# Talk:Princess Mononoke

Per the hidden comment at the top of § Plot summary, here's a talk page section in case anyone would like to discuss the changes I've made. I've included a fair bit more detail, about as much as could fit in the the 700-word limit. I've removed obscure Japanese terms like kanrei and jizamurai which don't add much to a reader's understanding of the story and are not brought up in the article again. In general, I've tried to approach the rewrite by working backwards from the newly improved Themes and Style sections, as the encyclopedic purpose of the plot summary is to contextualize the more detailed analyses later in the prose. I welcome any questions or feedback about my work (about this section or elsewhere), so please let me know if you have any! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

As one of the major contributors, I would like to thank you for your efforts on improving this article (including the plot summary). I've been meaning to bring it up to GA for quite a few years. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Also, for the plot description in the lead, I think we can try one of the following:
"Set during Japan's Muromachi period, the film follows Ashitaka, an Emishi prince who journeys west to cure his cursed arm and becomes embroiled in the conflict between Irontown and the forest of the gods, as well as the feud between Lady Eboshi and a human girl raised by wolves, San."
"Set during Japan's Muromachi period, the film follows Ashitaka, an Emishi prince who journeys west to cure his cursed arm and becomes embroiled in the conflict between Irontown and the forest of the gods, as well as the feud between Lady Eboshi and San, a human girl raised by wolves."
"Set in the Muromachi period of Japanese history, the film follows Ashitaka, a young Emishi prince who journeys west to cure his cursed arm and becomes embroiled in the conflict between Irontown and the forest of the gods, as well as the feud between Lady Eboshi and a human girl raised by wolves, San."
"Set in the Muromachi period of Japanese history, the film follows Ashitaka, a young Emishi prince who journeys west to cure his cursed arm and becomes embroiled in the conflict between Irontown and the forest of the gods, as well as the feud between Lady Eboshi and San, a human girl raised by wolves."
If there are any other suggestions, please let me know here. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:24, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
I like the third option best... but I also can't see the difference between it and the current phrasing. :P Like I mentioned earlier, I think "Japan's Muromachi period" reads awkwardly as time periods relate to a country's history, not the country itself. (I've never heard "England's Victorian era", for example.) I also prefer the phrase "a human girl raised by wolves" before San's name to make it clear who the phrase is referring to. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:14, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
While I've gone ahead and rephrased the lead's plot description at the moment, I think Wikipedia:How to streamline a plot summary would help in streamlining any potential unnecessary additions and scene-by-scene recaps in the plot section, which is generally avoided as per WP:FILMPLOT. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:31, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


### Section break
About the header in the article, should we consider using either "Plot" or "Plot summary"? For the part where Eboshi and Jigo attack the boar clan (Eboshi and Jigo lure the boar clan and annihilate them in battle..."), should we simplify the last part into "slay them" or "attack them"? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 09:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

I think I said this in an edit summary before, but I usually prefer "plot summary" as it tells the reader that the section is an incomplete and boiled-down version of the work's story. There's nothing horrible about the simple "plot", but lacking a compelling reason to change it, MOS:VAR advises leaving styling choices like this as is. I think the use of "annihilate" is appropriate in this context, as the film shows the entire clan killed in the battle. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
As we generally avoid euphemisms per WP:EUPHEMISM, is "annihilate" considered one?
Also, some editors including myself use a script tool to check the plot summary word count for TV episodes and films (User:Alex_21/script-plotlength.js); it can be installed in the user's monobook if so needed. In this particular instance, it goes straight into mentioning the summary word count for an episode WP:TVPLOT instead of WP:FILMPLOT; that is partially why I sometimes use online word counter sites to check this summary's word count. Maybe we can ask other WP:FILM editors on this? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
I would not consider annihilate to be a euphemism in this context; it conveys the message directly enough. Thanks for sharing that script, though I don't think we're in need of trimming the word count any further to comply with the MOS (currently at 679 words). —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:59, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Reasonable concerns. As a side note, back in 2012, I found myself in some lively discussions on how we should handle the plot summary during my potential GA push (one of my later plans is to get this article up to FA status so we can feature it as a TFA on July 12, 2027).
For the scene where the Nightwalker dies, the plot description reads "light of the sunrise" (or "sunrise's light" per my recent edit), which would be accurate per these definitions: sunrise is either "the apparent rising of the sun above the horizon" or "the time when the upper limb of the sun appears above the horizon as a result of the diurnal rotation of the earth". So, I think either of the above plot descriptions might work.
While I can admit some of my edits to the plot can cause unintentional ambiguity for other readers when I try trimming it down, I wonder which plot sentences we can streamline as per Wikipedia:How to streamline a plot summary without any loss of meaning. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


### Plot suggestion
Ok, so I would have put this in the article but given it's quite a substantial rewrite, I thought I would let you pick over it here. I have attempted to cut back on some things that didn't seem very necessary, and clarify some of the more interesting themes like them being consumed by hatred, etc. I've also just introduced Nago at the start rather than doing reveals later because it was just taking up space. Same with mentioning the opening battle where he learns he's got super strength, the strength seemed more important than the battle. 

In Muromachi era Japan, the last Emishi prince, Ashitaka, kills a gigantic boar demon to protect his village, but his arm is afflicted by its curse. The boar, once the god Nago, was corrupted by its hatred for humans. Learning that the curse will eventually kill him, Ashitaka chooses exile and journeys west, seeking a cure by uncovering the source of Nago's hatred.

On his journey, Ashitaka discovers that the curse grants him supernatural strength. He encounters a monk named Jigo, who advises him to seek answers in the nearby mountains from the Forest Spirit—a deer-like god of life and death that transforms into the giant Nightwalker at sunset. Guided by tiny kodama, Ashitaka ventures into the forest of the gods, where he catches a glimpse of the Forest Spirit.

