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 is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
One thing we can clearly agree on is this film is a science-fiction horror. But I feel it may fall into other genres, such as neo-western (desert and cowboy imagery galore) and/or thriller. I propose it’s categorized as “epic neo-western sci-fi horror.” This is the most concise, accurate way this film can be described. 172.254.82.67 (talk) 23:12, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewers may use terms like "epic" to express their impressions of films, though, not to define their genres. "Sci-fi horror Western" is hilariously complicated enough for me—and I'm fond of complication. – AndyFielding (talk) 10:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
One thing we can clearly agree on is this film is a science-fiction horror. Not sure how this discussion happened without anyone pointing out the Project film guidelines WP:FILMGENRE" the primary genre or sub-genre under which it is verifiably classified. " There is a SHOUTING WARNING in the wiki source that thinks genres being mentioned "IN SOME CAPACITY" is somehow enough, and demands that nothing be changed without discussion. Please discuss why the guidelines were ignored. I refer you all back to the guidelines and strongly recommended the extra genres be removed from the lead section and list only primary genre and subgenre, namely "science-fiction horror", which User:Apokryltaros said was the one thing we should be able to agree on. There may be other places such as the "Themes" section where these extra genres and influences could be mentioned but there is no excuse for forced genre bloat into the opening sentence. -- 109.77.206.76 (talk) 22:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I also was surprised that WP:FILMGENRE fell through the cracks, but it clearly applies. It generally means only one genre, but certainly not three. I removed neo-western and the SHOUTING WARNING. Shouting it doesn't make it any more true that whispering it. Neo-western should be restored if and only if there is a consensus here to do so, and even then one or both of the other genres need to be removed. The argument that there are many sources for neo-western doesn't make have much meaning because I'm sure the other genres can be backed up with as many or more sources. If I looked I probably could come up with sources for at least two or three more genres, but they don't all belong in the lead. They can be discussed later in the article if they are important, in proportion to the weight they have in reputable sources. The issue here is the "primary genre or sub-genre under which it is verifiably classified. Genre classifications should comply with WP:WEIGHT and represent what is specified by a majority of mainstream reliable sources," not the opinion of a couple of Wikipedia editors. Sundayclose (talk) 22:02, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the thread resurrection. I just removed neo-Western from the lead per MOS:FILMGENRE and in the absence of any clear consensus above. The cited Rolling Stone source is also ambivalent about whether it's appropriate to call the film a Western. I also removed the neo-Western category, though I would not object to a mention in the body that some consider it a neo-Western. If that's done, it would be sensible to restore the category. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]