Talk:The Omen (2006 film)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Omen (2006 film) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Film: American

	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 Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Name Change

How do you change the title of this page? The film's now just called The Omen. No 666 anymore. Please?

I have moved the article to reflect the name change. To do it yourself just press the move tab at the top of the page and follow the instructions (this won't work with very new accounts). Rje 17:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Release Time

The wiki lists the release time as 00:06:06 which doesn't really make sense in terms of the 666. Can someone confirm this time? I looked online for a release time but the best I could get was that some places in India released it at 6:06:06. Tclphz 09:17, 06/06/06 (UTC)

I think maybe thats what they meant and got confused, maybe it would be best to remove it. --Xdiabolicalx 19:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jerry Goldsmith???

So I take it that Jerry Goldsmith's music from the original film will be re-used in this re-make (given this site's post-humous credit to him)? Darth Sidious 02:10, 25 May Hmm, the line was probably something along the lines of "Did I scare you?". I honestly can't remember, as I have only seen the movie once, and it was when it came out. -MW

2006 (UTC)

Damian's Lines

In the trivia section, he is credited with 3 lines, and 2 screams. However, I can only recall two lines. (spoilers may ensue)

When he speaks at the zoo and when he pleads his father not to kill him. In the previews, you can see Damian tell his mother goodbye before she falls off of the balcony, but that was cut from the movie (at least, I don't recall it.

Is that the third line or am I mistaken?

First line is after he scares his mother, then at the zoo, and as far as I can tell, the pleaing at the end. I don't recall him speaking in that scene from the trailer, only silently waving goodbye. --Bacteria 14:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I just saw another preview for the movie, and in it he does whisper "Bye bye." while waving, though the scene definitely wasn't in the movie. So that makes Damian have four lines, though one is cut. Thanks for the help Bacteria. ^_^

I recently saw that advert with the "good-bye" line again, so I'm willing to admit I was mistaken. --Bacteria 13:39, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What was the line where he scares his mother? Also, I am the one who originally credited him with 2 lines and 2 screams as I don't remember more than that. -MW

I really can't recall; I have a poor memory when it comes to these things. I believe he simply says something about scaring her. But again, I could easily be wrong. --Bacteria 13:39, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember correctly, he said "Boo" as he jumped out from behind a tree in the park. He then asks something along the lines of "Did I scare you, Mommy?"..."I didn't mean to". Ketan Kapoor 14:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Demon?

"He is initially named Deputy Ambassador to his friend, but the ambassador dies at 6:06:06 due to a freak accident caused by a man who may be a demon."

I didn't think there was any inclination that the road worker dragging the manhole cover might be a demon. What about the tramp who threw the cigarette on the floor, and the builder on the roof in Jerusalem? --Adam7davies 19:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of SWAT incorrect

Ive just replaced 'SWAT' (5th paragraph, 'Plot Summary' section) with the appropate Metropolitan Police teams, due to the fact that the British Police do not employ 'SWAT' teams that are named as such.

Rgbriggsy112 20:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katherine has 2 deaths

This article says that Katherine Thorn has 2 deaths, both different. The first is Damien pushing Katherine off the 3rd story landing and the second is Mrs. Baylock putting the air bubble in the tube. Which one is correct? 74.96.212.21 02:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both events occured in the movie. But I recollect that she died in the second one and the first one just killed her unborn child (but I'm not sure). Cbrown1023 02:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the balcony thing put her into the hospikal which is where crazy nanny kills her with the air bubble.I am Paranoid 18:42, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tricycle from the original

When I was watching it, as Thorn heads upstairs when he first gets the call from the photographer, there is a small scene where he sees the dog and there is a tricycle partially obscured by the wall. While it is not the exact same as the original movie's, it is most likely a homage to it (and it's red of course). Anyone else agree? Sabalon 04:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Original Film

Could contributors here please take a look at the original film article which may need a synopsis and some other edits? cyclosarin 13:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who were the robed figures?

In Katherine's dreams, She sees figures dressed in robes and wearing bizzare masks.

