Mission: Impossible – Fallout
Mission: Impossible – Fallout ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 21:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
This article is about Mission: Impossible – Fallout. Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 21:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Comment from LegalSmeagolian
- "relatively brief" - is not the case, article is potentially overly detailed. Additionally just because you liked a film does not mean the article meets the FA criteria.
LegalSmeagolian (
talk)
LegalSmeagolian (
talk) 20:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- So what was the purpose of this comment when you clicked publish?
Darkwarriorblake (
talk) 20:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- To highlight the size of the article and the fact that it was not relatively brief, which you must agree with to some extent as you edited your nomination to be more accurate towards the length of the article.
LegalSmeagolian (
talk) 21:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- No I don't agree, I removed it because it was meant to be a joke and it's attracted unnecessary comments like this. Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 21:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- To highlight the size of the article and the fact that it was not relatively brief, which you must agree with to some extent as you edited your nomination to be more accurate towards the length of the article.
LegalSmeagolian (
talk) 21:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- So what was the purpose of this comment when you clicked publish?
Darkwarriorblake (
talk) 20:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Comments by TompaDompa
Without committing to a full review, I have to agree that roughly 8,000 words is not relatively brief. It's at the upper end of what might be appropriate for most well-covered topics. I think it's a pretty good length to aim for when writing about topics where the literature is extensive— Assassination of John F. Kennedy is about that length, for instance. Rarely, some topics may warrant lengthier treatments. WP:SIZERULE says roughly the same thing, as it turns out. TompaDompa ( talk) 21:18, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- WP: Size is a guide. When discussing popular culture topics the size goes up and with every. single. nomination. 1000 of those words are thematic analysis which I have to include, don't choose to, and am forced to make reasonable coverage thereof. Hence the actual content is 7000 words but even if it was 8000 there would be no justification for splitting the article because it's all within scope and this isn't Geocities. As always, I appreciate your boundless support Tompa, it isn't killing my passion for this process at all.
Darkwarriorblake (
talk) 21:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Like I said, the current length of this article is about what I would aim for if I were writing an article on a topic about which there is (fairly) extensive literature. I don't know if this is such a topic, not having taken a close look at either the article or the sources (at least not yet), but it very well might be. Generally speaking, 1,000 words of thematic analysis by no means seems excessive to me; it obviously depends on the work in question and the coverage in the sources, but in many cases an even greater (absolute or relative) length would be appropriate.
TompaDompa (
talk) 22:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, makes sense Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 15:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Like I said, the current length of this article is about what I would aim for if I were writing an article on a topic about which there is (fairly) extensive literature. I don't know if this is such a topic, not having taken a close look at either the article or the sources (at least not yet), but it very well might be. Generally speaking, 1,000 words of thematic analysis by no means seems excessive to me; it obviously depends on the work in question and the coverage in the sources, but in many cases an even greater (absolute or relative) length would be appropriate.
TompaDompa (
talk) 22:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Support from Draken Bowser
I don't immediately balk at the length, but I'll do what I can to help you cut it down to standard. I'll start off by providing my assessment on the production section, hopefully some of the suggestions can also help in polishing other sections.
- I'm concerned with the citation stacking. Three I'd consider borderline, but often fine. Four to five stacked citations could with few exceptions be considered overkill. If several reliable sources agree there is no need to cite them all. If citing up to five sources are necessary to piece together the preceding sentence, the text is probably trying too hard.
- The text talks a lot about the sensibilities and motivations of the involved. Maybe this is just a personal sentiment, but I occasionally find it a bit jarring to state this in prose (until things have moved further into the past), I much prefer the use of quotes. My skittishness is not universal, sentences like this is perfectly fine: "Cruise was particularly interested in resolving the long-running narrative between Ethan and his wife Julia.."
