Talk:Greenland (film)

	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 American cinema task force.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

inept engrish

This sentence makes no sense! Can anyone figure out what is actually happening with the release dates? "It was originally scheduled to be theatrically released on July 31, 2020, but was delayed to June 12, 2020, and then August 14, 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic"

The film was first supposed to show in cinemas on July 31. Then it was delayed twice because of COVID-19, first time to June 12 and then to August 14. BOVINEBOY2008 15:32, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, the first 'delay' was actually a planned release to something other than 'cinemas', which was rescheduled. So yeah, perplexity an stuff. Lycurgus (talk) 16:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading critical appraisal

I know that it's standard to quote the Rotten Tomatoes critical consensus. In fact, it's usually the first thing I look at when I go to a film's Wikipedia page. But for this film, it is entirely misleading: "Beware, comets of Greenland: Gerard Butler is here to protect Earth." Ask anyone who hasn't seen the film what they think this sentence means and they will probably tell you that it must be another film where the heroes go to space and blast the comets before they can hit earth. Why else tell the comets to beware? Why else say the earth is being protected? But as this film makes clear pretty quickly, there is no chance that the comets will NOT hit earth and destroy most of the life on it. No one even discusses trying to stop it. No one goes to space. Instead, the film is about seeking shelter in a frantic attempt to survive. The character is not protecting the earth; he's protecting his family. Rather than noting the inaccuracy of RT, I propose simply deleting the reference. WindSandAndStars (talk) 02:52, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rotten Tomatoes sometimes includes very dumb critical consensus summaries (that are not really a summary of the critical consensus). That people go ahead and include them in Wikipedia film articles anyway greatly annoys some people (as has been made clear in past WP:MOSFILM discussions). There are plenty of things that people indiscriminately include in Wikipedia that bother me but on this one I'm ambivalent. On one level it would probably be a good idea to remove the dumb critical consensus summary from this article as you suggested. On another level you have to ask if it is worth the hassle of having to remove it repeatedly after people add it back over and over again in good faith. So while I'd give very weak support to your suggestion to remove it, you would need to be sure you want to do the annoying maintenance work of keeping it removed. -- 109.79.173.243 (talk) 06:31, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]