![]() | Speed Racer (film) 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. Review: November 10, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Speed Racer (film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There should be a section on the main page questioning the reception for this film. It is based on Japanese characters, yet I am not sure that would translate into box office success. People don't go to movies just to see actors, they go because they are interested in the movie's plot and so on. 96.3.72.93 ( talk) 06:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
The citations on the article reflect the involvement of directors Julien Temple, Alfonso Cuarón, and Gus Van Sant with the project, as well as actor Johnny Depp and writers Marc Levin, Jennifer Flackett, J. J. Abrams, and Patrick Read Johnson. I think that the history of Speed Racer can be more accurately shaped by providing chronological detail of the project prior to September 2000. This may need to be done by accessing news databases and the like. If anyone finds anything potentially useful, please share here on the talk page. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 06:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Jung Ji-Hoon is going to be in the film as well.
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)IMDb lists Peter Fernandez in the film as a local announcer. He was responsible for voicing characters in the original series (and the upcoming series as well). If anyone can provide an attributable source for Fernandez's involvement, please do that. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 13:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Headlines. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 21:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- J.D. ( talk) 18:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
New York Daily News reports via "a source close to the writer/directors" that Rose McGowan and Zac Efron were originally considered for Speed Racer. The source of information seems dubious since NY Daily News is a tabloid and its sources wouldn't be reliable, but I thought I'd place it here just in case. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 19:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I wonder if the live action version is going to have the "chyock chyock" sound effect if the Mach 5 uses the jump/jacks feature. -- Mikecraig 04:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Now that the [ first production stills] are out, I need to know if there is any way to include them in this article? They are promotional stills of course, but are we allowed to use them? They would be deeply valuable to this article. JayKeaton ( talk) 19:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Now that the Speed Racer Trailer is out, I wanted to know how to add it to this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slewy ( talk • contribs) 15:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the trailer was released yesterday online. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slewy ( talk • contribs) 21:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Should we put that Racer X is Speed's older brother Rex? Many people who have only heard of Speed Racer still know about Rex/X. Please tell me your answers and give me an explanation. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kazaan ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Why are there different actors playing Racer X and Rex Racer? Corvus cornix talk 23:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
!!!SPOILER!!! In only the horrible way Hollywood can, Racer X underwent cosmetic surgery so he would look like a totally different person. This was added to create depth to the character and to possibly confuse the two people in the audience who didn't know that X was supposed to Speed's brother. It was my main problem with the plot. Reminded me of 'magical knowledgable butler' in Spider-Man 3. If they would've only used the same actor, this film would've gone up several notches in my book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.140.254.250 ( talk) 08:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
should this have its own page??-- Lbrun12415 23:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
The Production section repeats some of the things stated in the beginning section. There are even some of the same sentences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.8.2 ( talk) 00:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Where is the new poster? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.148.8 ( talk • contribs) 09:19, April 19, 2008
In the trailer I watched I saw the first few scenes were shot in the 'real' world and seemed to focus on an autistic boy.
Are the events of the film taking place in his head?! 65.185.29.175 ( talk) 16:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Nope. I saw the movie and believe it or not that classroom scene was all CGI. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.177.231.105 ( talk) 15:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Get more than one critic's review or remove Variety's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.148.8 ( talk) 19:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I've seen the film and i can add the plot summary if they change the the article so i can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duncandrake ( talk • contribs) 19:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the reception part of the article is way too biased. I've seen many positive reviews of the film on several websites. The article only gives examples of negatives ones, making it look like a crappy movie when in reality it is subjective and many people think it is a good movie as well. We should equal it out a bit instead of only incorporating negative reviews and quotes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.72.47.41 ( talk) 14:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps add the fact that the audiences love the film. Rotten Tomatoes Users were favorable. Duncandrake ( talk) 15:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree that several websites, including Wikipedia, led me to believe that the film was much worse than it was. I saw it today, and I found it quite cute. That surprised me, since I generally do agree with what critics say; for some reason, this film seems to have been built up to be a failure. Is that all in my head? Or does it feel like sites just want to jump to the negative?