He arrives at Irontown, a settlement that has deforested the surrounding area to mine iron ore for powerful firearms, giving its inhabitants an advantage over the giant beasts guarding the forest. The town's revered leader, Lady Eboshi, admits to shooting Nago, instilling the hatred that corrupted him. She also reveals her plan to kill the Forest Spirit, hoping to end the beasts' resistance and enable Irontown to prosper. Though Ashitaka's cursed arm tries to attack Eboshi, he resists its influence. Eboshi is collaborating with Jigo, who stands to be richly rewarded for delivering the Forest Spirit's head—believed to grant immortality—to the Emperor.

Irontown is attacked by the wolves, led by Moro and her adopted human daughter, San. San duels with Eboshi, but Ashitaka subdues them both and suffers a grievous wound in the process. Empowered by the curse, he carries San to the forest before collapsing. San threatens to kill him for sparing Eboshi but is taken aback when he compliments her beauty. She brings Ashitaka to the Forest Spirit, who heals his wounds, though the curse remains. As San nurses him back to health, they grow closer, but she struggles with her deep distrust of humans.

The next day, the remnants of Nago's boar clan, led by the blind god Okkoto, declare their intention to attack Irontown, preferring to die in battle rather than grow weaker and become prey for humans. Ashitaka vainly pleads with them to resist the hatred that corrupted Nago and now afflicts him. He asks Moro to let San leave with him, but she refuses and banishes him from the forest.

The boars assault Irontown but are annihilated by its weaponry. Moro, San, and the mortally wounded Okkoto retreat to the forest, unknowingly followed by Eboshi and Jigo, who uses the blood of Okkoto's fallen boars to deceive him into leading them to the Forest Spirit. San tries to stop Okkoto, but his pain transforms him into a demon, engulfing her in the process. With Moro's remaining strength, she and Ashitaka free San. The Forest Spirit arrives, granting peaceful deaths to Okkoto and Moro. As it transitions into the Nightwalker, Eboshi beheads it. The Forest Spirit's body then transforms into a dark, chaotic fluid that expands in search of its head, killing everything it touches—including the forest—and briefly reanimates Moro's head, which bites off Eboshi's arm.

Though reluctant to help the humans, San joins Ashitaka in pursuing Jigo to recover the Forest Spirit's head. Ashitaka evacuates Irontown before the Nightwalker's destructive body can consume it, and together, he and San retrieve the head from Jigo, returning it to the Nightwalker. As the sun rises, the Nightwalker collapses and dissolves into the wind. In its place, the devastated land and town are renewed with abundant flora, and Ashitaka's curse is lifted.

A repentant Eboshi vows to rebuild Irontown with greater care and compassion. Ashitaka and San acknowledge their deep connection. While Ashitaka chooses to help with Irontown's reconstruction and San, unable to forgive humanity, decides to stay in the forest, they promise to meet as often as they can.

Let me know what you think, if you want to use it I'd like to put it in just for attribution purposes. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:03, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

