Talk:Princess Mononoke

Japanese souvenir program

The souvenir program I bought at a Japanese theater when the movie was released in 1997 contains a lot of information that is not well known outside of Japan. So, using it as a source, I have added some information from my area of interest. According to an interview with Hayao Miyazaki, He created the story assuming that Lord Asano was a venerable samurai (bushi) of kanrei status. He explains that this is evident from the fact that Asano is referred to in the play with the honorific title "Kubō". Miyazaki clearly states that the samurai under Asano are jizamurai. He explained how iron making with iron sand destroys the environment of the lower reaches of the river. He also explained that in a time when the distinction between samurai and farmers was blurred, it was natural that if an Iron Town was built in the mountains, there would be a conflict between the Iron Town and the farmers living downstream, and the jizamurai would invade the Iron Town. In the character introduction section on page 6, "Samurai" is listed, showing a scene of several mounted warriors chasing Ashitaka on a burned mountain ridge. They are described as "Unlike the nobushi, these men are fully armed and launch a well-organized attack." This means that the "Samurai" are different characters from the jizamurai and the nobushi. The nobushi are not specified where they appear in the movie. However, given the historical fact that the nobushi were armed peasants, I believe they are the marauders who appear in the scene where Ashitaka first demonstrates his supernatural archery ability through the power of a curse.--SLIMHANNYA (talk) 14:21, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

About recent additions

@Camsteerie: Thanks for taking the time to contribute to this article. I disagree with several of the changes you've made today, some of which I've listed below. Let's talk about them. The changes are visible within this collective diff.

• You added broken links to the article animal worship on phrases such as "boar god" and "wolf goddess". Per the linking guideline, part of the Manual of Style, links should be introduced when they have "relevant connections to the subject of another article that will help readers understand the article more fully". Considering this is an article about a work of fiction, I don't see how a reader would benefit from links to further reading about wolves in real-life mythology from unrelated cultures, which is what the animal worship article covers.
• Also, the sheer number of links you're adding cuts against the grain of MOS:OVERLINK. More links are not always a good thing. For example, some rather everyday terms that don't need links include princess and industrialization.
• You assert in your edit summary that "the film is about animism". That may or may not be the case, but you need to verify that claim with a citation to a reliable source.
• You added a link to the elemental article, which is also unsourced and, again, feels irrelevant when that article discusses a rather different concept from a different culture.
• The claim that the film depicts yōkai needs a citation to a reliable source, as I don't believe the film ever mentions the term, and the body of the article doesn't discuss it either.

Let me know if you have any questions. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

The title of the film is Princess Mononoke (or Mononoke-hime) but this is not the character's name as it is often misconstrued. It may be better to say, "Lady Spirit of Vengeance" as a descriptor for the girl San. It should be noted that the 'hime' in the title can either be 'princess' or 'lady' - it is certainly no Disney character. This too should be made clear.

You should note that I did not insert the terms boar good or wolf goddess - they were already there - I just provided a link so other readers can understand that supernatural spirit would be a better term, but it is not as pithy a term as god.

This is a film about which most of the Western world has little direct understanding - animism in Japanese folklore - in which spirits of the otherworld are seen as animals in this world. If we go back to pre-Christian European, we have the concept of the Green Man and woodwose and other humanoid creatures, which carried forward to a degree, but animism as such is very remote indeed. So explanation for this is help, hence some links are needed. It is blatantly about animism as the non-human characters are animistic spirits.

San, though she is human, is being called a mononnoke - or a vengeful yokai spirit - in an equivalence with the other yokai that look like as animals or animal-like creatures that appear in the film. These points had not been made clear. Read the article on Yōkai which has the linked mononoke as one of the two forms in which they appear - it will clear up much for you.

The film was composed as an environmentalist rebuke to the over-industrialisation of society and the pollution of its waste as can be seen in the ending with the rebuilding of Iron Town in a more sympathetic way to nature rather than fighting against it as it had been previously. As this is a core part of the film's message, then a link to industrialisation is needed.

The forest spirit is an elemental - Japan and China culturally consider wood to be a basic element as much as earth wind and fire - again western and eastern interpretations do not conform easily with one another. Links help people clarify their own thoughts if they choose to follow them.

Let me know if you have any questions.

