Talk:G.I. Joe: Retaliation

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the G.I. Joe: Retaliation article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

G.I. Joe: Retaliation has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 28, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

Film: Comic book / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Comic book films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

G.I. Joe (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject G.I. Joe, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.G.I. JoeWikipedia:WikiProject G.I. JoeTemplate:WikiProject G.I. JoeG.I. Joe articles

Comics: Films Low‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Comic book films work group.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Toys Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Toys, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of toys on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ToysWikipedia:WikiProject ToysTemplate:WikiProject ToysToys articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Toys To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Barbie Queen of the Prom, Eve The Second Genesis CCG, More...
Assess : Rate the Unassessed Toys articles and Unknown-importance Toys articles.
Expand : Expand the doll pages, Expand Larami article
Infobox : Toys articles needing infoboxes
Photo : Request images that are needed from Wikipedia requested photographs of toys to included in each articles.
Stubs : work on stubs in Category:Toy stubs
Other : * Tag the talk pages of Toys-related articles with the {{WikiProject Toys}} banner.
- Help out with articles placed in Category:Toys articles needing attention

Infobox studio information

There has been some disagreement over how the studio information is being presented in the infobox of this article. In the interest of being as accurate as possible, I would like to point out the following:

The trailer seems to be the main source of which companies are associated with the production and distribution of G.I. Joe: Retaliation. While using this as a reference borders on original research, an examination of the beginning and end of the trailer reveals only four companies: Paramount Pictures, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Skydance Productions and Hasbro.
Of those four companies, IMDB lists the latter three as Production Companies, along with Silver Watch Productions, (which does not have an article on Wikipedia). Paramount is only listed as a Distributor. I understand that IMDB is sometimes not a reliable source, but this backs up the information shown in the trailer, and gives clarification as to which part of the infobox these companies should be listed.
These four companies are further backed up by their respective articles: List of Paramount Pictures films lists G.I. Joe: Retaliation as a "co-production with MGM, Skydance Productions and Hasbro". List of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer films lists G.I. Joe: Retaliation as a "co-production with Paramount Pictures, Hasbro and Skydance Productions". Skydance Productions lists G.I. Joe: Retaliation as an upcoming film, and Hasbro Films is a link to a section of the Hasbro page, which lists G.I. Joe: Retaliation as an upcoming film.
And Lorenzo di Bonaventura will no doubt be involved with the film, but NONE of these sources list di Bonaventura Pictures as a production company. He is already listed in the infobox as a producer.

Therefore, I have modified the infobox to reflect the above information. I welcome any editors to discuss these changes here, so that we can come to a consensus and avoid getting into an edit war. Thank you. Fortdj33 (talk) 13:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

iMDB isn't a reliable source and it makes no sense that you list Paramount as a distributor just because iMDB says so. di Bonaventura Pictures is involved with the production of the film considering the official description states, "in association with di Bonaventura Pictures and Hasbro". Also, the trailer does not show the logo of a company named, "Silver Watch Productions" nor does one exist to my knowledge. And HOW is the trailer supposed to show a logo for a company that doesn't have one? Did any of trailers for any of the Transformers films show a logo for di Bonaventura Pictures, no. It was nonetheless included with some of the credits at the end of the trailer. You don't have any REAL evidence to back up your statements aside from saying that iMDB says so. I thought Wikipedia didn't accept iMDB as a source at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.76.248 (talk) 20:14, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The point is, I am at least providing references to back up my edits. You have not provided any sources that contradict the information above, you are simply reverting my edits because they don't match your point of view, and in fact you have actually removed sources from the article. That type of editing is not very helpful or constructive, and goes against Wikipedia guidelines. Please provide a reference for the "official description" that you refer to, and try to come to a consensus before reverting again. Fortdj33 (talk) 13:20, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do you add a reference?

I'm trying to add a reference to prove that di Bonaventura Pictures is involved with production of the film but I don't know how to add the reference. All that happened is that the text came out like this:</ref>[http://www.hisstank.com/gi-joe-news/gi-joe-movie-2/g-i-joe-retaliation-teaser-poster-and-official-description-revealed-10968</ref> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.76.248 (talk) 01:30, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. If you had presented this sooner, instead of blindly reverting the edits of others, we wouldn't have gotten caught up in such senseless edit warring. Next time, please attempt to come to a consensus on the talk page first, because I'm sure that we would both rather spend our time improving Wikipedia articles, rather than fighting over them. Fortdj33 (talk) 02:11, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, I just didn't know how to provide a reference.