I think it looks good. Maybe Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch can help with regards to potential weasel words and so on. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:17, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, Darkwarriorblake! There are some inaccuracies in this version, but I think it's headed in the right direction in terms of where you've condensed events down. I'll make some changes when I have a moment this weekend and ping you again if you want to move it into the article. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Mox Eden is doing a copyedit of this article at the moment; we'll probably incorporate said copyedits into the proposed summary later on. If you have concerns about Mox Eden's copyedits, there's the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors talk page. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:50, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Now that the copy-edit is done, I've boldly added the summary into the article. We'll hash out any additional implementations or differences here, line by line if needed. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:00, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
Noting here that I've reverted and I'll try to get a version of Darkwarriorblake's rewrite here with corrections sometime today or tomorrow. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:46, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
Duly noted. No rush. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 10:36, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
What do we think of this one? I've blended in sentences from the old version to fill in a few gaps or inaccuracies, but I think the flow and the balance of plot elements is better, as I mentioned earlier. Word count is 616. Darkwarriorblake, courtesy ping, and feel free to move this into the article if you'd like.In Muromachi-era Japan, the last Emishi prince, Ashitaka, kills a gigantic demon to protect his village, but his arm is afflicted by its curse. The demon, once the boar god Nago, was corrupted by an iron ball embedded in its body. Learning that the curse will eventually kill him, Ashitaka is exiled to the west, seeking a cure by uncovering the source of Nago's hatred.On his journey, Ashitaka discovers that the curse grants him supernatural strength. He encounters a monk named Jigo, who advises him to seek answers in the nearby mountains from the Forest Spirit – a deer-like god of life and death that transforms into the giant Nightwalker at sunset. Guided by tiny kodama, Ashitaka passes through the forest of the gods, where he catches a glimpse of the Forest Spirit. Nearby, a group of men led by Lady Eboshi repel an attack by a pack of wolves led by the goddess Moro and her adopted human daughter, San.Ashitaka arrives at Irontown, a settlement that has deforested the surrounding area to mine iron, leading to conflicts with the nearby lord Asano and the animal gods of the forest. However, the town shelters former prostitutes and people with leprosy, who work to manufacture firearms. Eboshi, the town's leader, admits to shooting Nago, instilling the hatred that corrupted him. She also reveals her plan to kill the Forest Spirit, hoping to eradicate the gods and enable Irontown to prosper. Though Ashitaka's cursed arm tries to attack Eboshi, he resists its influence. Eboshi is collaborating with Jigo, who stands to be richly rewarded for delivering the Forest Spirit's head – believed to grant immortality – to the Emperor.The wolves attack; San infiltrates Irontown and duels Eboshi. Ashitaka subdues them both, but is shot by a townsperson. Strengthened by the curse, he takes San out of the town before collapsing. San threatens to kill him for sparing Eboshi, but is taken aback when he compliments her beauty. She brings Ashitaka to the Forest Spirit, who heals his wound but leaves the curse. The next day, a boar clan, led by the blind god Okkoto, declare their intention to attack Irontown, preferring to die in battle rather than allow their kind to diminish. Ashitaka recovers and implores Moro to let San escape with him, but the gods banish him from the forest.The boars assault Irontown's forces but are annihilated by their weaponry. San and the mortally wounded Okkoto retreat to the forest, unknowingly followed by Eboshi and Jigo, who use the blood of the fallen boars to deceive Okkoto into leading them to the Forest Spirit. San tries to stop him, but his pain transforms him into a demon, engulfing her. With Moro's remaining strength, she and Ashitaka free San. The Forest Spirit grants peaceful deaths to Okkoto and Moro. As it transforms into the Nightwalker, Eboshi beheads it. Its body explodes into a dark, chaotic fluid that expands in search of its head, killing everything it touches – including the forest – and briefly reanimates Moro's head, which bites off Eboshi's arm.Though reluctant to help the humans, San joins Ashitaka in pursuing Jigo to recover the Forest Spirit's head. Ashitaka evacuates Irontown as the Nightwalker's body floods it, and together, he and San retrieve the head from Jigo, returning it to the Nightwalker. As the sun rises, the Nightwalker dies and dissolves into the wind. In its place, the devastated land is renewed with abundant flora, and Ashitaka's curse is lifted. A repentant Eboshi resolves to build a better town. While Ashitaka chooses to help with Irontown's reconstruction, San, unable to forgive humanity, decides to stay in the forest. They promise to meet as often as they can.Bottom text. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
This is mostly good, I will say I don't see the purpose of mentioning Lord Asano, while he creates some issues in the narrative he's ultimately unimportant and you can never mention him without creating issue, it's the conflict with the animals that is the main element. It would be different if Asano killed all the women because of Eboshi's focus, but she ultimately trusts them to beat his men and it's the Nightstalker that does the town in. Other than that, it looks fine. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 09:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
While I've made some small copyedits here and there, I also think the plot looks good at the moment. Of course, we can always ask for some additional local editor feedback as needed. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Fair enough. Since you've cut out the siege of Irontown later on, I agree there's no longer any purpose mentioning Asano; I've removed it. I've also switched the dashes back over to en dashes (–) for consistency with the rest of the article. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 14:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
FYI, en dash is typically for ranges, such as numbers, typically replacing "to", em dash is for how it is used in this plot section, for asides or other extra information, it's similar to a comma but more explicit, and there shouldn't be spaces around them. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
 Spaced en dashes can be used interchangeably with unspaced em dashes as punctuation; I've seen both in common use by various publications, and MOS:DASH approves of both. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Princess Mononoke/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs) 05:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Rhain (talk · contribs) 06:22, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Happy to take this one! I thoroughly enjoyed reviewing Castle in the Sky in 2023, so I'm looking forward to this one. Apologies in advance for any delays—there's a lot to get through, and I want to ensure I do it justice. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 06:22, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


### Lead and infobox
Considering how the original credits split its cast list (Ashitaka and San, then Eboshi and Jigo, then most of the others), I think it would be fine to limit the infobox cast list to the top four
It might be beneficial to do the same in the lead, but that's up to you
I would also prefer if this list was shorter, but I'm simply copying over the list of actors starred on the poster, which I believe is common practice and is also suggested by the template documentation. I'm going to call this one  not done. —TS
You're right; I somehow completely missed the names in the poster. ☔
the film's marketing, then the largest promotional campaign in Japan → the marketing, then the largest film advertisement campaign in Japan
Not done, seeing as the campaign involved things other than advertisements like preview screenings. —TS
clock Understandable, but I don't think this is supported within the article, which describes it as the largest film advertisement campaign in Japan at the time. ☔
Hmm, I'm unsure from the rough translation I have of the source whether Kanō means the entire campaign was the largest or just the advertisements. To err on the side of caution, though, I'll indeed take your suggestion. —TS
and it was given → and was given
 Done —TS
but underperformed gives the impression that the underperformance is somehow linked to the translation; consider rephrasing
 Done. Rephrased and used a semicolon instead of a conjunction, which I suppose is good enough. Feel free to suggest any alternative phrasing you think might be more elegant. —TS
rereleases → releases
 Done —TS
The film received → It received
 Done —TS


### Plot summary
Asano, and a giant boar → Asano and a giant boar
 Done —TS


### Voice cast
Consider rephrasing the captions as sentences—e.g., Claire Danes (pictured in 2015) voiced San.—though I can see these are consistent with the other captions below too, so fine either way
 Done —TS
Link Makoto Satō, Tetsu Watanabe, and Akira Nagoya
 Done —TS
Re-order the characters per the Japanese credits:

 Done —TS
Some sources (e.g.) claim that John DiMaggio also portrayed Nago in English, but this isn't in the credits so it's up to you if you want to include it
Some also claim that Pat Fraley played Ushikai, but unfortunately I can't find any sources verifying this
Though I didn't spot the Nago one, I recall looking around for sources that might fill in the unknowns on the list a while ago and didn't find anything useful. —TS


