Talk:The Emoji Movie/Archive 1

Archive 1

Inconsistent examples

"It received predominantly negative reviews from critics, many of whom compared it unfavorably to The Lego Movie, Inside Out, or Wreck-It Ralph."

While it is true that it has received negative reviews, especially visible on IMDb and stuff like that, the examples it mentions are all good. The Lego Movie, Inside Out, and Wreck-It Ralph all received good reviews according to their individual Wikipedia articles. If, by "compared it unfavorably" they mean, this movie sucked and wasn't as good as these movies, which were good, it needs to be rephrased to better reflect that intention. If that's not the case, the examples should be removed. AWwikipedia "Eat more nachos!" (talk) 10:59, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Add the logo

Please add the logo its on Google images Jstar367 (talk) 20:37, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

I think a teaser is coming

Look on sony pictures animations facebook page the scroll up until you see a group of emojis Jstar367 (talk) 20:38, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

[1] --31.49.114.250 (talk) 19:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Poop Daddy voice

Might be Sir Patrick Stewart, according to Cinemablend. Interligator (talk) 10:18, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed. --31.49.114.250 (talk) 19:42, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 April 2017

Change the release date to July 28th, 2017 Here look at this

make sure to say that it swapped with The Dark Tower 96.234.202.100 (talk) 18:55, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The source provided is not a WP:RS. -- Dane ^talk 03:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2017

Can someone add these categories back?

• [[Category:Columbia Pictures animated films]]
• [[Category:Columbia Pictures films]]

104.157.250.86 (talk) 04:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Columbia Pictures is not mentioned in the article — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:09, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Then can you please change this back from:

"'''''The Emoji Movie''''' is an upcoming 2017 American 3D [[computer animation|computer-animated]] [[buddy film|buddy]] [[adventure film|adventure]] [[comedy film]] written and directed by [[Tony Leondis]] and co-written by Eric Siegel and Mike White.<ref name="ColliderTrailerMeh" /> It will star the voices of [[T. J. Miller|T.J. Miller]], [[Anna Faris]], [[James Corden]], [[Patrick Stewart]], [[Maya Rudolph]], [[Steven Wright]], [[Rob Riggle]], [[Jennifer Coolidge]], [[Jake T. Austin]], [[Sofia Vergara]], and [[Christina Aguilera]]. Produced by [[Sony Pictures Animation]], the film is scheduled to be released on July 28, 2017.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.darkhorizons.com/dark-tower-emoji-movie-swap-dates/|title="Dark Tower" & "Emoji Movie" Swap Dates - Dark Horizons|last=Franklin|first=Garth|website=www.darkhorizons.com|language=en-US|access-date=2017-04-23}}</ref>"

To:

"'''''The Emoji Movie''''' is an upcoming 2017 American 3D [[computer animation|computer-animated]] [[buddy film|buddy]] [[adventure film|adventure]] [[comedy film]] written and directed by [[Tony Leondis]] and co-written by Eric Siegel and Mike White.<ref name="ColliderTrailerMeh" /> It will star the voices of [[T. J. Miller|T.J. Miller]], [[Anna Faris]], [[James Corden]], [[Patrick Stewart]], [[Maya Rudolph]], [[Steven Wright]], [[Rob Riggle]], [[Jennifer Coolidge]], [[Jake T. Austin]], [[Sofia Vergara]], and [[Christina Aguilera]]. Produced by [[Sony Pictures Animation]], the film is scheduled to be released on July 28, 2017, by Columbia Pictures.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.darkhorizons.com/dark-tower-emoji-movie-swap-dates/|title="Dark Tower" & "Emoji Movie" Swap Dates - Dark Horizons|last=Franklin|first=Garth|website=www.darkhorizons.com|language=en-US|access-date=2017-04-23}}</ref>"

And change the distributor in the infobox back from "Sony Pictures Entertainment" to "Columbia Pictures" using this reference? http://pro.boxoffice.com/long-range-forecast-atomic-blonde-emoji-movie/ 104.157.250.86 (talk) 04:15, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

