Talk:List of adventure films of the 2000s

The Matrix

I can't find much information about these Matrix films belonging to the genre of adventure films. Remember that IMDb is not considered a valid source. I'm reverthing this edit for now, please discuss it before editing it again.Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find much information about Inglourious Basterds belonging to the genre of adventure films. Remember that Allmovie is not reliable, as they list Jurassic Park as Action and Fantasy. hehehe andrzej, find me 5 more sources listing inglourious basterds as an adventure film, and I'll leave you alone. 187.35.33.17 (talk) 00:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nah. I'm content with my citation. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:26, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take a list at your consequences. 187.35.33.17 (talk) 00:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wait...your promise?

DVDTalk: 1

The Independant: 2

Boxoffice.com (Richard Mowe): 3

Metro.co.uk :4

Metacritic: 5

Macleans 6

I even gave you one extra! Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:39, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hehehehe you won, but metacritic is not reliable, they list Twilight as action. 187.35.33.17 (talk) 00:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. You can scrap metacritic. But I've still given you five. Anyways. It's been fun. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inglourious Basterds

For any information regarding the inclusion of this film, please refer to this definition of a "War adventure" film here. The movie does indeed fit the "men on a mission" which can easily seen by reading the plot of the film if you have not seen it. Cheers. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The matrix is not an adventure film, but IB is? 201.42.213.42 (talk) 13:10, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read the definition and tell me what you do not understand about it. See how it fits in? It's not like Indian Jones, but the Matrix is not like Sphere or Back to the Future or The Abyss either. Did you read the definitions on the site? Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:25, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the rv. comment, the characters do go on a mission. In the trailer alone they mention their mission, "Films like The Dirty Dozen, Kelly's Heroes, and The Guns Of Navarone portrayed these soldiers as tough, no-nonsense men of action who put aside their differences to get the job done. There was also the WWII espionage film, with plots of invasions, assassinations, and intrigue behind enemy lines". Tarantino even described the film as "bunch-of-guys-on-a-mission film. [It's] my Dirty Dozen or Where Eagles Dare or Guns of Navarone kind of thing."source. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Andrzejgaybanas, IB is a man on a mission, but let's remember that in The Godfather Michael was a man on a mission to kill Solozzo and McCluskey? Is The Godfather an adventure film like Inglourious Basterds Andrrzejgaybanas: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.158.244.189 (talk) 22:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yawn. Even from you this is a weak argument. I miss the days when you just reverted a page nine times so it could get a nice padlock on it. Ah well. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:26, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've provided my source. You have just been insulting and hiding under various random IPs. Do you know what it means to find a reliable source as well the fact that Wikipedia does not use original research? Click those links. Read. Get back to me. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just because I love you so much, here's another cite: The Guardian: "Quentin Tarantino's cod-second world war adventure is a transcendentally disappointing dud, in which Brad Pitt delivers his most charmless performance to date.".[1]. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The source doesn't explicitly says it is an adventure movie, they are refering that the life of the characters in this film is an adventure, but not that they go into an adventure. Also in the genre section, they list it as a comedy, when it is a drama. Note also that the source review is a negative review. 187.35.33.17 (talk) 23:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again. Read. WP:OR.. It says clearly war adventure in the above article, and no where does it say "comedy". Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't read what I said, the review doesn't explicitly says it is a war adventure film, just an adventure in war times, and adventure in war times = not a war film. Read the f'ing article in the genre section they say comedy, it's not a reliable source. In case you haven't learned to read, I'll show you, it's this part

   * Quentin Tarantino ·
   * Brad Pitt ·
   * Action and adventure ·
   * Drama ·
   * Comedy ·
   * Cannes film festival

Also, you're the only one who thinks Inglourious Basterds is an adventure film, that's because you trust allmovie too much, "Quentin Tarantino's cod-second world war adventure" doesn't mean anything because in a Godfather context "in The Godfather, the adventure and life of michael corleone" doesn't make the Godfather an adventure movie. How is a road trip film like Little Miss Sunshine not an adventure film? how can this slow-paced war drama be an adventure film if the only sources you have is 1 and a half?. I can find millions of sources refering as Little Miss Sunshine as adventure before even IMDB added adventure genre to LMS page, and I can find million sources listing Jurassic Park as an adventure and thriller film, in case you think JP is not a thriller or an adventure film. Yet I can't find no sources reliable listing Inglourious Basterds as a war adventure film. This is my last edit. 187.35.33.17 (talk) 23:45, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a discussion page for the list of adventure films. Not The Godfather. IMDb is not considered a valid source. The rating of the film doesn't matter. Those side-genres are just hash-tags (i.e: Brad Pitt is not a genre). Now please do me a big favour and read WP:OR. Once you've read it. We'll take you seriously again. (maybe). I really hope this is your last edit. Cheers!Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:50, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed titles

Please do not add titles without sources. Per WP:RS and WP:OR you require sources to have your content sourced. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TCM source and FilmAffinity

Please do not use FilmAffinity per WP:FILM standards (see WP:RS/IMDb). As for the TCM source, we should not use it if does not back up everything being stated. For example, it needs to state the director, genre, production country and cast. These sources do not. Also, should we even be using their genre category? There is no information on that site on how that information is gathered, who added it, or anything. It would fail and high quality peer review. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:31, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I could replace the links from FilmAffinity with links from NotreCinema.com, Mymovies.it, FilmTv.it, ComingSoon.it, EncycloCiné, AlloCiné, Ivid.it, Fan-de-cinema.com and others – but why? Sooner or later you would claim on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Resources that all of them are also unreliable. So the only remaining reliable online-source in the world would be AllMovie, a site full of factual errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.136.208 (talk) 09:51, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just find a quality source. I used AllMovie because it was an easy go-to source. To truly make these lists better, we should use sources that are not just listing genres in point form, but one that actually discusses genre of films in prose. That's about it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:09, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]