- For example: "McQuarrie's main interest was in better exploring Ethan's emotions and motivations. He felt that the previous films made the character effectively a cipher on which the audience could project thoughts and motivations without depicting the character's true thoughts and feelings. For Fallout, McQuarrie wanted Ethan to be vulnerable and more relatable, exploring his fears such as the threat of nuclear annihilation, so audiences could establish a more emotional connection to the character." This is an occasion where I'd appreciate anchoring his motivations to a quote at some point during the paragraph.
- "..
ideas they wanted to explore throughthe narrative." or story. - "Fans often asked Cruise about Julia's fate and he wanted to provide them with closure,
for Ethan and Juliawhich could also serve as Fallout's primary emotional narrative arc. "Abandoning this plot helped other scenes come together, such as the England-based sequences." "McQuarrie described his four main women characters — Alanna, Erica, Ilsa, and Julia — as independent and not requiring Ethan's protection."I suggest cutting these as superfluous.- "A dispute over Cruise's pay stalled production in August 2016." "Although the dispute was resolved by September, it further delayed filming from January 2017 by several months." This can be rewritten into one sentence.
- "The helicopter weighed 14 t (14,000 kg) while the helipad was only rated to hold four so the pilot hovered the craft imperceptibly above the pad's surface." In my estimation this is an interesting tidbit, but still trivia.
- Filming: there are no technical details on the cameras used, although I'll have give you props for including details on lighting, which is easily overlooked. :)
I'll hold here for now. Cheers, and thanks for taking Dredd to FA-status. That's a boss movie. Draken Bowser ( talk) 21:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Just letting you know I've seen this, I've had the good fortune of spending the extended weekend in perpetual pain from migraines, I will get to this as soon as it passes.
Darkwarriorblake (
talk) 22:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
- No worries, ain't no hurry. Get well soon though! Draken Bowser ( talk) 22:58, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Funny thing, I lost my original print out and made another one. I was surprised to learn that the movie was released in 2015 (I swear I saw it a few years ago with my mates, time sure flies..), halfway through the plot-section I realized my mistake. The good news is I was able to do some light c/e-work on Rogue Nation.
Now for Fallout.
Lead
- "McQuarrie's return marked the first time that anyone would direct more than one film in the series." Feels a bit clunky, is it ok to call him a "returning director" in English?
- "..by the interesting filming locations
the production identifiedand allowing.."
Plot
- "..Ilsa explains that MI6 assigned her to kill Lane to prevent foreign governments interrogating him and prove her loyalty after working undercover as a Syndicate agent." Could use a comma or two.
- "Walker is
alsounable to kill Ethan.."
Stunts and effects
- "For the pursuit sequence through Paris after Ethan recovers Lane, Ethan's and Walker's escape truck becomes lodged in an alley, and they kick out the windscreen to escape; the scene had to be refilmed as Cavill's initial kick was powerful enough to knock it well away from the vehicle." To me this is trivia, re-shoots happen all the time. Ultimately it didn't affect the end result or impact the production.
Post production
- "Hamilton suggested adding sound effects, but McQuarrie wanted the score to further convince the audience that the events were happening." Perhaps I'm just being dumb here, but how would sound effects run contrary to realism?
Box office
- The final list in the third paragraph is not in order.
Release
- "..the proceedings,
andmaking Fallout.."
Thematic analysis
- For me these kinds of sections offer the writer a lot of poetic license, since there is no obvious standard for balancing prose with quotes. Only stacking quotes is probably wrong. Only writing prose makes the section read like it's entirely in wikivoice, offering a few quotes would remind the reader that we are restating the views of prominent experts. How many quotes would be required for this? No idea, poetic licence.
- Fake news: why the first two thematic sections are included is obvious. This one confounds me a bit. Is it really unusual for news anchors to perform in movies like this in the US? Actual news anchors have been used to add realism to Swedish movies for at least a couple of decades. I understand reliable sources said all those things, but I'm still uncertain whether the coverage is extensive enough to make the information due when compared to coverage of themes in Fallout as a whole.
Legacy
- "..Fallout is often ranked as the best or second-best film." If Fallout is beaten by the same movie in most of the polls it should be spelled out, otherwise leave it as it is.