ASC Camsteerie (talk) 06:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Also, on the subject of over-linked, the fact that all the names in the second sentence of the article is a case of this. Each actor is credited with a link in the side list to the right and in the Voice Cast table, again each actor with a webpage is linked. The is not a need for each and every one of them to be linked again in that 2nd sentence. Take those links out if there's too much blue for you…

ASC Camsteerie (talk) 06:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate that you want to introduce links to potentially ambiguous concepts in order to aid the reader's understanding of those concepts, but the execution is not completely in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. You make several claims in your message which are not (yet) supported by sources in the article. If you believe a concept such as animism needs further elaboration, introduce sourced prose in the article that serves that purpose instead of creating easter egg links. If the claims you're adding to the article don't have a source and are based on your own inferences or opinions, they are not permitted under the no original research and verifiability policies. I suppose that's the fundamental issue I have with your additions, so we need to address that before getting into the weeds with the links. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@TechnoSquirrel69

At its core, Wikipedia runs on links, but excessive use is counter-productive if used on every word. Everyday words are left as is, but where novel terms are introduced, a link should be obligatory and a brief description, so long as it does not detract from the statement being made. Otherwise articles end up with endless digressions.

What you propose will lead to an article full of digressions and no links. Do you want this?

You state you do not like links for some reason - I suggest a way of ridding many superfluous ones in the opening paragraph where there is obvious excessive linking.

I make no claims, these points are self-evident in the viewing of the film, that the film brings in numerous aspects of Japanese folklore and religion of supernatural spirits of creatures and places - this is animism - that is an integral part of Shintoism and its predecessor religions, as of the Ainu people for example.

The film is not really aimed at young children, but it still is a family film in being and as adults we typically know many terms used. In the West though, animation is typically considered to be targeting children, especially young ones. So if we consider that children may well be seeking Wikipedia to provide an understanding of what the film is about and what it relates to, then there will be a number of issues that will be novel to them and so will need a link to uncover more, but it would make the film article over-long to include these points in the article itself. So we need to have links on the subjects addressed.

So animism, if you want, can be explained in the article as belief in supernatural spirits tied to places, creatures, plants, and other objects, but to go beyond this detracts from the article addressing the film. Thus the optimal way of giving people an in-depth explanation if needed, is to have a link.

The point of that 'Mononoke' is not a name really does really need to be made clear - it is a title and descriptor - but too often it is misconstrued because of the Disney factor and so there needs to be clarification to ensure that the misconception is not perpetuated.

Search for 'mononoke' and it leads directly to a subset of Yokai spirits and so this needs a link but a full-blown description of beyond supernatural spirit or creature is not needed. These are novel terms, so need a link. To exclude links runs counter to the principle of Wikipedia.

[These explanations – comparing Oriental and European mythology - here and above, I am putting to you directly, but I do not suggest that these go into the article unexpurgated.]

ASC Camsteerie (talk) 01:09, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Please don't link concepts like "industrialization" and :animal deity#wolf". No, Wikipedia does not at its core "run" on links"--it is based, at its core, on reliable secondary sources. That the movie "uses folklore and Yōkai spirits with the balance of nature being disturbed by human industrialization to deal with the themes of Shinto and environmentalism" is not based on secondary sources at all, for instance. Drmies (talk) 01:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

It's not that I don't like links, but they should be used appropriately to support the subject and content present in the article. My knee-jerk reaction to your changes was to comment on the links, but the main issue is related to the lack of sourcing, as Drmies also mentions. It's important to remember that the assumed audience of a Wikipedia article (and, of course, any encyclopedic article) are readers with no knowledge of the subject. While it may be obvious to you that animism is an element of Shintoism or the beliefs of the Ainu people, for example, we should not assume readers are even aware of those terms. When the concepts are that important to the article's subject, prose added to the article citing reliable sources is the way to solve that problem, not links. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:41, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

You just said it yourself - you made a 'knee-jerk reaction' - and so, beyond commenting, you undid what I had just done without thinking about it and considering why I may have thought these additional links important. Instead of reacting, may be sitting and considering the changes would have been better?

May be an alternative approach would be, after some consideration, adaptation & restructuring of the new input to make it more coherent and how it addresses the wider scope?