Henry Jackman confirmed as composer

The "credits" section of the official site lists Henry Pryce Jackman as the composer for the film:</ref>[http://www.gijoemovie.com/img/credits.jpg</ref> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.76.248 (talk) 04:16, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of survivors

Since there seems to be a discrepancy about which characters survive the attack on G.I. Joe from the movie trailer, I have removed that information from the Plot section. Any inclusion of a list there would be speculation anyway, and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. We can afford to wait until the movie is released, before any info like that is included. Fortdj33 (talk) 19:33, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Returning Characters

If anyone saw the movie(like i did), it clearly shows the death of storm shadow.So, you can confirm this or you can delete Storm Shadow from the list of characters coz' how can he be alive if he clearly got killed by Snake Eyes in the first movie?

In Operation HISS, a comic book sequel to G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, it shows how Storm Shadow survived his apparent death in the film. Fortdj33 (talk) 12:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the original Joe team except for Snake Eyes is killed off in this movie though you don't see it happen although Channing Tatum, who returns as Duke is clearly killed off in the brand new trailer released April 24, 2012. It shows Roadblock talking with Duke and then Cobra attacks them and afterwards Roadblock mentions that he, Flint and Lady Jaye were the only ones to survive the attack. Channing Tatum is also barely seen in any of the trailers further confirming this and in a MTV interview back in January he dodged many questions about being killed off very early so clearly he is no longer the star of the movie and likely to have a small cameo. Jason1978 (talk) 03:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disproportionate attention to Deadline rumours

Especially since it's the ONLY source for them, or at least the only one used here. --Niemti (talk) 12:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Date Discrepancy

I just watched the trailer for G.I. Joe: Retaliation. The exclusive premiere trailer. Would someone please explain why the date on the Wikipedia page is entirely different from the one in the premiere and newer trailer?

/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=bSX2oxLdcWA -- skip to 2:42 if you'd like to get straight to the point

/watch?v=kNUBV9trDoA&feature=player_detailpage -- once again, 2:42

Both YouTube links

75.39.104.194 (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Both of those trailers were released, before the decision was made to postpone the movie, in order to convert it to 3-D, and possibly re-shoot some key scenes. See the "Post-production" section of this article for more information. Fortdj33 (talk) 18:24, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Order of starring roles

Can we please come to a consensus about the proper order to list the cast of this movie? There has been some edit warring over this POV issue, because some editors believe that certain actors are more important to the movie than others. While I understand that Channing Tatum will probably have a larger role once the movie is released, constantly moving his name around is just clogging up the edit summaries of this article. The order of the supporting actors has also been in dispute, alternating between alphabetical order, and the order on the movie poster. I encourage all interested parties to express their opinion here, so that we can come to a consensus and end this senseless edit warring. Fortdj33 (talk) 14:59, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion was moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 44#Order of starring roles. Fortdj33 (talk) 18:57, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is still some edit warring going on, please note that the cast of the movie is being listed according to the movie poster until the film is released. The ensemble cast is listed alphabetically, which unfortunately puts Channing Tatum's name at the end of the list for now. However, Bruce Willis and Dwayne Johnson are being listed first in the Cast section, because they are both given "last billing" after the ensemble cast, in order to highlight their starring roles. See Billing (filmmaking), and refer to the above discussion for more information. Fortdj33 (talk) 15:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About the cast section here.

I have a few questions regarding the cast section.

Should Willis be billed above Johnson? Johnson is the main protagonist. I understand that the cast order is supposed to be following the poster, but if the cast was entirely based off of the poster, Willis and Johnson would be placed eighth and ninth.

The official site features a cast section with a slightly different order from the poster, as well as a character section. Do either of these have any impact on the way the actors are ordered?