75.140.254.250 (
talk)
08:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Metacritic and rottentomatoes also has very high ratings compared to critics in the user categories. RT community gave the movie a 78%, as compared to the T-meter giving it a 35%. Metacritic have a 37/100 for critics, and a 8/10 for users. This seems to point demonstrate that the reception from the general public (or at-least speed racer fans,) is considerably higher then those of critics. To help with neutrality i think some comment about that should be given. 132.178.202.69 ( talk) 20:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Ckatz, the last discussion I initiated was never resolved. You are the only person that has a problem with it and you apparently REFUSE to respond to my last comment on the matter, so I left it until someone else could chime in. I saw that someone did and so I went ahead with the change again. We can't reach a consensus when the opposing editor refuses to discuss anything. Zybon ( talk) 05:49, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I attempted to add the Rotten Tomatoes user data, and had it deleted. It was cited that the information was "unreliable", and yet it's listed as a statistic on RT's own page. One would hardly imagine that RT would bother gathering the data were it not at least in some way statistically relevant. The same can be said for the Metacritic user data. This removal of valid information that might help to balance the segment is evidence of a strong bias against this film on the part of some users, as commented on by others. It almost seems that some have taken it on themselves to warn people away from the film just because some critics have. It'd be far more unbiased and fair to note the failed box office, and the critical displeasure, and also note that there is evidence for a better reception among some audiences and some positive word of mouth for the film that indicates the potential for a cult fanbase. Peter David's excellent review on his blog would be a good one to note. (kitty_tc) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.31.200 ( talk) 04:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia always gets Negative reviews in movies on Wikipedia......they always do that. It's annoying. That's why I always ignore the Reception sections, because I never care what Film Critics think :)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.44.204 ( talk) 12:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Thought it should be noted that the updated version of "Go, Speed Racer, Go" theme song that plays over the end credits was produced by Ali Dee and Jason Gleed at Deetown Entertainment in NYC, and performed by Ali Dee and the Deekompressors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterTheEater ( talk • contribs) 22:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the Reception section of the article is too verbose. A quick quip here and there is fine to demonstrate the variety of opinions, but the article shouldn't be a repository of writings that are available elsewhere. Lighthope ( talk) 23:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree with this. Phrases like "The critics were divided on the unique visual style" etc. would do well for this section. Most movie articles use a few paragraphs; one for the review aggregate sites, one for the positives, and one for the negatives. Zybon ( talk) 06:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I spotted two references to other films, one is the scene where one of the ninjas drips the drug into Taejo Togokhan's mouth- that's an exact copy of the scene in the 1967 James bond film You Only Live Twice. The other is a nod to "Star Wars" where Trixie, wearing Taejo Togokhan's driving suit and driving his car, twice says she can't see a thing in her helmet.
Anyone spot more references to other films? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody ( talk • contribs) 22:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
The Synopsis article currently reads "Japanese racer Taejo Togokhan." This strikes me as quite wrong – not due to the nationality of the actor, but because neither Taejo nor Togokhan are Japanese names (if they are, they must a very rare as neither shows up on databases such as Kanjidict). It may be that they are not real names of any language or culture, but "Togokhan" cannot be a Japanese word because of "kh" sound – Japanese has only a few instances of where one consonant can come after another (other than "n") without a vowel in between, and "kh" is not one of them.