We've already got a source that Sony is releasing it. That source says Sony/Columbia. Why do you want to remove Sony? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:53, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Because the trailer shows the Columbia logo, and Columbia is the main film division of Sony. (Alternative ref link to use: http://deadline.com/2017/05/t-j-miller-emoji-movie-cannes-film-festival-stunt-trailer-video-1202094573/) 104.157.250.86 (talk)

Variety Insight's data is vetted by the studios themselves, and it's run by a trade magazine. Clearly, removing Sony is the wrong option, especially when it's mentioned in every source. Also, the Deadline source above doesn't explicitly say anything about Columbia being the distributor, whereas Variety Insight does. As far as trailers, we can't interpret primary sources, so if someone's logo appears on a poster or in a trailer, it doesn't necessarily mean anything as far as Wikipedia is concerned. I suppose we could change it to Sony/Columbia per the Box Office source, but I'd personally prefer to stick with what Variety says. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:43, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

What about these sources? 1.9.129.48 (talk) 05:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Animation Magazine is reliable, but it doesn't say Columbia is distributing the film. ComingSoon.net says it's distributed by Columbia. I kind of doubt Cartoon Brew is a reliable source, but I could be wrong. I got curious and checked Box Office Mojo, and that also says Columbia: link. What do you think about a compromise on using the Box Office source to say Sony/Columbia? Or are you dead set on only crediting Columbia? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:49, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

What about this source? https://www.yahoo.com/movies/emoji-movie-meet-james-cordens-high-spirited-high-fiving-character-160115395.html 142.166.217.64 (talk) 20:37, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

That also says Columbia/Sony, but only for the photo credit; the actual article says nothing about distribution. SkyWarrior 21:13, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

What about these sources? 139.194.132.31 (talk) 21:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

References

Not done for now: Looks like people are discussing the current change, which means there is no consensus. If one of the participants here does not implement the outcome of this discussion, feel free to reactivate this semi protected edit request. Izno (talk) 12:43, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Izno (talk) 02:35, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Goddammit, WHY CAN'T ALL YOU ADD THESE FRIGGIN' CATEGORIES AND REF LINKS AND CHANGE THESE INFOS BACK ALREADY??!!!!!! 18:50, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

It would help if you would engage in discussion instead of repeatedly posting URLs. I asked if you were willing to compromise by using the Box Office magazine source to say that it's released by Sony/Columbia, but you never responded. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Although now I'm starting to think that you're an IP sock of User:Nate Speed. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:09, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

No mention of negative publicity

The various trailers on YouTube have had significant backlash against the movie in general and the concept in particular.

I swear a couple months ago I saw this mentioned on the page. Was I mistaken? Are significant pre-release criticisms not relevant?

The trailer for the 2016 film Ghostbusters had an overwhelming backlash and it is mentioned in the § Controversy section alongside other controversies surrounding the film. Backlash against the concept of the Ghostbusters film was directed at specific notable issues but I don't see that here. Likes and dislikes of a trailer on YouTube aren't a good statistic of criticism of the film just like IMDb ratings aren't very useful. Wumbolo (talk) 08:01, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Israel release date july 27th

Maybe that's notable Alondon17 (talk) 16:46, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Already has sources in the hebrew article Alondon17 (talk) 19:24, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 July 2017

Would like to add to "Reception" the following:

"The movie received largely negative reviews. Lindsey Bahr of the Associated Press wrote that the movie was "just mediocre, or in emoji parlance, simply "meh."" MidwoodMartin (talk) 23:25, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Marianna251TALK 23:36, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Add the reception info.