### Development
Early concepts and pre-production
(mononoke)—considering changing ) to {{--)}} to avoid a text collision
All bracket fixes  done. —TS
However, after unsuccessfully... → After unsuccessfully...
 Done —TS
Very few of the ideas from the 1980 concept appear in the final film—the reference seems to suggest that key elements were retained, even if the basic plot itself is very different; consider rephrasing to reflect this
 Done —TS
few of the ideas → few ideas
 Done —TS
destroyed, and its slaves → destroyed and its slaves
 Done —TS
but nonetheless continued to consider → but still considered
 Partly done; I've gone with "but continued to consider", which I think flows better. —TS
April 1994 → August 1994, according to McCarthy
Oops, that's a slightly embarrassing error on my part.  Done and fixed the citation. —TS
he decided to take a break → he took a break
 Done —TS
returned to the film and began working on the storyboards in April 1995 → returned to the film in April 1995 and began working on the storyboards in May or something similar, per McCarthy
 Done —TS
In May 1995 → In May—though I think this needs referencing specifically
Went with "that month", since May is now being mentioned in the sentence before it. Kanō, thankfully, came to the rescue with the production timeline. —TS
The island's isolation and relative lack of development—could you please highlight the specific passage in the reference/s to support this? Not doubting it, just spot-checking
Couldn't figure it out either, so I've rephrased and switched the source to McCarthy. I'm not sure what's going on with this sub-section, but I suspect the source-text integrity drifted a bit when I removed references to Dani Cavallaro a little bit ago, and these slipped by me. This is why it helps to have someone who knows what he's doing assess my work! :) —TS
The fifth, → The fifth art director
 Done —TS
to take inspiration → to draw inspiration
 Done —TS
Production and animation
most expensive animated film → most expensive Japanese animated film or similar
 Done —TS
The film was originally → It was originally
 Done —TS
which needed to be expanded → which was expanded
 Done —TS
¥2.35 billion—that the budget was more than double any previous Studio Ghibli film might be worthy of inclusion, but I'll leave it to you
I'm inclined to agree;  done —TS
Miyazaki's declining sight → His declining sight
 Done —TS
with the animation and the final boards → with the animation, and the final boards
 Done. I believe both are grammatical, but it seems to read better with the comma. (Case in point...) —TS
the background illustrations and to animating background characters → the background illustrations and to background characters' animations or to illustrating backgrounds and animating background characters
 Done using the latter. —TS
Each one → Each
 Done —TS
unprecedented in the animation industry → unprecedented
 Done —TS
the daytime shots would be handled by one director while another covered the nighttime → one handled the daytime shots while another covered the nighttime
 Done —TS
with less than a month from the release date → less than a month from the release date or with less than a month until the release date
Alternatively, consider flipping the sentence—The final shots were completed in June 1997, less than a month before the release date.
 Done. I think I phrased it that way because I was afraid of too closely paraphrasing from the source, but in retrospect the copyright violation concern is really not that potent over just one sentence. —TS
Computer graphics
realized with → created using or similar
 Sure —TS
five minutes of the film → five minutes
 Done —TS
and in a 1997 interview with members of the computer graphics team at Studio Ghibli, they felt → and by 1997, members of Studio Ghibli's computer graphics team felt
 Done —TS
was adopted as a technique → was adopted
 Done —TS
were well known → was well-known
 Partly done; "were" → "was", but leaving unhyphenated since "well known" is not acting as an adjective in this context. —TS
came as a surprise to audiences → came as a surprise to many or similar, as I'm not sure "audiences" is specifically supported by the reference
 Done; removed the "to audiences" and attributed the statement to Denison to avoid saying something weaselly or otherwise suspect in Wikipedia's voice. —TS
the opening sequence with the demon god → the demon god in the opening sequence
 Done —TS
Certain sequences in the film → Certin sequences
 Done —TS
Three broad categories—the punctuation of this sentence doesn't make it entirely clear what these three categories are; consider using semicolons between them
 Done. I could've sworn I'd done that already! —TS
alternate being rendered with each approach between shots → alternate between rendering approaches in different shots
 Done —TS


### Themes
Conflicts of nature, technology, and humanity
Ashitaka – the protagonist – serves... → Ashitaka serves...
 Done —TS
the film does not present these positions as complete opposites, as many Western works that touch on these themes do → Unlike many Western works with similar themes, the film does not present these positions as complete opposites
 Done —TS
Add {{nowrap}} to the bracketed quote—i.e., {{nowrap|"[embraces]}}
 Done —TS
In a 1998 interview at the Berlin International Film Festival, Miyazaki stated... → In a 1998 interview, Miyazaki stated or even Miyazaki stated
Consider rephrasing stated to avoid repetition with meant to state
Changed to "Miyazaki expressed". —TS
into a film. Miyazaki had declined → into a film; Miyazaki had declined
 Done —TS
elements similar to the play ... themes similar to the Nausicaä—consider rephrasing "similar to the" in one of these
 Done; rephrased the second to "shares several themes with". —TS
he considered to be in violation → he considered a violation
 Done —TS
the preamble—consider linking Causes of World War I
 Done; that seems relevant. —TS
psychological and environmental level → psychological and an environmental level
 Done —TS
No matter → no matter
 Done. It seems I still haven't gotten used to the MOS's quote capitalization preference after a year and a half. —TS
Heterogeneity of society
(minzoku)—considering changing ) to {{--)}}
that claim that its culture → that claim its culture
 Done —TS
Previous entries in Miyazaki's filmography → His earlier films
 Done. The college paper word-count-itis took over for a sec. —TS
She also wrote that ... McCarthy wrote that...—consider rephrasing "wrote" in one of these
 Done —TS
the only one of Miyazaki's female protagonists → Miyazaki's only female protagonist
 Done —TS
the conflicting philosophies the film presents → the film's conflicting philosophies or the conflicted philosophies presented by the film
 Done —TS
Miyazaki's decisions to have female characters work on iron and people with leprosy manufacture weapons → Miyazaki's depictions of female characters working on iron and people with leprosy manufacturing weapons
 Done —TS
I'm envious of how you've written this section—it reads so effortlessly
Thanks, it's very encouraging to hear that you think that! § Themes was definitely the most challenging one to structure and bring together, and it still somehow doesn't feel quite finished to me. Maybe one day I'll split this into its own article and use the room to wax eloquent to my heart's content. (Though you'd be forgiven for thinking that's already happened!) —TS
 Question:   By the way, do you have any suggestions for illustrations in this section? It would probably be best to break this section up a little, but all of the obvious choices to me (portraits of the scholars mentioned, or a picture of the sanatorium) don't seem to have any available free images. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Actually, I'd forgotten about the image of the sanatorium gate, which I'd passed over a while ago because it doesn't show very much. Lacking a better option, though, I've put it in. I'd still appreciate suggestions if you have any ideas. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
I'll have another look—will let you know if I come up with anything. ☔
 If you're still considering images of scholars, here are some photographs that might work. Still waiting on VRT for some, so we may lose one or two, but hopefully it's a good start. ☔
Oh, excellent — thank you so much for working to get many of these images uploaded! I was referring more to the Japanese scholars who influenced Miyazaki, but there's also something very nice about giving a spotlight to the people whose work this article is built on.  Added —TS
I looked into those scholars too, but their (freely licensed) photographs are even more difficult to track down... Glad I could help! ☔


