is. A simple summary at their first mention is all that is needed to give folks the general idea. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:12, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank You, Now I Understand. :~)--AKIRA70 (talk) 09:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)