According to the IMDb, the cast order has been verified and it looks like it was organized by appearance. I know the IMDb isn't considered a reliable source of information and it'll have no impact on changing the order until the film's release, but if the on-screen credits are indeed by appearance, and given the fact that most of the actors are billed alphabetically and not by prominence on the poster, what's going to be the basis for the cast section? Bluerules (talk) 22:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Billing (filmmaking) and the discussion above, for a link to when a similar question was asked at {{WikiProject Film}}. The consensus was to list the cast according to the film poster, but that Bruce Willis and Dwayne Johnson should be listed first, because they are both given "last billing" after the ensemble cast, in order to highlight their starring roles. Fortdj33 (talk) 23:10, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand how billing works- my concern is what's going to be used as the basis for the cast order once the film comes out. We can't continue to use the poster and the on-screen credits seem to be by appearance (though I could be wrong, judge it for yourself). Also, I want to know if it's acceptable to put Johnson above Willis. Johnson is the main character and the "and" credit he receives puts more emphasis on his name. Bluerules (talk) 19:50, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, imdb is not a reliable source when it comes to cast listings. I agree that Johnson's character is probably more important to the story, and that the cast listing will probably change, once a definitive source is provided for the credits of the film. In the meantime, the poster is all we've got, and Bruce Willis' name is listed before Johnson's, because he is arguably a bigger star. Fortdj33 (talk) 20:15, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, got it. We'll know for sure when more people see the film. Bluerules (talk) 20:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

already released in mexico

the movie has been already released in mexico, just came from the theather. this should be at least mentioned in the release section. though someone else should do it because i suck at writing. KRISHANKO (talk) 05:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Forbes

Interesting article about the film from Forbes, maybe someone might try and add it. Scott Mendelson (4/08/2013). "Paramount And MGM Did Everything Right With 'G.I. Joe: Retaliation' (Except Make A Good Movie)". Forbes. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help) -- 109.76.209.171 (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pared down cast list

User:JesseRafe has entered into an edit war over the cast list of this article, citing WP:CASTLIST for deleting credited characters in the film. He has already pared down this cast list once, and is doing so again without a consensus, expecting others to justify material that has been in this article for months. Please give your opinion on whether these characters should stay or go, because I do not see any reason why they should be removed. Fortdj33 (talk) 19:19, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no hard and fast rule when it comes to cast lists, it often depends on the particular circumstances of the film, but cast lists usually include cast members that are "blue links" or play blue-linked parts i.e. if a reader can click on an actor's name or their role and get more information about them then we usually include those people. It seems to me that these removals are cutting off access to information that may be of interest to a reader. Betty Logan (talk) 20:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per a suggestion at WP:CASTLIST for ensemble casts, I split the cast list into 2 columns. Hopefully this will eliminate the desire to remove valid information from the cast list, while still tightening up the amount of white space in that section. Fortdj33 (talk) 22:04, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:G.I. Joe: Retaliation/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Rusted AutoParts 14:36, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this. Rusted AutoParts 14:36, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The lead section should have a bit more detail in it. Cast, production highlights, expanded detail on critical reception.

I reorganized the intro, but I'm not sure what specifically needs to be added. Fortdj33 (talk) 21:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of info from each section. Mention the new cast joining as well as returning cast in a way that doesn't sound like its just listing off. See Star Trek Into Darkness lead section as an example. Rusted AutoParts 21:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded the cast and plot information in the lede, per your example. Fortdj33 (talk) 22:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A majority of the production section could be merged. A lot of sections with very little detail.
Perhaps remove the picture of The Rock from the cast section. Or keep his and remove the cast picture. The sizes aren't compatible.

Done. I removed The Rock, and move the cast picture to the Casting section, as to not break up the Cast list.

Needs a few more pictures.

Added a picture from the toyline in the Promotion section. Fortdj33 (talk) 23:21, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pass keep it ship shape, and don't forget to keep improving it. Rusted AutoParts 00:47, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About the sequel.

You know something? The sequel will not have a 2016 release date. I bet...I bet it will release next year or later, but we're not sure at the moment. Yeah. We'll see about that. I can't wait to see the date! Oh. What? I think IMDB doesn't have it's release date yet. What the (beep). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.79.232.245 (talk) 23:44, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on G.I. Joe: Retaliation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:37, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]