The page is protected for vandalism now. So now, no one can untill it expires. Gameman18 (talk) 00:13, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Massive vandalism and uncontructive edits

This page has been reverted to the most recent most stable version and placed under special editng restrictions. User who have made less than 500 mainspace edits and registered for less than 90 days, please follow the instructions to make an Edit request. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:21, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 July 2017

Change "The Emoji Movje" to "The Emoji Movie". Wumbolo (talk) 14:19, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

 Done [2] Wumbolo (talk) 15:03, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Comparisons to Inside Out (2015 film)

Please change "many" to "some" people comparing this film to Inside Out. Or remove this part from lead. The provided sources show only two reviews comparing this film to Inside Out. Wumbolo (talk) 10:33, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Wumbolo, I agree that "many" is an overstatement and changed to "several". I saw three reviews make the comparison: The Hollywood Reporter, The AV Club, and Variety. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 14:37, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Most people are saying it's a comparison to Wreck it Ralph more than inside out Omarithemagnificent (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on July 28, 2017

Would like to add to the Reception section the Rotten Tomatoes consensus, which at this point is "🚫 ". If the emoji would cause problems, then maybe a description. 174.19.232.139 (talk) 22:18, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Already done. SkyWarrior 02:51, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

"The Cloud" link points to wrong article

The link in the second sentence of the second paragraph of the Plot section points to this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cloud_(company)

In this context "the cloud" is not that specific company, but rather either https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_storage . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theycallmezeal (talk • contribs) 23:13, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

IMDb has a rating

IMDb has given The Emoji Movie a score 1.4 out of 10, yet another negative score by critics. Here's the link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4877122/?ref_=nv_sr_1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomebroboy1 (talk • contribs) 01:21, July 30, 2017 (UTC)

Much as with the "audience score" at Rotten Tomatoes (see below), Wikipedia does not use IMDb users' ratings. - SummerPhD^v2.0 23:22, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Rotten Tomatoes score

This needs to be updated more frequently. It's currently 40 (https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_emoji_movie). I'd do it, but the page is protected. 174.23.14.253 (talk) 21:07, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

The RT score that we use, the critics' score, is still at 8%. We do not use the "audience score" from RT or similar site users' scores in any context. Movie critics are movie critics, thus the horrible score at RT is similar to the horrible score at Metacritic. Site user scores will vary a lot based on who uses the site, efforts to slant the score (from Reddit, 4chan, etc.), vote stuffing, etc. - SummerPhD^v2.0 23:19, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Right, I didn't mean the audience. Currently, 49 critics have reviewed it, which isn't tracked on the page. Snorepion (talk) 15:29, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

In that case, then consider it  Done. SkyWarrior 17:41, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

On the removal of explicit description of reception

I noticed on here before that the reception section (as well as places in the article's introduction) explicitly say the film was "panned". While this specifically doesn't necessarily have to be, a description of how the film was received would be pretty useful. Something that explicitly says that the film was widely negatively received would be useful, and if nothing else it's not worth having been removed from the page. Jpmcruiser (talk) 15:32, 3 August 2017 (UTC

The article says "Critics called The Emoji Movie 'unfunny and a waste of time,' comparing it unfavorably to The Lego Movie, Inside Out and Wreck-It Ralph, with some calling it one of the worst animated films of all-time." It's sourced. The article goes on to give RT and Metacritic scores and descriptions, also sourced. Combining all of that into "panned" is synthesis.

If, in your opinion, "panned" does not say anything other than what the sources are already quoted as saying, it would be redundant. If, OTOH, you feel it does add something other than what the sources say, where did you get that "something"? - SummerPhD^v2.0 16:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Noteworthy?

Is the following worth including, or just a fleeting piece of tabloid flammery? Man Arrested After Pleasuring Himself During Screening of ‘Emoji’ Movie: NJ Police ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 19:52, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Not worth including, IMO. Adding this would be comparable to adding a random assault case to McDonalds because the assault took place in a McDonalds. - SummerPhD^v2.0 01:06, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Very noteworthy. It'd be criminal to not include this into the article. 70.44.154.16 (talk) 05:32, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 August 2017

I would like to edit some to make it more perfect. JohnHenry666 (talk) 20:16, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:46, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 August 2017

I would like to add some more content onto articles. JohnHenry666 (talk) 16:09, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. SkyWarrior 16:39, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 16:42, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@SkyWarrior: Sorry for stepping on your toes with this one, but I felt the template I used above was more appropriate for this situation. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 16:42, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@Jd22292: I don't understand how it is though; JohnHenry666 is not requesting user rights, nor does he even imply that. SkyWarrior 16:44, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed protection may not be very necessary

My guess is most vandalism of this page results from young children who don't have access to an account or not patient enough for semi-protection. Codyorb (talk) 22:13, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

It may make the page more vulnerable. Codyorb (talk) 22:16, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 August 2017

I want to add something. Let me please. JohnHenry666 (talk) 23:56, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 00:22, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Thoughts on critic quote(s) in the intro?