I have yet to experience the film myself, so I require the authority of someone who has. If it is explicitly stated within the film that the Togokhans are Japanese, then leave the text as it is and specify in a citation where their nationality is made explicit in the film (the presence of ninjas does not count). If it is not, then replace "Japanese" with " East Asian." Turtleheart ( talk) 23:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Is it possible that the sister's name was meant to be "Haruko" and it got mistakenly devolved into "Horuko" instead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.31.200 ( talk) 04:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
They had to build a new car for the second race. What happened to the first one? — DanielLC 16:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
It was destroyed in Speed's crash at the end of the Fuji race scene, it blew up. Yes, they are really the same car, but because of the circumstances of the film's 'time period' (cars going around 500 mph causing crashes to be completely devastating) it would make sense that they would rebuild the same car for recognition, comfort for the driver etc. They're basically just 'fixing' the car. -- Electrovir ( talk) 23:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Zybon is once again attempting to remove the comments from the New Yorker, arguing that the review is "ridiculousness" and the magazine is not influential. The same editor also tried to remove the review in mid-May, but there was no consensus to remove it at that time. Given that the magazine is clearly notable, I see no reason to remove its review. Thoughts? -- Ckatz chat spy 05:32, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I'll copy this response here since you seem to think I'm the only one that has qualms with this review:
"The New Yorker review is a joke, and the perfect example of absurd yellow journalism. If you want to put a negative review up, please remove that one and add a review that may actually make a few valid points and isn't incessantly negative beyond imagination. Permission to remove it, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.141.255.146 (talk) 23:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)"
Regarding it not being influential, what I mean is that no one with even a passing interest in Speed Racer will really care about The New Yorker's status and look to it for a review. Just because a source is notable does not mean that everything they put out is gold; I went into detail on several points (which were reflected with similar pretentiousness throughout the review) and those should be more than enough cause for exclusion. Oh well, I don't expect any activity here until (possibly) the DVD is released. Zybon ( talk) 06:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Zybon. The only reason to go into such detail in the Reception section is to deliberately disparage the film. It's more than sufficient, as mentioned above, to trim down to listing the Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic scores, mention the contrast in user ratings compared to the critical reception, and list a few of the more common praises and criticisms such as "critics were divided on the visual style, some calling it brilliant and others finding it virtually unwatchable" and similar such summaries. List the facts and let people make their own decisions about the film. Enough bandwagon bashing already. (kitty_tc) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.31.200 ( talk) 02:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Is "pompestuous" even a word? I assume that he meant "tempestuous". Even if it is a direct quote, wouldn't it be preferable to have a less retarded reference for the Hitchens comparison? Tons of reviewers noted the resemblance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.89.155.96 ( talk) 12:11, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Is that real? Did they really claim the animal trainer spanked the monkey?
I mean, come on! Aside from the obvious masturbation joke, Chimps are apes, not monkeys!
Is this a true claim or a joke they sent just to get a spank the monkey joke in there? AndarielHalo ( talk) 15:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I've removed that section. I'm not saying it's not important information, but since so many other movies with similar (or worse) incidents lack such sections on their respective wikipedia pages (looking through the AHA review site that was cited in the article I found that Fast and Furious (2009) involved unmonitored possibly unsimulated cock fighting). I feel it paints a particularly hostile view towards the movie. If someone wants to go through and make a list of movies that feature possible or confirmed animal abuse on set and make edits to the relevant pages as well, then I have no problem with that section coming back. 24.211.241.127 ( talk) 22:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Biggs Pliff ( talk · contribs) 23:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm reviewing this article as part of my training at WP:GARC as such it may take longer than normal to complete (see here). I'll start by filling out a review template and after that do a prose and source review. Any queries or input is welcome. Biggs Pliff ( talk) 23:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
Lead
Plot
Cast
Production
Release and Reception
Possible Sequel
Well that's that for the prose review, I'll try and do the source review tomorrow or the next day. Biggs Pliff ( talk) 01:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Besides these issues there is just the matter of updating the "Retrieved" dates on all the sources, once these are sorted out the article is ready to be passed. Biggs Pliff ( talk) 11:58, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
I passed the article. Congratulations! Biggs Pliff ( talk) 14:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Cosma Shiva Hagen as Gennie than not pleased. It is in the Wiki. 4Sage Wiki ( talk) 14:39, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
The article says "Speed Racer premiered on May 3, 2008 as the closing film at the Tribeca Film Festival. [1]". But the movie was already shown on 26 April 2008 according to among others this article. I'm not sure if it counts as a premiere though. So which of the showings was the premiere? -- Distelfinck ( talk) 15:38, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
References
