Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/The X-Files task force/A-Class review/Ice (The X-Files)

The following is an archived discussion of an A-Class nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in the main page's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was approved by TRLIJC19 15:57, 16 November 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Ice (The X-Files)

Nominator(s): GRAPPLE X 17:14, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is not who we are. GRAPPLE X 17:14, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is likely going to FAC soon enough I'll offer comments. Just nitpicking suggestions;

Is it worth mentioning the episode's wider influence on the series? Critics have compared a lot of episodes to "Ice", including "Darkness Falls", "Firewalker", ie "Ice in the forrest", "Ice in a volcano", etc. All those episodes have the whole "nature VS man" theme. Goblins by Charles Grant (on Google books) summarizes this decently enough.
I think the Lowry book might cover this a little, I'll check it out. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added now. GRAPPLE X 12:57, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What about the fact that Carter initially wanted to film the episode at the North Pole but couldn't due to budget limits? (which influenced the production of "Colony")
Wasn't aware of this; had assumed that BC was always the intended locale. If there's a source I'd gladly add it. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The "Colony" article itself references this, Edwards, p. 115 from X-Files Confidential. Bruce Campbell (talk) 13:18, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Dur, and I wrote that one, too). Added now; seemed to be more about setting than filming though. GRAPPLE X 13:44, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According he Greenwood Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy: Themes, Volume 2, the episode was notable for featuring the first "invertebrate parasite" in the series, beating out the likes of ""The Host" [1995], "Firewalker" [1995], "F. Emasculata" [1995], and "Roadrunners"".
Checking this out now. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added. GRAPPLE X 12:57, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The production company "had at first planned to portray the worms using snakes wearing latex suits"? What the fuck?
Yeah, you can see why they didn't go ahead with it. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The image of Anderson has a geocoded location notice tag... thing. Bruce Campbell (talk) 22:11, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think that means that, since it was taken at a known event, the location should also be known and could be added to the image; shouldn't have any bearing on its use, just its categorisation. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

"Ice" was watched by 6.2 million households in its initial broadcast, and has received positive reviews with critics praising its tense atmosphere." No comma after "broadcast"; comma after "reviews"
Got it. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Morgan was originally inspired to write this episode after reading an article in Science News an excavation in Greenland..." On?
Added "about" before "an". GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"...about men in Greenland who dug up something 250,000 years old out of the ice." "Something" is really vague; specify if the sources elaborate.
Source just says "something", which is always ominous. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"The worms crawling in the host bodies was done..." I think it should be "were", as the subject (worms) is plural
Got it. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Digital worms were employed for scenes such as them swimming in the jars and entering the dog's ear." "Them" sounds funny here; maybe "when they swam".
Reworded a good bit there. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Actor Gillian Anderson stated..." Actress?
Stuck with "actor" as it's gender-neutral. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The rest looks okay. Glimmer721 ^talk 00:39, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reviews, both of you. Still working on some of these points. GRAPPLE X 11:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support per changes. Bruce Campbell (talk) 01:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since I was bored I found literally every additional source I could scrimmage up:

This could also be added. As could this, as we've been using her reviews in quite a few articles (she works for SFScope).

Reviews for Firewalker and Darkness Falls both bring up positive (though slight) notices for Ice. Zack Handlen wrote that Darkness Falls lacks the "ratcheting paranoia" of Ice, and Zack Handlen brought up that Firewalker "serves as a companion piece to "Ice" from season one, another story focusing on an isolated outpost, extreme temperatures, and internal parasites" but lacks Ice's "intensity, and also its convincing threat". Though the article already references 3 separate AV Club articles.

Another possibly redundant source; UGO Networks writer Alex Zalben compared it to the Fringe episode What Lies Below, that has a similar plot, commenting that Ice was "one of the best X-Files hours ever, perfectly channeling – but not ripping off – John Carpenter’s The Thing." Further substantiates the "most influential episode ever made" claim, as it was even influencing episodes from other series.

Some dude from IGN wrote that "I think Ice is one of the best episodes ever, and it was like only the fifth episode." (though it's obviously not "like, the fifth" episode. )

David Hofstede in 5000 Episodes and No Commercials: The Ultimate Guide to TV Shows On DVD cited the entire episode as one of "great moments" of the first season, simply just calling it "brilliant." The nitpicker's guide for X-philes as usual goes into intricate detail about anal little details here and there, more so than average episodes. Bruce Campbell (talk) 00:42, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the Fringe bit where the plot has been discussed as influential (as that section grows I'm beginning to doubt it's in the right section though), but the rest seems largely redundant to me, as the article already features a solid heft of reception material. If you feel that any of the sources you've listed should trump what's already there then I'd be happy to swap them out, but I think it might weight the article too heavily in one area to just add without removing others too. GRAPPLE X 04:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I've made some changes, looks good now. TBr and ley 01:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.