References
- The harvnb/sfn-anchors of Jinde, Lamb and Purse are broken.
Other than my concerns over refbombing, we're good. Draken Bowser ( talk) 15:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Draken Bowser, I think I've done all of these now. I haven't removed the helicopter information because unlike kicking out the window I think it's a very interesting technical aspect of the film while yeah kicking out the window is not very important. With the ranking, it's almost always number 1 and if it's not it's always different films so there isn't a consistent challenger. Regarding themes, on all 3 of my previous nominations I have been criticized for using direct quotes so while I get where you're coming from if I start introducing quotes someone else will probably just tell me to take them out. Rest assured I have done my best to be faithful to the texts since I hate having to re-read sources, especially thematic ones that can be 30 pages of waffle with one page of interesting information. As for the fake news, I don't think it's always super common but there were several sources that focused on this aspect and I think in terms of contemporary media it came along at the same time fake news became a more prominent theme in real life which may be why it got more attention in analytical sources, I especially think it's a growing trend still. If several sources cover it it's more difficult for me to ignore that when tasked with comprehensiveness whereas if it's one fringe theory it's easier to ignore. Sorry for taking so long btw, still not feeling great. Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 20:16, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- EDIT: Oh and I added some camera technical details per your mention.
Darkwarriorblake (
talk) 20:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Good work, especially finding a decent source for "cameras".
- Ok, I can buy into the "having to fake realness" aspect of the helicopter scene.
- Yeah, I suppose "fake news" is zeitgeist, but the section still feels a bit forced to me, maybe that is clouding my judgement. The Vanity fair and Esquire articles make the case for such a section. I don't think that using Lamb here makes sense though. It's about the mustache Caville had to grow for Fallout, sure. But the fake news aspect is the retouching done for Justice League, which also seems to be used more as an example of what the technology can do (no direct connection made between Fallout and fake news).
- I'm still clueless on the "post-production" question. Could you ELI5?
Draken Bowser (
talk) 21:02, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oh missed that one, let me try to rewrite it. The gist is that McQuarrie wanted to use the score to evoke whatever feelings necessary in the audience that would convince them the scene was real rather than hypothetical, and he thought sound effects would lessen the effect since previous MI films have similar hypothetical scenes but it's obvious they are hypothetical. I'll re-read the source and try to give a better explanation.
Darkwarriorblake (
talk) 21:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- I've just removed it, the actual explanation is too convoluted to properly parse and I don't think it's super important in retrospect as we've got hte main point of it. Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 21:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oh missed that one, let me try to rewrite it. The gist is that McQuarrie wanted to use the score to evoke whatever feelings necessary in the audience that would convince them the scene was real rather than hypothetical, and he thought sound effects would lessen the effect since previous MI films have similar hypothetical scenes but it's obvious they are hypothetical. I'll re-read the source and try to give a better explanation.
Darkwarriorblake (
talk) 21:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Ah, thanks for the explanation. I think it's time to pass the torch. I still want Lamb removed, but I'm willing to agree to disagree on the section as a whole. Either way, the article seems to meet the criteria as far as I can tell. Support A final note on length: for many (most?) movies we don't have the kind of overarching sources discussed on the FAC-talk page, which might help us decide on appropriate length. This should result in a lot more leeway than usual. After the few tiny trims we agreed on, I'm not sure that theres even anything I'd want removed, so the size does not bother me. Thanks for making the effort to address or contend with my concerns. Draken Bowser ( talk) 05:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Removed Lamb, thanks for the support Draken. Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 22:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Igordebraga
- Support I understand pushing straight for FA even though it would possibly pass the GA with ease (though both are taking quite long to review nowadays), and it's weird to see so many stacked refs (it's understandable regarding opinionated parts such as the ones on reception, but on Production, seems more fit for more complex sentences like the one regarding Cruise's rehabiliation, the ones in Development could backed up by one or two sources alone). Otherwise, can't deny this type of work deserves a promotion.
igordebraga
≠ 19:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Igordebraga! Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 23:45, 13 April 2024 (UTC)