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
Well, this is bothering me for a long time. Since this edit there is a long edit war over the usage of "The Wachowskis" or "The Wachowski Brothers" ( [1], [2], ). I would prefer "the Wachowskis" since its gender-neutral but gives the same information. However, Template:Infobox film#Credits say "A person should be credited by the name they were using professionally at the time the film was made." (empashis mine) There have been other dicussions and the consensus seems to be this — to use "The Wachowski Brothers" (check: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 42#The Matrix - Larry to Lana (And other films) and The Matrix archives 4 and 3). Anyway, apparently, The Matrix uses "The Wachowski Brothers" only in the infobox but "The Wachowskis" in the rest of the article. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 21:59, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Since now both are trans woman, it's been focus of several disputes on the name we should use ( [3], [4], [5]). I understand both sides' reasoning so I want to propose a half term: may we keep "The Wachowski Brothers" and "Larry Wachowski" and "Andy Wachowski" in the infobox (per Template:Infobox film#Credits) and add a note to explain the situation? Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 01:25, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
I think it's pretty clear that the link in the first paragraph that reads "The Wachowski Brothers" now links to a page that is titled "The Wachowskis". At the very least the link text should be modified to the new name of the article. Otherwise, it's misleading -- Exshpos ( talk) 16:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
The cited convention only says that the original credit should be kept in the infobox. I would suggest we do the same as The Matrix, keep the original credit in the box, but change the text in the first paragraph (and maybe move the footnote to the name in the infobox). Vilhelm.s ( talk) 03:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I went ahead and changed "The Wachowski Brothers" to "The Wachowskis" in the first paragraph. To me, it makes sense to use the same terminology that the linked article uses, and the linked article is titled The Wachowskis. Also, in the article of their most well-known film, The Matrix, they are referred to as "The Wachowskis" in the opening paragraph. I think that is a good model to follow. We can refer to them as "The Wachowski Brothers" in the infobox since that is what the template for film infoboxes suggests, but to apply the guidelines of the infobox template to the first paragraph of this article makes no sense to me. What do people think of my reasoning here? Rebecca Weaver ( talk) 08:23, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
There are numerous media on this site that use names not credited. Whether your infobox template policy is intentionally an excuse to misgender, misname, and overall denigrate marginalized people or whether it only comes off that way because Roseanne Barr (formerly Roseanne Arnold) is listed as Roseanne Barr on the page for Roseanne (as one of **many** examples of changed names being updated in the infobox for a work after the work already credits the prior name), the effect is the same. The inconsistency is because of cis comfort. A note about the directors' transitions can be placed on the pages for the directors as it is part of their personal lives, not related to the movie. The Wachowskis have not said that they do not want the credited name changed, it simply has not been changed, and the rule should be to have the information correct rather than the preconceived notions of the information be presented as such. Put a footnote on every credited name that has changed since its original crediting, for example, changing Roseanne Barr back to Roseanne Arnold for the Roseanne article, or agree that the current name is in common use on every single other piece of work and you're only singling out the Wachowskis because they're transgender. Be consistent. 2600:8801:1C00:3AB0:E84E:383B:7F77:CAE8 ( talk) 11:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi! This poll could affect how the Wachowskis are credited on Wikipedia for years. Please give us your input How should we credit the Wachowskis? WanderingWanda ( talk) 07:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Do awkward, unflattering, out-of-character snapshots of the actors really add anything to the article? I wish, instead, the article had some screenshots showcasing the film's phantasmagoric visual style. I know copyright makes that tricky, but I've noticed the 2001 article has several shots from the film (and even video) with a fair use rationale. WanderingWanda (they/them) ( t/ c) 19:25, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
How the footnote should appear in relevant Wachowski film articles is being discussed at Talk:The Matrix (franchise)/Archive 3#Footnote implementation. Please join the discussion and weigh in with your thoughts and suggestions. Thank you. -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 15:57, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | Speed Racer (film) 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. Review: November 10, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Speed Racer (film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There should be a section on the main page questioning the reception for this film. It is based on Japanese characters, yet I am not sure that would translate into box office success. People don't go to movies just to see actors, they go because they are interested in the movie's plot and so on. 96.3.72.93 ( talk) 06:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
The citations on the article reflect the involvement of directors Julien Temple, Alfonso Cuarón, and Gus Van Sant with the project, as well as actor Johnny Depp and writers Marc Levin, Jennifer Flackett, J. J. Abrams, and Patrick Read Johnson. I think that the history of Speed Racer can be more accurately shaped by providing chronological detail of the project prior to September 2000. This may need to be done by accessing news databases and the like. If anyone finds anything potentially useful, please share here on the talk page. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 06:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Jung Ji-Hoon is going to be in the film as well.
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)IMDb lists Peter Fernandez in the film as a local announcer. He was responsible for voicing characters in the original series (and the upcoming series as well). If anyone can provide an attributable source for Fernandez's involvement, please do that. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 13:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Headlines. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 21:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- J.D. ( talk) 18:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
New York Daily News reports via "a source close to the writer/directors" that Rose McGowan and Zac Efron were originally considered for Speed Racer. The source of information seems dubious since NY Daily News is a tabloid and its sources wouldn't be reliable, but I thought I'd place it here just in case. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 19:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I wonder if the live action version is going to have the "chyock chyock" sound effect if the Mach 5 uses the jump/jacks feature. -- Mikecraig 04:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Now that the [ first production stills] are out, I need to know if there is any way to include them in this article? They are promotional stills of course, but are we allowed to use them? They would be deeply valuable to this article. JayKeaton ( talk) 19:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Now that the Speed Racer Trailer is out, I wanted to know how to add it to this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slewy ( talk • contribs) 15:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the trailer was released yesterday online. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slewy ( talk • contribs) 21:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Should we put that Racer X is Speed's older brother Rex? Many people who have only heard of Speed Racer still know about Rex/X. Please tell me your answers and give me an explanation. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kazaan ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Why are there different actors playing Racer X and Rex Racer? Corvus cornix talk 23:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
!!!SPOILER!!! In only the horrible way Hollywood can, Racer X underwent cosmetic surgery so he would look like a totally different person. This was added to create depth to the character and to possibly confuse the two people in the audience who didn't know that X was supposed to Speed's brother. It was my main problem with the plot. Reminded me of 'magical knowledgable butler' in Spider-Man 3. If they would've only used the same actor, this film would've gone up several notches in my book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.140.254.250 ( talk) 08:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
should this have its own page??-- Lbrun12415 23:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
The Production section repeats some of the things stated in the beginning section. There are even some of the same sentences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.8.2 ( talk) 00:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Where is the new poster? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.148.8 ( talk • contribs) 09:19, April 19, 2008
In the trailer I watched I saw the first few scenes were shot in the 'real' world and seemed to focus on an autistic boy.
Are the events of the film taking place in his head?! 65.185.29.175 ( talk) 16:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Nope. I saw the movie and believe it or not that classroom scene was all CGI. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.177.231.105 ( talk) 15:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Get more than one critic's review or remove Variety's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.148.8 ( talk) 19:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I've seen the film and i can add the plot summary if they change the the article so i can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duncandrake ( talk • contribs) 19:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the reception part of the article is way too biased. I've seen many positive reviews of the film on several websites. The article only gives examples of negatives ones, making it look like a crappy movie when in reality it is subjective and many people think it is a good movie as well. We should equal it out a bit instead of only incorporating negative reviews and quotes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.72.47.41 ( talk) 14:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps add the fact that the audiences love the film. Rotten Tomatoes Users were favorable. Duncandrake ( talk) 15:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree that several websites, including Wikipedia, led me to believe that the film was much worse than it was. I saw it today, and I found it quite cute. That surprised me, since I generally do agree with what critics say; for some reason, this film seems to have been built up to be a failure. Is that all in my head? Or does it feel like sites just want to jump to the negative?