### Style
Link Zen gardens
 Done —TS
it is untamed, violent, and is largely avoided → it is untamed, violent, and largely avoided
 Done —TS
in order to facilitate → to facilitate
 Done —TS
felt that the film's world → felt that its world
 Done —TS
than his previous works → than Miyazaki's previous works
 Done —TS
the nostalgic depictions of historical settings that Miyazaki had previously created → Miyazaki's previous nostalgic depictions of historical settings
 Done —TS
can be tied the → can be tied to the
Whoops,  done! —TS
industry standard of staff being employed on short-term contracts → industry standard of employing staff on short-term contracts
well suited → well-suited
 Not done, as before. —TS


### Release
Marketing and Japanese release
Consider adding {{hsp}} between The Legend of Ashitaka and the footnote
 Done —TS
to make up the large production budget → to make up for the large production budget
 Done —TS
word of mouth—consider linking Word-of-mouth marketing
 Done —TS
had had → had
Eh, the perfect past reads better in my head as it correctly implies that Porco Rosso was before Princess Mononoke, while the simple past does not. I do see that the duplicate word could be confusing for others, so I don't mind changing it if you think it would be prudent, but let's call it  not done for now. —TS
I think the simple past reads simpler, but either options works so I'm fine with it. ☔
the scale of the marketing campaign → the marketing campaign's scale
 Sure —TS
approach to the release → release approach
Trimmed to just "approach". —TS
1800 cinemas → 1,800 cinemas
MOS:DIGITS approves of both, and I must confess to a preference for comma-less four-digit numbers, sorry! —TS
The inconsistency between the four- and five-digit numbers pains me—but you're right: the guideline has spoken. ☔
people queueing → audiences queueing
 Sure —TS
put out special issues for the film's release → released special issues for the film
 Done —TS
(daihitto)—considering changing ) to {{--)}}
come to see → seen
 Partly done using "saw" — the simple past! —TS
It's already in the footnote, but consider adding the reference to the end of the last paragraph as well
 Done —TS
English dub and American release
In an interview, Gaiman claimed → Gaiman claimed
 Done —TS
Gaiman was intending → Gaiman intended
 Done: "had intended". —TS
a scene in the film in which → a scene in which
 Done —TS
differences between the English dub and the original create a product more closely approaching → English dub's differences more closely resemble
 Partly done: "the English dub's changes more closely approach". —TS
continually comingled → commingled
 Done —TS
the languages and cultures of the two → the two languages and cultures
 Done —TS
Gaiman recalled in later interviews → Gaiman later recalled or simply Gaiman recalled
 Done with the former. —TS
alterations were sometimes made to the script → some script alterations were made
 Done —TS
Several of the changes cut out → Several changes removed
 Done —TS
the setting of the film → the film's setting or simply the setting
 Done with the latter. —TS
Nicholson felt these decisions to be indicative → Nicholson found these decisions indicative
 Done —TS
a collection of American and British accents → American and British accents
 Partly done: "various American ..." —TS
in order to further remove → to further remove
 Done —TS
films from overseas → international films
 Done —TS
screened for the first time → first screened
 Done —TS
and officially premiered → and premiered
 Done —TS
Home media and other releases
A number of books → Several books
 Done —TS
the English dub's total → the English dub's total earnings or similar
 Done —TS
was not initially to include → was not initially set to include or similar
 Done —TS
was delayed as a result → was consequently delayed or even just was delayed
 Done with the former. —TS
in 2014. It was included → in 2014, and it was included
 Done —TS
Blu-ray and DVD—I typically see this written as DVD and Blu-ray, but I suppose this order is alphabetical so it seems logical too
I agree that it rolls off the tongue a little better.  Done —TS
Six of the last seven sentences (soon to be six of six if this is actioned) use the film—consider rephrasing
 Done; about half converted to pronouns. —TS