I've changed the intro twice to remove the "unfunny and a waste of time" quotes since including them there seems pretty biased, but I don't want to get into an edit war, so I thought I'd post this section here for discussion. Any thoughts? It just seems to me like quotes that take that obvious of a position should be left to the reception section in order to avoid making it look that they represent any particular stance that Wikipedia itself might have, but I could be wrong. Alphius (talk) 23:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

The quote is not one critic's opinion selected to present a point-of-view. Instead, it is a reliable source summarizing what critics in general thought of the film. It is not biased to present a reliably sourced summary of critics' opinions. Based on the individual reviews I have read, those we quote and the scores on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, it seems about right. - SummerPhD^v2.0 01:34, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

To be fair, I'm not saying I don't think the quote should be used at all - I was just surprised to see it used in the intro section. It doesn't seem all that common to do that, and the examples I have found (Movie 43 being one) tend to cite a specific critic rather than just using a quote meant to summarize the reviews. But I still won't mess with it anymore if it gets changed back again. Alphius (talk) 02:33, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't recommend using critics quotes...but "It received predominantly negative reviews from critics..." should really be changed to "It received overwhelmingly negative reviews from critics...". And everyone else, it would seem: It's currently #16 on IMDB's "Bottom 100". — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoAnneThrax (talk • contribs) 19:29, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

"Overwhelmingly negative reviews"/"predominantly negative reviews" is not reliably sourced, it is WP:SYN (the terminology used by Metacritic is applied automatically, we can use it as a direct quote of Metacritic's term, but not apply it as a fact). Here's an easy test: can anyone argue that one is correct and the other not, while someone else argues the opposite? Clearly, yes, as you are doing that right now. When editors disagree about how to restate what a source says, the solution is often a direct quote: "unfunny and a waste of time". Q.E.D.

IMDb's bottom 100 is the result of IMDb users' scores. We pointedly do not use cite users' scores.

The quote, "unfunny and a waste of time", is not our synthesis, it is a reliably sourced summary, written by a human being, subject to editorial oversight, directly quoted. The only reasonable way I can see to challenge that would be to argue that the quote isn't in the source (it is) or the source isn't reliable (Entertainment Weekly is clearly reliable for this information). - SummerPhD^v2.0 02:03, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I just checked the actual source again, and technically the quote from Entertainment Weekly is "Critics are using actual words to review The Emoji Movie: 'unfunny,' 'waste of time,' and 'crappy.'" I'm not sure if it changes anything or not, but "unfunny and a waste of time" isn't actually a direct quote - it's two separate bits of reviews that EW was itself quoting. Just thought I'd mention that in case it makes any sort of difference with regards to deciding what to do. Alphius (talk) 04:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 August 2017

108.197.23.98 (talk) 06:56, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I want to add the home media release of this movie, which is October 24.

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 07:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Update box office

The wiki page says $92 million, and Box Office Mojo WAS saying that but now it's $74 million. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=theemojimovie.htm Gameman18 (talk) 19:16, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I initially updated it, but reverted. It's possible that BOM's total is an error, so it might be best to wait a bit in case it updates again. SkyWarrior 19:36, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, it seems to be the international totals that were lowered. Gameman18 (talk) 19:59, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

It updated again! Now it's saying $76 million. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=theemojimovie.htm Gameman18 (talk) 22:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 August 2017

Can you lower the Rotten Tomatoes score to 7%? More negative reviews have come in. Here's a source: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_emoji_movie/ 96.19.13.8 (talk) 13:06, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

 Done Ruslik_Zero 20:48, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Sentence Revision