75.140.254.250 (
talk)
08:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Metacritic and rottentomatoes also has very high ratings compared to critics in the user categories. RT community gave the movie a 78%, as compared to the T-meter giving it a 35%. Metacritic have a 37/100 for critics, and a 8/10 for users. This seems to point demonstrate that the reception from the general public (or at-least speed racer fans,) is considerably higher then those of critics. To help with neutrality i think some comment about that should be given. 132.178.202.69 ( talk) 20:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Ckatz, the last discussion I initiated was never resolved. You are the only person that has a problem with it and you apparently REFUSE to respond to my last comment on the matter, so I left it until someone else could chime in. I saw that someone did and so I went ahead with the change again. We can't reach a consensus when the opposing editor refuses to discuss anything. Zybon ( talk) 05:49, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I attempted to add the Rotten Tomatoes user data, and had it deleted. It was cited that the information was "unreliable", and yet it's listed as a statistic on RT's own page. One would hardly imagine that RT would bother gathering the data were it not at least in some way statistically relevant. The same can be said for the Metacritic user data. This removal of valid information that might help to balance the segment is evidence of a strong bias against this film on the part of some users, as commented on by others. It almost seems that some have taken it on themselves to warn people away from the film just because some critics have. It'd be far more unbiased and fair to note the failed box office, and the critical displeasure, and also note that there is evidence for a better reception among some audiences and some positive word of mouth for the film that indicates the potential for a cult fanbase. Peter David's excellent review on his blog would be a good one to note. (kitty_tc) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.31.200 ( talk) 04:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia always gets Negative reviews in movies on Wikipedia......they always do that. It's annoying. That's why I always ignore the Reception sections, because I never care what Film Critics think :)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.44.204 ( talk) 12:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Thought it should be noted that the updated version of "Go, Speed Racer, Go" theme song that plays over the end credits was produced by Ali Dee and Jason Gleed at Deetown Entertainment in NYC, and performed by Ali Dee and the Deekompressors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterTheEater ( talk • contribs) 22:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the Reception section of the article is too verbose. A quick quip here and there is fine to demonstrate the variety of opinions, but the article shouldn't be a repository of writings that are available elsewhere. Lighthope ( talk) 23:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree with this. Phrases like "The critics were divided on the unique visual style" etc. would do well for this section. Most movie articles use a few paragraphs; one for the review aggregate sites, one for the positives, and one for the negatives. Zybon ( talk) 06:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I spotted two references to other films, one is the scene where one of the ninjas drips the drug into Taejo Togokhan's mouth- that's an exact copy of the scene in the 1967 James bond film You Only Live Twice. The other is a nod to "Star Wars" where Trixie, wearing Taejo Togokhan's driving suit and driving his car, twice says she can't see a thing in her helmet.
Anyone spot more references to other films? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody ( talk • contribs) 22:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
The Synopsis article currently reads "Japanese racer Taejo Togokhan." This strikes me as quite wrong – not due to the nationality of the actor, but because neither Taejo nor Togokhan are Japanese names (if they are, they must a very rare as neither shows up on databases such as Kanjidict). It may be that they are not real names of any language or culture, but "Togokhan" cannot be a Japanese word because of "kh" sound – Japanese has only a few instances of where one consonant can come after another (other than "n") without a vowel in between, and "kh" is not one of them.
I have yet to experience the film myself, so I require the authority of someone who has. If it is explicitly stated within the film that the Togokhans are Japanese, then leave the text as it is and specify in a citation where their nationality is made explicit in the film (the presence of ninjas does not count). If it is not, then replace "Japanese" with " East Asian." Turtleheart ( talk) 23:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Is it possible that the sister's name was meant to be "Haruko" and it got mistakenly devolved into "Horuko" instead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.31.200 ( talk) 04:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
They had to build a new car for the second race. What happened to the first one? — DanielLC 16:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
It was destroyed in Speed's crash at the end of the Fuji race scene, it blew up. Yes, they are really the same car, but because of the circumstances of the film's 'time period' (cars going around 500 mph causing crashes to be completely devastating) it would make sense that they would rebuild the same car for recognition, comfort for the driver etc. They're basically just 'fixing' the car. -- Electrovir ( talk) 23:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Zybon is once again attempting to remove the comments from the New Yorker, arguing that the review is "ridiculousness" and the magazine is not influential. The same editor also tried to remove the review in mid-May, but there was no consensus to remove it at that time. Given that the magazine is clearly notable, I see no reason to remove its review. Thoughts? -- Ckatz chat spy 05:32, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I'll copy this response here since you seem to think I'm the only one that has qualms with this review:
"The New Yorker review is a joke, and the perfect example of absurd yellow journalism. If you want to put a negative review up, please remove that one and add a review that may actually make a few valid points and isn't incessantly negative beyond imagination. Permission to remove it, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.141.255.146 (talk) 23:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)"
Regarding it not being influential, what I mean is that no one with even a passing interest in Speed Racer will really care about The New Yorker's status and look to it for a review. Just because a source is notable does not mean that everything they put out is gold; I went into detail on several points (which were reflected with similar pretentiousness throughout the review) and those should be more than enough cause for exclusion. Oh well, I don't expect any activity here until (possibly) the DVD is released. Zybon ( talk) 06:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Zybon. The only reason to go into such detail in the Reception section is to deliberately disparage the film. It's more than sufficient, as mentioned above, to trim down to listing the Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic scores, mention the contrast in user ratings compared to the critical reception, and list a few of the more common praises and criticisms such as "critics were divided on the visual style, some calling it brilliant and others finding it virtually unwatchable" and similar such summaries. List the facts and let people make their own decisions about the film. Enough bandwagon bashing already. (kitty_tc) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.31.200 ( talk) 02:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Is "pompestuous" even a word? I assume that he meant "tempestuous". Even if it is a direct quote, wouldn't it be preferable to have a less retarded reference for the Hitchens comparison? Tons of reviewers noted the resemblance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.89.155.96 ( talk) 12:11, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Is that real? Did they really claim the animal trainer spanked the monkey?
I mean, come on! Aside from the obvious masturbation joke, Chimps are apes, not monkeys!
Is this a true claim or a joke they sent just to get a spank the monkey joke in there? AndarielHalo ( talk) 15:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I've removed that section. I'm not saying it's not important information, but since so many other movies with similar (or worse) incidents lack such sections on their respective wikipedia pages (looking through the AHA review site that was cited in the article I found that Fast and Furious (2009) involved unmonitored possibly unsimulated cock fighting). I feel it paints a particularly hostile view towards the movie. If someone wants to go through and make a list of movies that feature possible or confirmed animal abuse on set and make edits to the relevant pages as well, then I have no problem with that section coming back. 24.211.241.127 ( talk) 22:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Biggs Pliff ( talk · contribs) 23:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm reviewing this article as part of my training at WP:GARC as such it may take longer than normal to complete (see here). I'll start by filling out a review template and after that do a prose and source review. Any queries or input is welcome. Biggs Pliff ( talk) 23:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
Lead
Plot
Cast
Production
Release and Reception
Possible Sequel
Well that's that for the prose review, I'll try and do the source review tomorrow or the next day. Biggs Pliff ( talk) 01:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Besides these issues there is just the matter of updating the "Retrieved" dates on all the sources, once these are sorted out the article is ready to be passed. Biggs Pliff ( talk) 11:58, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