### Music
The release date and recording year in the infobox need referencing (this should work for the former)
The release date is given and cited in the table, but I've removed the recording year, which seems to be a holdover from a previous version of the article that was a little lighter on references. —TS
many of Miyazaki's previous films—technically it's all but one, so most might be more appropriate
 Done, though I wonder how much I'm riding the line of original research with this phrase, since McCarthy technically only implies it. —TS
clock Napier 2018 p. 71 mentions their collaboration a little more explicitly, and I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to track down others that do the same. ☔
Cool, I'll leave your suggested phrasing in then. —TS
You could add the Napier ref to be safe if you prefer, but I'll leave it to you. ☔
the film's score → Princess Mononoke's score
 Done —TS
development of the score → the score's development
 Done —TS
Japanese elements from the film. However, she also acknowledged → the film's Japanese elements, but she also acknowledged
 Done —TS
Leitmotifs, for example, which are... → For example, leitmotifs, which are...
 Sure —TS
The third paragraph uses also thrice—consider removing/replacing one, particularly one of the last two
 Done —TS
The last sentence is fascinating but gives little—are there any other details about this?
Unfortunately not, as McCarthy does not elaborate, and I've come across no other scholarly sources that discuss the soundtrack in detail that aren't already here. As a musician, it's a bummer to be so brief in this section, but it is what it is. I'll probably go looking for more to add at some point, but I really needed to get this GAN review done before accidentally spending another year on this article, lol. —TS
clock Seems unfortunately common from that particular source. This oneseems to have a tidbit worth including, but sadly I think we're limited to what we've got. ☔
I've actually read another chapter in that collection on Joe Hisaishi's work, but it unfortunately skips right over this film. Looking through the book again, though, I'm not sure what there is to include. The chapter you mentioned seems to have only this sentence – "Miyazaki's Mononoke-hime has been called a jidaigeki, however it is as much an eco-fantasy as a period work", complete with a citation to Napier – which is nothing that isn't covered in the article already. Ctrl+F-ing for the film's title also doesn't reveal much elsewhere. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
This is the bit I was referencing:
The soundtrack composed by Joe Hisaishi, the main collaborative composer with Hayao Miyazaki since the 1980s, is characteristically orchestral, lush with full strings and occasionally heavy brass motifs that signal the epic qualities of this narrative ... The main theme revels in sonic contrasts evocative of the character's jarring visual qualities: a pretty, young girl whose face is smeared with blood and war-paint. Beginning with a shimmering synth keyboard notes, the magic of the forest is abruptly interrupted with three harsh cluster chords that resolve into San's quasi-pentatonic, melodic motive.
The last sentence piqued my interest the most. It may not fit, but I figured it was worth mentioning anyway. ☔
Ah, I see I should have Ctrl+F-ed for Mononoke-hime and not Princess Mononoke! I've put in a few details from around that paragraph. —TS
I'm not sure the second table entry requires italicisation, as it's the name of a single (per MOS:POPMUSIC)
 Done —TS
Consider mentioning the vinyl record releases somewhere, though that may be trivial
Thanks,  done. I forget how relatively old, and therefore incomplete, these sources are sometimes. —TS


### Reception
Critical response
I assume the first two paragraphs correspond to the Japanese and international response—I typically prefer to split by thematic element per WP:CRS but I think this approach is logical
I generally do as well, but in this case many of the sources talked about the receptions in each region quite separately, so I followed in their footsteps. —TS
I'm not too familiar with the reviews, but are there more responses to the film itself—the art style, animation, script, performances, music?
There almost certainly is; 1065 reviews, not counting the Japanese ones, really are something. This section is another candidate for splitting into its own article if anyone has the mind to look into it. Like I said earlier, though, I have to draw the line somewhere or you may never see my head poke out of this rabbit hole again. To be reasonably confident the section gives appropriate weight to all of its arguments, I limited the reviews I quoted to those that fit into the major themes identified by Kanō, Pett, and Yoshioka. —TS
clock Seems like a good call. Do you think there's enough information in these reviews to perhaps justify one more paragraph? Is there general consensus among reviewers about different elements of the films (acting, music, sound design, etc.—whether positive or negative) that might be worth summarising and including? ☔
Thanks for the push on this; I've added a few more arguments that Pett quotes in her chapter. Neither Yoshioka nor Kanō appear to have anything else. Again, I'm hesistant to start compiling arguments from reviews myself due to the inevitable risk of placing improper weight on one theme or the other, which is why I'm leaning on the scholars so much. Relatedly, though, there's probably enough in Pett's chapter to flesh out an "Audience response" subsection, but that's a bit beyond the time and energy I have to put into writing at the moment — maybe a task for future me. Either way, I think the section meets the GA standard; it's not comprehensive, but it is broad. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your work on this. I agree it may be worth considering a little more expansion if you plan on going for FA, but the quality absolutely surpasses GA standards, so I'm happy. ☔
but also in response → as well as in response
 Done —TS
the factors that contributed → the contributing factors
 Done —TS
the film's themes → the themes (×2)
 Done —TS
viewers in Japan → Japanese viewers
 Done —TS
felt that the text was → found the text
 Done —TS
others also favorably → others favorably
 Done —TS
Roger Ebert is technically a duplicate link, but the first instance is so long ago that it's probably fine to repeat if you'd prefer
 Removed for now, but I might go through the article later and add repeat links where they are prudently distant. —TS
concluded that the film was the greatest of Miyazaki's works → considered the film Miyazaki's best
 Done —TS
a nomination at the Academy Awards → an Academy Award nomination
 Done —TS
Pett and Andrew Osmond of The Guardian → Pett and The Guardian's Andrew Osmond to avoid implying Pett wrote for the The Guardian
 Done —TS
certain violent → some violent
 Done —TS
featured the film → featured Princess Mononoke, then ranked Princess Mononoke → ranked it
 Done —TS
Time Out should probably be italicised as it's being treated as an outlet in this instance (per MOS:WEBITALICS)
Huh, the footnote at that guideline seems to dislike my use of the |publisher= parameter to unitalicize names in citation templates. I've fixed Time Out for now, and I might get back to the rest of them (and all my other articles) when I have a little less on my plate. Thanks for calling it out! —TS
clock Time Out should also be italicised in the article's title, and you could also add the author/s (either all seven, or simply David Jenkins, who wrote Mononoke's blurb). ☔
 Done with David Jenkins. —TS
Time Out and Total Film's rankings could probably be combined, especially as the film ranked the same on both lists (though Total Film's was actually the top 75, not 50)
 Done —TS
Here are two more lists to consider: Empire and Paste
Thanks,  done. This paragraph is probably the one I've touched the least in my rewrite, so I appreciate the help with getting it into shape. —TS
Accolades
Princess Mononoke was submitted by Japan to be nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 70th Academy Awards but was ultimately unsuccessful. → Japan submitted Princess Mononoke for Best Foreign Language Film at the 70th Academy Awards but it was not nominated.
That it was unsuccessful needs a reference—here's one that would work
 Done —TS
The first two awards appear to be backwards—readers gave it first, critics second
Indeed,  fixed —TS
Composition Award—I could be wrong, but my translation reads Best Original Score
Nausicaa.net calls it "Best Composer", so that's what I've gone with. —TS
Music of Princess Mononoke → Princess Mononoke Soundtrack
 Done —TS
Consider clarifying that the Japan Record Awards for Best Album Production was also won by three others, and the Takasaki Film Festival award for Best Director by one other
 Done —TS