Could you please modify the last sentence in the opening paragraph? It just needs to say that the movie has been panned by critics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Znelson2 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Is the phrase "piracy app" used in the movie? I find it a strange choice of words, as most apps used for file sharing are neither expressly intended for, nor limited to, illegal usage. Just because an app is used for file sharing doesn't make it a "piracy" app... Is this a reference to Popcorn Time? That's the only app which springs to my mind as having been clearly designed with the intention for users to violate copyright. By way of contrast, Dropbox & µTorrent are both file sharing apps but are not "piracy apps" per se. The phrasing "piracy app" is extremely prejudicial; I'm just wondering if that phrasing is used in the movie, in which case I think that's worth specifying with a quotation, or if that phrasing was chosen by an editor of this article, in which case both this article & that editor's viewpoint may benefit from revision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.34.111.76 (talk) 07:28, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it is called "the piracy app" and has a skull as the icon. It's filled with gelatinous blob creatures boasting about their crimes and advertising free music downloads. --Joppy2 (talk) 19:35, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 September 2017

Kindly reformat "30 August 2017" in the critical responses section into MDY dates, and please consider adding the "Use mdy dates" disclaimer into the article. Thanks! Raku Hachijo (talk) 02:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 08:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 September 2017

The total review count on Rotten Tomatoes has now increased from 99 to 100, and the average rating has increased from 2.5 to 2.6. Isi96 (talk) 07:05, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 07:27, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 September 2017

The review count on Rotten Tomatoes has increased again, to 103 reviews. Isi96 (talk) 22:37, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Done jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 00:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 November 2017

The brackets that should link to Rotten Tomatoes on the reception section are incomplete, currently it appears as "Rotten Tomatoes]]" Ashburning (talk) 21:43, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Already done by PatTheMoron (talk · contribs). ToThAc (talk) 15:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 December 2017

50.250.44.217 (talk) 18:11, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. You have not made any request. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:58, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 January 2018

Please change Hi-5 to high five and make high five a hyperlink to the article about high fives. DJ Hellard (talk) 19:07, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: Since the character's name is actually Hi-5 (e.g., here), changing it is incorrect and the listing is already linked to High five. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:06, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 January 2018

Add to the release section that this was the first movie to be played in Saudi Arabia after the 35-year ban on cinemas was lifted.

Jedieaston (talk) 17:25, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: Claim not verified by the source offered. While this movie was screened at a temporary movie theater in a cultural center, the article does not say this was the first shown in that theater. Only that the theater was showing "children's animated movies" of which this film was one. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:07, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

References

Razzie Nominations

The Emoji Movie actually got nominated for Worst Picture at the Razzies. Please add that as well as clarify the fact that it was the first animated movie nominated in the category. Adamtb24 (talk) 01:09, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Here's a source: https://www.indystar.com/story/entertainment/2018/01/21/here-nominees-2018-razzie-awards-recognizing-worst-cinema/1052444001/

Technically you’re wrong about it being the first. Thumbelina (1994 film) and Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return had a Razzie before this film. 2600:1009:B042:3866:DD6C:2778:D9EC:90F7 (talk) 19:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Protection Status

Guys, the extended confirmed access protection lock that was placed in July just expired. Should we downgrade it to autoconfirmed once that happens considering the mass vandalism and backlash that happened earlier? IceWalrus236 (talk) 23:14, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Critical response

Critics panned The Emoji Movie, calling it "unfunny and a waste of time". Both "panned" and "unfunny and a waste of time" are from the sources.

"Universally" or "unanimously" panned would mean that every critic everywhere panned the film. While you might say to your friends, "Like, ohm'god, literally everyone totally hated this film", the 9% from Rotten Tomatoes shows that that is literally not true.

Yeah, the sourced say lots of critics hated the film or thought it was "meh". We have no reason to exaggerate, what the sources say is clear enough without any of us adding out two cents. - SummerPhD^v2.0 04:25, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2018

We should add this to the category of "Film controversies" 207.172.180.75 (talk) 18:26, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

 Question: What controversy? Winning Razzies doesn't necessarily make a film controversial on sight. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:54, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

The general public and social media consider the film one of the worst films of the decade. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.172.180.75 (talk) 21:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

So? This movie didn't offend anybody in a notable, event-sized way, did it? And let a little more time pass before we decide to evaluate this movie with the retrospect that a title like "one of the worst films of the decade" needs. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 23:03, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2018

Some editor added that there will be a sequel to The Emoji Movie which is nonsense 2600:1009:B001:3109:BCEC:273B:78B:AFD4 (talk) 18:53, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: I can't see where the article sates that a sequel may be released. L293D (☎ • ✎) 21:17, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Typo/Grammar errors

As the page is protected I can't fix a couple of small errors. In the third paragraph of the plot section a sentence reads: "They evade it by entangling it's arms...". The word should be "its", not "it's".

Also, in the Voice cast section Conrad Vernon is listed as "an Trojan Horse". This should be "a", not "an". Aerach (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

/* Something's Wrong With this Page */

The Emoji Movie, music by Cold — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:881:8300:CB80:1891:19F4:AF9E:B657 (talk) 00:26, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 July 2020

Important Edit for the plot summary 174.255.67.191 (talk) 05:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:00, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Spelling error

"Award-winning" is misspelled in the second paragraph. I would edit it but the page is locked. Someone please fix.2600:1700:C820:28C0:A00B:1A51:2E9:ACB4 (talk) 06:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2021

Write the following in "Video Game":

As of 2021, the game has since been removed from the App Store and Google Play. 2001:8003:5D5F:2300:A110:37B3:984:4DA0 (talk) 06:13, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bestagon ⬡ 18:05, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2021

The emoji movie was fantastic and beyond that had a thrilling appearance when the main character is getting ready to be EXECUTED! 2600:8802:270D:B400:6D33:3F58:BFA4:6071 (talk) 23:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:26, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

It says it made 900 million dollars. That's obviously wrong.

See above. 51.7.200.9 (talk) 22:23, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

I hate villain The Wild & The Emoji Movie

I Hate Kazar Wildebeest I Despise Kazar Wildebeest Stupid Bad Cow Kazar Idiot Cow Kazar & I Hate Smiler I Despise Smiler Stupid Smiler Idiots Smiler 2400:AC40:620:9A:EDB8:4655:252C:142E (talk) 06:41, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Unclear sentence

The lead contains the sentence:

The Emoji Movie was the fastest production time for two years, unlike most other animated films.

This is really unclear and doesn't make sense, may I suggest replacing it with

The Emoji Movie had a production time of two years, shorter than most other animated films.

Which I think better summarises the content of The Emoji Movie#Development. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 14:53, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done AnnaMankad (talk) 14:58, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 December 2023

The page says the film is considered one of the worst, but it’s not on the list. Could somebody please fix it? 2600:1006:B020:5934:A846:274F:9771:945E (talk) 16:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 17:48, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2023

The page says the film is considered one of the worst, and the page provides a link to the page for List of films considered the worst, even though it’s not on the list anymore. This might come off as misleading, so could somebody please remove the link? 2600:8800:6CA1:D800:C424:614B:86EC:E25D (talk) 22:17, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: The request needs to specify the exact location where this link exists (e.g., "after the fourth paragraph of the Film section", etc)  Spintendo  00:12, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

At the end of the third paragraph. 2600:1011:B309:1B6E:C40B:EF49:209C:9E19 (talk) 02:25, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done I've removed the link. SkyWarrior 16:59, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2024

David Amponsah (talk) 23:19, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Excuse me, would you mind let me in right this minute?

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:23, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Edit request

Hey - out of curiosity, should Patrick Stewart's credit in the cast section and infobox include his title? He's marketed in the film as 'Sir Patrick Stewart', however the usual practice is to omit titles in cast sections in Wiki articles. For comparison, Ben Kingsley is credited as 'Sir' in the film Lucky Number Slevin, but he's credited without in the Wiki article for the film. Jye147 (talk) 06:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)