From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject icon Guild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by SheriffIsInTown, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 8 March 2024.

Action

change ((action)) to ((Action film|action)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:541:4500:1760:1c50:13ba:7843:a475 ( talk)

 Done, thanks! ‑‑ ElHef ( Meep?) 14:02, 7 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Removed a clear and obvious plot spoiler in cast and character list.

Hopefully no one minds this. Seemed like an unnecessary spoiler for people who might just glance at the page without reading the plot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.157.36.228 ( talk) 15:55, 10 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Puffery about being the best action film ever made

Recently, editors – IP editors, mostly, I think – have been adding puffery about how critics consider this either the best film ever made or the best action film ever made. For such a strong claim, this requires solid sourcing. It can't be to some random blog host, like Medium.com. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 04:32, 14 June 2019 (UTC) reply

The puffery is getting really undue and disruptive. One critic called it the best action film, and this goes into the lead? That belongs in the reception with the rest of the reviews, not in the lead. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 04:14, 16 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Just because a handful of critics may have proclaimed it as such it is misrepresenting the critical consensus elevating these claims to the lead. The critical consensus should go in the lead an nothing more. If it starts topping serious polls and surveys in the way Die Hard does then that is the time to incorporate such statements into the lead. Betty Logan ( talk) 06:14, 16 June 2019 (UTC) reply
I agree that it is puffery. Such strong claims require true passage of time. It is completely unrealistic to do that now, especially using sources from the time of release. If sources said it was the best action film of 2018, that would make more sense, but there needs to be more retrospective sources for an "all time" claim. Erik ( talk |  contrib) ( ping me) 23:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Why the article don't mentioned ...

that India's censor board suggest cuts on disputed mention of "Indian occupied Kashmir" instead of Kashmir and wrong map of the nation.[ https://scroll.in/reel/888534/mission-impossible-fallout-removed-mentions-of-kashmir-before-india-release]. We should write this. Tesla car owner ( talk) 11:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Production company/Distributor

IP, you're just cherry picking a reference when there are more reliable references stating these in the body.

Production: A Paramount Pictures release, presented with Skydance, of a Tom Cruise, Bad Robot Production. Producers: Tom Cruise, David Ellison, Christopher McQuarrie, Jake Myers, J.J. Abrams. Executive producers: David Ellison, Dana Goldberg, Don Granger. Co-producer: Tommy Gormley.
“Mission: Impossible — Fallout” is produced and financed by Paramount and partner Skydance Productions, headed by David Ellison. Cruise is a producer along with J.J. Abrams, Bryan Burk, David Ellison, Dana Goldberg, and Don Granger.
A Tom Cruise production Tom Cruise
Production Company Bad Robot
In association with Alibaba Pictures
Presents Paramount Pictures
Presents Skydance

Plus there are just the plain credits in the film itself that say Paramount and Skydance present, a Tom Cruise Production, a Bad Robot Production, in Association with Alibaba Pictures, and Presents, per Ben Schott | Assembling a Film’s Billing Block - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com this reference is the distributor credit.

I've also gone to great lengths to source and explain the breakdown in the body text.

McQuarrie, Cruise (via his TC Productions company), 
J. J. Abrams (via 
Bad Robot Productions), and Jake Myers served as Fallout's producers, with Skydance executives David Ellison, 
Don Granger, and Dana Goldberg receiving executive producer roles. Paramount Pictures and Skydance Media provided the film's finance.{{efn|Attributed to multiple references:<ref name="ReutersPrediction"/><ref name="VarietyFilmDate"/><ref name="VarietyBOPredict"/><ref name="ReviewVariety"/><ref name="MWebTCProd"/><ref name="VarietyBadRobot"/><ref name="BFICast"/>}} Chinese film company 
Alibaba Pictures provided investment financing in exchange for serving as a local marketing partner in China.<ref name="THRAlibaba"/>


Please don't keep changing this without providing sufficient evidence that somehow proves more reliable than Variety, THR, and the film. Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 09:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply