Talk:The Omen (2006 film)

message: 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)
thread_title: Name Change

message: 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)
thread_title:  Release Time 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Damian's Lines 

message: "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)
thread_title:  Demon? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Usage of SWAT incorrect 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Katherine has 2 deaths

message: 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)
thread_title:  tricycle from the original 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Original Film 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Who were the robed figures?

message: 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)
thread_title:  Plot sentence missing 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Unnessary linkage? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Huh? 

message: *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)
thread_title:  Shoot to Kill or Shoot to Wound 

message: :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)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The Omen 666.jpg

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Real???? 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  London location scenes 

message: 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 | talkcont | ~ 02:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article cleanup 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Cross not crucifix.