Anyway, forget the animism bit, etc. for a mo. Again, you point out that the assumption for articles is that the readers have no knowledge of the subject. So if a branch subject is mentioned, in the first occurrence, the term always should have a link to the relevant webpage so that the reader can follow through if so desired for further in-depth information.

In this article, the concept of environmentalism linked, so it directly follows that the concept industrialization should be linked - why it should not baffles me - as the one is a reaction to the other.

I beg to differ with Drmies about the point of web-links. Wikipedia is a child of the Internet and both employ at their cores the inter-connectedness of everything and hence we have we-links to take a reader from one webpage / website to another - it is their raison d'etre.

Back to animism and animal worship, in Europe and the western world there has been nigh two millennia of programmatic obliteration of these concepts by monotheistic religions that see paganism as an existential threat. They are now poorly understood and little known of in the west, whereas in the orient they are not. Therefore in obvious links to these subjects are needed to make the subject abundantly clear to the novice reader.

This film is littered with concepts of animism with kami and yokai supernatural spirits. They need explanation, but diatribes in the article of the film on these concepts would be counter-productive.

Yes, I have not cited any references / sourced my text yet, but external critiques on mid-1990s films, especially on-line are not common. Checking many of the current references to this article leads to old websites, not updated or expired links to no longer existent sites.

In essence though, I was not adding new information, but bringing out inferences already in the text to enable a clearer understanding and enabling people new to the subject, to find further information about the concepts already stated from within Wikipedia itself.

ASC Camsteerie (talk) 03:40, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

You misunderstand me when you say my reversions were a knee-jerk reaction — I made the reversions for several other reasons (you might notice I mentioned the sourcing issue at the beginning of this conversation); the "knee-jerk" part was to focus on the links in my opening message. In any case, the text you added has to be cited to reliable sources in order to be kept. There are several online sources available that might be useful in expanding this article — some of them are accessible in the {{Refideas}} template at the top of this talk page, and many are cited in the article, including Denison 2018, collection of scholarly essays on the film. I plan to expand the article in the future myself, but don't have the time at the moment to track down citations for the claims you added. Per the verifiability policy, "any material that needs an inline citation but does not have one may be removed", so I have done so. I'd ask you to please not revert again, and only re-introduce the content along with references. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:18, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

You stated clearly your reaction was knee-jerk and so reverted the text back. You are being utterly dogmatic.

You have reverted it again to what you wrote without addressing any of the issues that I raised.

The most significant aspect is that the you leave no explanation as to why the film is called Mononoke. I provided this context and I also improved the readability of the article.

What you can do is re-edit by explaining your points along with my points. If you have not got time to update the article then leave it for others to do so, until you have time to add something new yourself. You are not the final arbiter on the subject.

ASC Camsteerie (talk) 04:45, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Try this - do not undo it. If you have a problem with the material, then re-edit it. ASC Camsteerie (talk) 05:05, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Academy Award submission

Princess Mononoke was Japanese Academy Award submission for Best Foreign Language Film. Tenil2 (talk) 03:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Hey Tenil2, I can see that you've reverted to your preferred version of the article without comment after I had left an edit summary about why the see also links were unnecessary; could you please explain why you did that? As for the Academy Award, that information is already present in § Accolades. I don't feel it's important enough to note in the lead — not only did the film not win the award, it wasn't even nominated. Let me know what you think, and please leave informative edit summaries when making changes of this kind in the future. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

In Seee also links writes List of submissions in current year and List of submissions of country. Princess Mononoke was Japanese submission in this year. Tenil2 (talk) 06:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

For example you can See other pages like Shoplifters or Drive My Car Tenil2 (talk) 06:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

That does not address my concerns, Tenil2. As I mentioned when I removed them, the lists of Academy Award submissions are already mentioned in the navboxes at the bottom of the article. The Cinema of Japan article is far too generic of a subject to need a link on one specific film. You also didn't mention why you added the information to the lead. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

On other pages where this section is indicated, this information is written, but I did it according to the template. If you want, then delete the set See also, I won’t return it later Tenil2 (talk) 15:22, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Sure, I have done so. I have also reverted the addition to the lead for the reasons I mentioned above. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

About the rewrite of the plot summary

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)

GA Review

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
• the film's marketing, then the largest promotional campaign in Japan → the marketing, then the largest film advertisement campaign in Japan
• and it was given → and was given
• but underperformed gives the impression that the underperformance is somehow linked to the translation; consider rephrasing
• rereleases → releases
• The film received → It received