I passed the article. Congratulations! Biggs Pliff ( talk) 14:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Cosma Shiva Hagen as Gennie than not pleased. It is in the Wiki. 4Sage Wiki ( talk) 14:39, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
The article says "Speed Racer premiered on May 3, 2008 as the closing film at the Tribeca Film Festival. [1]". But the movie was already shown on 26 April 2008 according to among others this article. I'm not sure if it counts as a premiere though. So which of the showings was the premiere? -- Distelfinck ( talk) 15:38, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
References
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
Well, this is bothering me for a long time. Since this edit there is a long edit war over the usage of "The Wachowskis" or "The Wachowski Brothers" ( [1], [2], ). I would prefer "the Wachowskis" since its gender-neutral but gives the same information. However, Template:Infobox film#Credits say "A person should be credited by the name they were using professionally at the time the film was made." (empashis mine) There have been other dicussions and the consensus seems to be this — to use "The Wachowski Brothers" (check: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 42#The Matrix - Larry to Lana (And other films) and The Matrix archives 4 and 3). Anyway, apparently, The Matrix uses "The Wachowski Brothers" only in the infobox but "The Wachowskis" in the rest of the article. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 21:59, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Since now both are trans woman, it's been focus of several disputes on the name we should use ( [3], [4], [5]). I understand both sides' reasoning so I want to propose a half term: may we keep "The Wachowski Brothers" and "Larry Wachowski" and "Andy Wachowski" in the infobox (per Template:Infobox film#Credits) and add a note to explain the situation? Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 01:25, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
I think it's pretty clear that the link in the first paragraph that reads "The Wachowski Brothers" now links to a page that is titled "The Wachowskis". At the very least the link text should be modified to the new name of the article. Otherwise, it's misleading -- Exshpos ( talk) 16:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
The cited convention only says that the original credit should be kept in the infobox. I would suggest we do the same as The Matrix, keep the original credit in the box, but change the text in the first paragraph (and maybe move the footnote to the name in the infobox). Vilhelm.s ( talk) 03:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I went ahead and changed "The Wachowski Brothers" to "The Wachowskis" in the first paragraph. To me, it makes sense to use the same terminology that the linked article uses, and the linked article is titled The Wachowskis. Also, in the article of their most well-known film, The Matrix, they are referred to as "The Wachowskis" in the opening paragraph. I think that is a good model to follow. We can refer to them as "The Wachowski Brothers" in the infobox since that is what the template for film infoboxes suggests, but to apply the guidelines of the infobox template to the first paragraph of this article makes no sense to me. What do people think of my reasoning here? Rebecca Weaver ( talk) 08:23, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
There are numerous media on this site that use names not credited. Whether your infobox template policy is intentionally an excuse to misgender, misname, and overall denigrate marginalized people or whether it only comes off that way because Roseanne Barr (formerly Roseanne Arnold) is listed as Roseanne Barr on the page for Roseanne (as one of **many** examples of changed names being updated in the infobox for a work after the work already credits the prior name), the effect is the same. The inconsistency is because of cis comfort. A note about the directors' transitions can be placed on the pages for the directors as it is part of their personal lives, not related to the movie. The Wachowskis have not said that they do not want the credited name changed, it simply has not been changed, and the rule should be to have the information correct rather than the preconceived notions of the information be presented as such. Put a footnote on every credited name that has changed since its original crediting, for example, changing Roseanne Barr back to Roseanne Arnold for the Roseanne article, or agree that the current name is in common use on every single other piece of work and you're only singling out the Wachowskis because they're transgender. Be consistent. 2600:8801:1C00:3AB0:E84E:383B:7F77:CAE8 ( talk) 11:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi! This poll could affect how the Wachowskis are credited on Wikipedia for years. Please give us your input How should we credit the Wachowskis? WanderingWanda ( talk) 07:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Do awkward, unflattering, out-of-character snapshots of the actors really add anything to the article? I wish, instead, the article had some screenshots showcasing the film's phantasmagoric visual style. I know copyright makes that tricky, but I've noticed the 2001 article has several shots from the film (and even video) with a fair use rationale. WanderingWanda (they/them) ( t/ c) 19:25, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
How the footnote should appear in relevant Wachowski film articles is being discussed at Talk:The Matrix (franchise)/Archive 3#Footnote implementation. Please join the discussion and weigh in with your thoughts and suggestions. Thank you. -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 15:57, 16 March 2019 (UTC)