### Legacy
the most significant of Miyazaki's feature films → Miyazaki's most significant feature film
 Done —TS
She wrote that the film → She wrote that it
 Done —TS
Miyazaki included → including Miyazaki
 Done —TS
to the making of the film → to production or to making the film
 Done with the former. —TS
He retired in 1998 → He resigned in 1998 or similar, as I don't believe it was intended as a full retirement
 Done. Napier states "Miyazaki had actually quit on January 14, 1998" on the page cited, which I suppose could be taken either way, but I trust that you have a bit more insight on the man's life, having written his article. —TS
He briefly quit Studio Ghibli, but it's unclear if it was intended as a retirement from professional work or simply from the studio. (In any case, it's been 27 years and the man's still working, so I doubt his retirement would have lasted long regardless of Kondō's unfortunate death.) ☔
the untimely death → the death
 Done —TS
Neon Genesis Evangelion → Neon Genesis Evangelion (1995–1996)
 Done —TS
the film also laid → the film laid
 Done —TS
anime as a whole → anime
 Done —TS
Yoshioka also felt → Yoshioka felt
 Done —TS
cult film—consider adding more references to support this statement
 Done. I'd originally added this claim because of this edit, so I've pulled one of the sources from List of cult films: P in that spirit. —TS


### Notes
The first, fifth, and seventh footnotes are sentence fragments and therefore don't require terminal punctuation
 Done —TS
overturned → overtaken or something similar
 Sure —TS


### References
A recent FAC resulted in reference titles being changed to title case per MOS:TITLECAPS—not something I'm concerned about (or agree with) but something to keep in mind if you ever consider seeking the golden star
Ooh, thanks for the heads up. That isn't something I agree with either, but that's a bridge we can cross when we come to. (In this article's case, that bridge would be only one of many, many more hurdles on the journey to the bronze star...) —TS
Book and journal sources
Kanō 2006: Hayao Miyazaki bibliography#The Complete Hayao Miyazaki → The Complete Hayao Miyazaki
 Done —TS
Magazine and news sources
Ebert 1999b: Rogerebert.com → RogerEbert.com
 Done —TS
Online and other sources
When references lack an author, I generally prefer to alphabetise by the title per APA, but I've not seen any guidelines so alphabetising by publisher seems logical
Anime News Network should probably be italicised per MOS:WEBITALICS
 Done —TS
Toyama: remove |ref={{harvid|Toyama}} as the reference works fine without it (and it adds it to this category)
 Done —TS
Total Film: add Josh Winning as an author and May 13, 2014 as the publication date, remove |ref={{harvid|Total Film}}, change its {{sfn}} from {{sfn|''Total Film''}} → {{tl|sfn|Kinnear|Winning|2014}}, and alphabetise. The URL is also dead, and should probably be linked directly to here
 Done —TS


### Images
File:Billy Crudup 2015 1b.jpg, File:Claire Danes.jpg, File:Shiratani Unsui Gorge 17.jpg, File:Kaparamipu and attushi, Ainou clothings. Museum der Kulturen Basel.jpg, File:HayaoMiyazakiCCJuly09.jpg, File:Toshio Suzuki, Howl's Moving Castle premiere.jpg, File:Gaiman, Neil (2007).jpg, File:Joe Hisaishi 2011.jpg, and File:James Cameron by Gage Skidmore.jpg are all free images on Commons
File:Tama Zenshoen Sanatorium gate.jpg is also free on Commons
File:Princess Mononoke Japanese poster.png is the film's official poster and has an appropriate fair use rationale
File:Mononoke hime cgi.png is a non-free film screenshot with an appropriate fair use rationale, and is used appropriately in the article to demonstrate the film's important use of computer graphics