Plot summary

• Asano, and a giant boar → Asano and a giant boar

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
• Link Makoto Satō, Tetsu Watanabe, and Akira Nagoya
• Re-order the characters per the Japanese credits:

Japanese credits
Ashitaka San Lady Eboshi Jigo Kohroku Gonza Toki Wolf Nago Ushikai Moro Oracle Okkoto

• 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

Development

Early concepts and pre-production

• (mononoke)—considering changing ) to {{--)}} to avoid a text collision
• However, after unsuccessfully... → After unsuccessfully...
• 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
• few of the ideas → few ideas
• destroyed, and its slaves → destroyed and its slaves
• but nonetheless continued to consider → but still considered
• April 1994 → August 1994, according to McCarthy
• he decided to take a break → he took a break
• 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
• In May 1995 → In May—though I think this needs referencing specifically
• 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
• The fifth, → The fifth art director
• to take inspiration → to draw inspiration

Production and animation

• most expensive animated film → most expensive Japanese animated film or similar
• The film was originally → It was originally
• which needed to be expanded → which was expanded
• ¥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
• Miyazaki's declining sight → His declining sight
• with the animation and the final boards → with the animation, and the final boards
• the background illustrations and to animating background characters → the background illustrations and to background characters' animations or to illustrating backgrounds and animating background characters
• unprecedented in the animation industry → unprecedented
• Each one → Each
• the daytime shots would be handled by one director while another covered the nighttime → one handled the daytime shots while another covered the nighttime
• 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.

Computer graphics

• realized with → created using or similar
• five minutes of the film → five minutes
• 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
• was adopted as a technique → was adopted
• were well known → was well-known
• 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
• the opening sequence with the demon god → the demon god in the opening sequence
• Certain sequences in the film → Certin sequences
• Three broad categories—the punctuation of this sentence doesn't make it entirely clear what these three categories are; consider using semicolons between them
• alternate being rendered with each approach between shots → alternate between rendering approaches in different shots

Themes

Conflicts of nature, technology, and humanity

• Ashitaka – the protagonist – serves... → Ashitaka serves...
• 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
• Add {{nowrap}} to the bracketed quote—i.e., {{nowrap|"[embraces]}}
• 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
• into a film. Miyazaki had declined → into a film; Miyazaki had declined
• elements similar to the play ... themes similar to the Nausicaä—consider rephrasing "similar to the" in one of these
• he considered to be in violation → he considered a violation
• the preamble—consider linking Causes of World War I
• psychological and environmental level → psychological and an environmental level
• No matter → no matter

Heterogeneity of society

• (minzoku)—considering changing ) to {{--)}}
• that claim that its culture → that claim its culture
• Previous entries in Miyazaki's filmography → His earlier films
• She also wrote that ... McCarthy wrote that...—consider rephrasing "wrote" in one of these
• the only one of Miyazaki's female protagonists → Miyazaki's only female protagonist
• the conflicting philosophies the film presents → the film's conflicting philosophies or the conflicted philosophies presented by the film
• 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
• I'm envious of how you've written this section—it reads so effortlessly

Style

• Link Zen gardens
• it is untamed, violent, and is largely avoided → it is untamed, violent, and largely avoided
• in order to facilitate → to facilitate
• felt that the film's world → felt that its world
• than his previous works → than Miyazaki's previous works
• the nostalgic depictions of historical settings that Miyazaki had previously created → Miyazaki's previous nostalgic depictions of historical settings
• can be tied the → can be tied to the
• industry standard of staff being employed on short-term contracts → industry standard of employing staff on short-term contracts
• well suited → well-suited

Release

Marketing and Japanese release

• Consider adding {{hsp}} between The Legend of Ashitaka and the footnote
• to make up the large production budget → to make up for the large production budget
• word of mouth—consider linking Word-of-mouth marketing
• had had → had
• the scale of the marketing campaign → the marketing campaign's scale
• approach to the release → release approach
• 1800 cinemas → 1,800 cinemas
• people queueing → audiences queueing
• put out special issues for the film's release → released special issues for the film
• (daihitto)—considering changing ) to {{--)}}
• come to see → seen
• It's already in the footnote, but consider adding the reference to the end of the last paragraph as well