I thought it was a jackal skeleton that could walk upright.--ShadowJester07 00:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plot sentence missing

There appears to be a sentence (or more) missing from the plot summary. I haven't seen the film so I can't fix it, but Katherine Thorn's fall/injury appears completely missing; she goes from having a stillbirth to being murdered by Ms Baylock. Was she just bedridden the whole time? Fitfatfighter 06:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unnessary linkage?

Are the links to words like doberman, suicide, nanny, and traffic accident really needed? These seem like really irrelevant linkages to words... Disinclination 06:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

Other "curses" followed young Billy Malboy, the grandson of the chief best boy from the original film. After developing a cyst in his eye from watching a particular VH1 Behind the Music episode, Malboy later developed a stutter after imagining Rue McClanahan watching the remake wearing nothing but an oversized Princess Leah outfit and bagels taped to the side of her head.

Uh... what? I'm taking this out because this almost HAS to be vandalism. Levid37 22:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shoot to Kill or Shoot to Wound

When Robert Thorn is shot, the Police Officer does not follow the Rules of Engagement correctly, merely shouting 'Stop!', before opening fire. This is almost certainly not what would have happened, and the officer would not have shot to kill, merely to wound or incapacitate. This scene also appears in the novel and the original, with small differences. A theory on why the policeman shot the ambassador is that the officer is in fact a follower of Satan like Mrs. Baylock and knows that Damien is the long-awaited Antichrist. He therefore killed Robert to protect the child.

The part "the officer would not have shot to kill, merely to wound or incapacitate" is untrue. In College (for Criminal Justice) and in the Police Academy they teach you never to draw your weapon and use it unless as a last resort. When you draw you must INTEND to fire you weapon, and when you do fire you aim for center mass (i.e. torso) and your intent is to stop the offender. You NEVER aim a gun to "wound" or "incapacitate" always to kill. Once you shoot your target you then attempt to save his life so that he can be tried, but you never aim to wound.

adarkpath 12:42, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

Not only that, this is a supernatural story. Even if the police did not intend to shoot to kill, accidents certainly would have happened. We can all imagine the press the day after and public reactions - much in the same case of Charles Mendez. Damiens 'protection' would have save him in both cases. DarkMithras —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.246.254 (talk) 19:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:The Omen 666.jpg

Image:The Omen 666.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) 02:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Real????

Could someone please tell me whether "When the Jews return to Zion, When a comet rips the sky, When the Holy Roman Empire rises, Then you and I must die. From the Eternal Sea, He rises, creating armies on either shore, turning man against his brother, till man exists no more." is actually derived from (snippets from) the Bible or not???? If not, then is it just made up???? StaticGull Talk 15:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is is completely made up as part of the original script. It has been suggested that it sounds more like an English translation of Nostradamus than the Bible.99.124.80.42 (talk) 04:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

London location scenes

Watching this movie on TV this evening, it's obvious that the 'London' street scenes were not shot there. The architecture is very un-British and even the windows in the buildings look wrong. Presumably the scenes were shot in Prague to save money.

You have to wonder why the location wasn't moved to Prague given that the shooting was going to take place there. The London location doesn't seem very important to the plot, and only a few script changes would have been needed. --80.176.142.11 (talk) 22:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the screenwriter thought that "Ambassador to Great Britain" had more resonance for English-speaking audiences than "Ambassador to the Czech Republic." WHPratt (talk) 13:04, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleanup

For the love of Old Scratch, someone clean this article up. It's a fucking mess. Sentences like "In the original, the soundtrack uses Gothic songs that cause more fear, in this version the soundtrack is not a big part in the film." are a really good reason to not allow retards on the intertubes contribute to an online Encyclopedia which is in and of itself a piece of shit. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.218.33.168 (talk • contribs)

Moved this comment here from the article main space, where it was posted. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 02:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cross not crucifix.

The item dropped by the priest when he dies is a cross not a crucifix,to be a crucifix it must bear the figure of Christ which this does not.94.196.95.57 (talk) 00:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]