### Result
What a fantastic article, as expected—possibly even even more enjoyable to read than Castle in the Sky, which is saying something; you've outdone yourself. There's very little that requires major attention here—most comments are minor personal suggestions and, as always, are open to discussion and disagreement. I'll put this on hold for now, but there's very little work required before this article earns its well-deserved green plus. Great work! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 14:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the excellent review, as always. Just noting that I'm most of the way through addressing the comments, but I need to wrap it up for the evening. Expect my responses in a few hours! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 07:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the update! Take all the time you need; as I mentioned, I may be delayed in responding anyway. Looking forward to seeing your work and comments! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 09:20, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
@Rhain: And done! I have a few questions here and there which you may want to take a look at, but I think we're getting close to the finish line. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your patience, and for your great work and responses! I've left a few replies above (clock). I agree—definitely close to the finish line. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 04:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
@Rhain: Responses are above! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your work and responses! I've left two more comments above, but they're only for consideration and will absolutely not hold up the review any longer. I'm very happy with the work that you've done, and I hope you are too. Here's your reward: . Congratulations! – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 02:00, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I have been thinking: should we consider adding details about the casting for the article in the development section? I can also help with finding some of the Japanese sources for this section as well as different sections of the article as necessary. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 10:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Sure, that sounds great to me if you know of any sources that cover that aspect in more detail. Kanō 2006 has a few details here and there, but nothing I'd consider substantial enough for its own subsection yet. Carter 2018 also has discussion about the casting choices made for the English dub. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:07, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
A couple of sources I can find include Animage, Newtype, the Yomiuri Shimbun (and The Japan News), the Asahi Shimbun, the Mainichi Shimbun (and The Mainichi), The Japan Times, and so on. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:57, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Would you mind linking them here if possible or sharing the issue numbers of the magazines so I can take a look through them? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
All right. Here goes:
Newtype
Yomiuri Shimbun (The Japan News)
Asahi Shimbun (English Version)
Mainichi Shimbun (The Mainichi)
The Japan Times
Some of those links are in Japanese (which I am proficient at, along with other users who can help such as Nihonjoe and Knowledgekid87). I'll try translating them when I have the time. Also, maybe we can use The Art of Princess Mononoke to expand upon the other sections of this article. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 11:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
These are all links to the home pages of the publications; do you have any specific articles in mind? On the art book, I've tried to be judicious about adding detail from it as it is a primary source. I think it might be better to start looking at scholarly sources that cover these aspects to avoid the trap of inadvertently adding fancruft to this section. Outside of the sources already in the article, I can only think of The Anime Machine for another English-language source that may have more to say about the animation. There are also lots of Japanese books and magazine special issues listed at this Nausicaa.net page which are sure to have much more. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Regarding the publication links, I added the home pages so that users can search for articles on Ghibli films (including this one) via said pages' search bars, whether it's in Japanese or English. Also, those publications have digital archives. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


### Casting interviews
Here are some interviews regarding the film's casting:

Ghibli interview with Yoji Matsuda which also includes his work on Nausicaä (in Japanese)
Bunshun interview with Yoji Matsuda (in Japanese)
Real Sound interview with Hayao Miyazaki which details how he cast each character (in Japanese)
The above list will be expanded as I find more sources. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 10:56, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I can take a look and incorporate these when I have a little more time on my hands. You can also consider leaving these in the {{Refideas}} template at the top of this page. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
No problem. After all, there is no deadline. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

To address the changes to the lead's reception summary and the hidden comment's brief addition, unless we have a source or group of sources summarizing the critical reception for us (similar to what Rotten Tomatoes does for most feature films), then we cannot include a summary statement that we have created ourselves as per WP:SYNTH and WP:FILMLEAD. This is what led to the most recent discussion to get it inserted into WP:MOSFILM back in 2023.
At the moment, the only source supporting a general summary of the critical response is Metacritic, which reads "generally favorable" (the site currently has 27 positive reviews and 2 average reviews).
Rather than edit war over this, I thought I would open up a discussion per WP:BRD so others can give their thoughts on this matter. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Sjones23, there are multiple sourced statements in § Critical response that support the claim in the lead. Kanō 2006 states "Critics across the United States unanimously praised the film." (p. 216) and Pett 2018 states "... a number of highly positive evaluations of the film. [...] it was widely considered to be a critical success", which I've summarized in that section as "the film received widespread praise from critics in the United States." A few other sources say similar things. Kanō also states "The film was generally well-received in Japan" (p. 217), and there are other direct quotes from him in that section that go into more detail. I think that's more than enough sourcing to justify the phrasing used in the lead — "It received a broadly positive critical response in both Japan and the United States" — which I honestly felt I was underselling in the name of neutrality when I wrote it. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
I can agree with your sentiments about the potential underselling of that particular phrasing. Other discussions on the lead's reception summaries in other film articles such as Talk:Batman & Robin (film)#Reception in the lead and Talk:Raiders of the Lost Ark#Synthesis in the lead section come to mind.
There are actually some reviews on multiple United Kingdom-based newspapers such as the BBC, The Guardian and so on if you search for them online. For the reviews for Japanese release, there are ones from Variety and The Daily Yomiuri. I'll try adding some more reference ideas for reviews and place them at the top of this talk page as needed. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
The question of including more reviews came up during the GAN review, and I would stand by my argument, at least for the moment, that we should refrain from adding more reviews to preserve some semblance of due weight given to each aspect covered in the section. There are an enormous number of reviews that I wouldn't be able to sift through to find the most common comments, so I'm relying on scholars to provide guidance on which aspects are the most important. It's also important to remember that the readily available sources for this section will almost invariably be English-language reviews that have been archived online at some point, so the trap of Western or Anglophone bias is all too easy to fall into. There's an almost equally massive repository of reviews from Japanese critics that are a lot harder to include as they are offline, behind significant paywalls, or simply unusable without human translation. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:18, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Since some of us editors know quite a bit of Japanese like myself (I studied the language for at least one year), User:Nihonjoe and User:Knowledgekid87, I could personally try looking into those. I've also asked on WikiProjects (including WP:JAPAN) for additional input on this.
About the reception section itself, there are some templates we can use as necessary including {{Rotten Tomatoes prose}} and {{Metacritic film prose}}. On most film articles, we usually use RT first and then MC. And for MC, the "generally favorable reviews" has been replaced with "generally favorable" as per Template talk:Metacritic film prose#Update. Some relevant guidelines like Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film#Critical reception come to mind. If we have any problems with this, we can ask on WT:MOSFILM and/or on the templates' talk pages. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Using the The Empire Strikes Back article (which is an FA) as a point of reference, I included some footnotes regarding potential inflations where relevant in general, using the relevant templates ({{Inflation}}, {{Inflation/year}} and {{Inflation/fn}} templates. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:29, 4 March 2025 (UTC)