English dub and American release

• In an interview, Gaiman claimed → Gaiman claimed
• Gaiman was intending → Gaiman intended
• a scene in the film in which → a scene in which
• differences between the English dub and the original create a product more closely approaching → English dub's differences more closely resemble
• continually comingled → commingled
• the languages and cultures of the two → the two languages and cultures
• Gaiman recalled in later interviews → Gaiman later recalled or simply Gaiman recalled
• alterations were sometimes made to the script → some script alterations were made
• Several of the changes cut out → Several changes removed
• the setting of the film → the film's setting or simply the setting
• Nicholson felt these decisions to be indicative → Nicholson found these decisions indicative
• a collection of American and British accents → American and British accents
• in order to further remove → to further remove
• films from overseas → international films
• screened for the first time → first screened
• and officially premiered → and premiered

Home media and other releases

• A number of books → Several books
• the English dub's total → the English dub's total earnings or similar
• was not initially to include → was not initially set to include or similar
• was delayed as a result → was consequently delayed or even just was delayed
• in 2014. It was included → in 2014, and it was included
• 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
• Six of the last seven sentences (soon to be six of six if this is actioned) use the film—consider rephrasing

Music

• The release date and recording year in the infobox need referencing (this should work for the former)
• many of Miyazaki's previous films—technically it's all but one, so most might be more appropriate
• the film's score → Princess Mononoke's score
• development of the score → the score's development
• Japanese elements from the film. However, she also acknowledged → the film's Japanese elements, but she also acknowledged
• Leitmotifs, for example, which are... → For example, leitmotifs, which are...
• The third paragraph uses also thrice—consider removing/replacing one, particularly one of the last two
• The last sentence is fascinating but gives little—are there any other details about this?
• I'm not sure the second table entry requires italicisation, as it's the name of a single (per MOS:POPMUSIC)
• Consider mentioning the vinyl record releases somewhere, though that may be trivial

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'm not too familiar with the reviews, but are there more responses to the film itself—the art style, animation, script, performances, music?
• but also in response → as well as in response
• (bunkajin)—considering changing ) to {{--)}}
• the factors that contributed → the contributing factors
• the film's themes → the themes (×2)
• viewers in Japan → Japanese viewers
• felt that the text was → found the text
• others also favorably → others favorably
• 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
• concluded that the film was the greatest of Miyazaki's works → considered the film Miyazaki's best
• a nomination at the Academy Awards → an Academy Award nomination
• Pett and Andrew Osmond of The Guardian → Pett and The Guardian's Andrew Osmond to avoid implying Pett wrote for the The Guardian
• certain violent → some violent
• featured the film → featured Princess Mononoke, then ranked Princess Mononoke → ranked it
• Time Out should probably be italicised as it's being treated as an outlet in this instance (per MOS:WEBITALICS)
• 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)
• Here are two more lists to consider: Empire and Paste

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
• The first two awards appear to be backwards—readers gave it first, critics second
• Composition Award—I could be wrong, but my translation reads Best Original Score
• Music of Princess Mononoke → Princess Mononoke Soundtrack
• 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

Legacy

• the most significant of Miyazaki's feature films → Miyazaki's most significant feature film
• She wrote that the film → She wrote that it
• Miyazaki included → including Miyazaki
• to the making of the film → to production or to making the film
• He retired in 1998 → He resigned in 1998 or similar, as I don't believe it was intended as a full retirement
• the untimely death → the death
• Neon Genesis Evangelion → Neon Genesis Evangelion (1995–1996)
• the film also laid → the film laid
• anime as a whole → anime
• Yoshioka also felt → Yoshioka felt
• cult film—consider adding more references to support this statement

Notes

• The first, fifth, and seventh footnotes are sentence fragments and therefore don't require terminal punctuation
• overturned → overtaken or something similar

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

Book and journal sources

• Kanō 2006: Hayao Miyazaki bibliography#The Complete Hayao Miyazaki → The Complete Hayao Miyazaki

Magazine and news sources

• Ebert 1999b: Rogerebert.com → RogerEbert.com

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
• Toyama: remove |ref={{harvid|Toyama}} as the reference works fine without it (and it adds it to this category)
• 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

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: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) (updated ☔)