Talk:Lord of War

Lord of War "Book"?

Just want some clarification, was the movie based off a book or in some way influenced by any such book on global arms trade? --Azncutthroat117 (talk) 21:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Resources to use

• Kempster, Grant (2006). "Lord of War". Film Review (668): p. 115. ISSN 0957-1809. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
• Thomas, William (2006). "At Home: Lord of War". Empire (202): p. 153. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
• Hamid, Rahul (2006). "Untitled". 31 (2): pp. 52–55. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Cite journal requires |journal= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) (Reviewed together with Stephen Gagan's SYRIANA)
• Galvin, Peter (2006). "Looking down the barrel". IF (85): pp. 22–23. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) (Director Andrew Niccol comments on exploring the political and social content of LORD OF WAR)
• MacNab, Geoffrey (2005). "Lord of War". Sight & Sound. 15 (12): pp. 64, 66. ISSN 0037-4806. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
• Dyer, James (2005). "Q&A: Nic Cage". Empire (197): pp. 128–129. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) (An interview with Nic Cage primarily about his film LORD OF WAR, and other aspects of his career)

Resources to use. —Erik (talk • contrib) 03:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Liberia or Libya

According to this article the Czech tanks were to be sold to Libya, not Liberia. 62.113.159.156 (talk) 00:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

German page better than this one

Normaly i read the english wikipedia cause i find more information, but this time i must admit that in the point "crtical reception" and "historical accuracy" you find loads more info. So if you understand german take a look at it. And no im not going to translate it, but if someone else is willing to he should ;-).

fixed the rifle name

under production it was marked that 3000 AK-47's where used but they where actually Sa vz 58's a cheaper copy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.220.206.218 (talk) 13:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Rifle rental

The director says in the nzherald article that they bought 3000 AK-47s, but http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Lord_of_war#SA_Vz.58_Assault_Rifle seems to contradict this. Is it possible they bought AK-47s to use in various scenes *and* rented SA vz.58's for the stockpile scene? Or did the director just get things mixed up when talking to the reporter? I don't have the DVD myself, so if someone could confirm and correct this (if necessary), that'd be wonderful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wascally wabbit (talk • contribs) 21:59, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Compared to Mogilevich

The following phrase is un sourced and highly controversial in itself: His background is loosely similar to Semion Mogilevich, a suspected master-mind in Russian organized crime who was born in Ukraine into a Jewish family.

Mogilevich was born and educated in socialist UkrSSR, and even gained significant criminal experience under that regime. How on Earth is it "similar" to exploits of an undereducated lawful-raised immigrant to US in his twonties? 95.133.79.166 (talk) 19:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I guess it is just the "Ukrainian Jewish Family". But even in this Orlov's background would be different, as his family just pretended to be jewish to flee Soviet Union, while Mogilevich was indeed jewish. 189.119.69.197 (talk) 06:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah a lot of arms dealers & rare metals smugglers are jews: Leonid minin, etc. 213.219.144.30 (talk) 19:19, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Yuri's Rules

Yuri's list of gunrunning rules should be restored. 174.22.8.140 (talk) 23:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

seems reasonable to include. Although there is a note about removing unneccessary information. I'd be in favour of including.AnieHall (talk) 17:14, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

• Orlov's Rules of Gunrunning
  • Never get shot with your own merchandise.
  • Always have a fool-proof way to get paid.
  • Never pick up a gun and join your customers.
  • Never go to war. Especially with yourself.

70.58.55.157 (talk) 22:30, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

While There's War There's Hope

I deleted the following sentence from the introduction paragraph:

"The subjects reminds an Italian movie of 1974, While There's War There's Hope (original title: Finché c'è guerra c'è speranza) starring Alberto Sordi"

If there is a source for this as an influence, could be added to a new section other than the introduction... rewording first. Something like "The themes in this film are reminiscent of those in the Italian film, While There's Ware There's Hope, etc." But unless there is a source for the connection, it probably shouldn't be included.AnieHall (talk) 17:21, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lord of War. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071012174251/http://www.amnestyusa.org/Artists_for_Amnesty/Lord_of_War/page.do?id=1104972&n1=2&n2=22&n3=797 to http://www.amnestyusa.org/Artists_for_Amnesty/Lord_of_War/page.do?id=1104972&n1=2&n2=22&n3=797

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) 22:58, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lord of War. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070918060214/http://www.rightsourceonline.com/enews/issue2/one.htm to http://www.rightsourceonline.com/enews/issue2/one.htm

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) 01:37, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Alternative ending

The ending of this film was edited for Chinese audiences, the film is substantially shorter and ends with a caption, saying the arms dealer confessed and went was sentenced to life in prison.[1] Not sure if this is any more notable than when in the past films got savagely cut for release television or airlines or other situations, so I leave it up to other editors to decide if it is worth adding to the article. -- 109.76.203.98 (talk) 00:30, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Amusing. We can't have anyone know that there is ugliness in the world, can we? But that kind of moral editing is not unique to China nor to this film (nor completely foreign to the US). 67.180.143.89 (talk) 18:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

As others have pointed out, the rifles were probably not Kalashnikovs

According to some, production used the visually similar SA vz.58 as a cheaper stand in for the AK47. I cannot currently provide a source for this. 192.77.12.11 (talk) 11:52, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lord of War/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TompaDompa (talk · contribs) 01:10, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

General comments

• The article could in general do with a thorough copyediting to improve prose quality, particularly in the "Plot" section. The WP:Guild of Copyeditors could perhaps help with this, if you don't feel up to it yourself. You could also ask for advice on how to write plot section, specifically, at WT:FILM.
• The article relies fairly heavily on interviews and the "making of" documentary. Articles should ideally use sources further removed from the subject than that.
• Apart from the "Critical reception" subsection, the article is rather thin.
• The structure is a bit unintuitive to me at times. I might suggest turning to WT:FILM for advice on this (as well as reading MOS:FILM).

Lead

• The budget in the infobox is unsourced.
• Taking place in the early 1980s – the film takes place over a much longer stretch of time than that. The dissolution of the Soviet Union is a major plot point.
• Securing funding for the film was difficult as it was pitched shortly before the Iraq War, resulting in many American studios being unwilling to take it on. As a result, funding was achieved through debt taken on with Citibank West, the VIP3 German tax fund, and foreign sales. All remaining costs were paid by French producer Philippe Rousselet. – this seems disproportionately detailed for the WP:LEAD.
• Review aggregators Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes gave the film a score of over 62%, indicating "generally favorable reviews" – this is not correct. Neither gave it over 62%. The Rotten Tomatoes score is 62%, and the Metacritic score is 62 out of 100 (not strictly speaking a percentage). The "generally favorable reviews" part only applies to Metacritic.
• The Metacritic, Rotten Tomatoes, and Cinemascore ratings are rather dubious to include in the lead.
• Amnesty International endorsed it for highlighting the danger of an uncontrolled global arms trade. – that the film does so is an opinion, and this phrasing puts that opinion in WP:WikiVoice (that is to say, this phrasing results in Wikipedia agreeing with Amnesty rather than just reporting what they said). This recurs in the body.
• There are five paragraphs in the lead, two of which are single-sentence paragraphs.

Plot

• This section is rather heavy on links. Not all of them are necessary.
• Ava follows him one day, unaware that Interpol is following her, and they both discover the shipping container that holds his arms-dealing office. – "they both"? Ava is a person whereas Interpol is an organization.

Production

• The idea for Lord of War originated prior to 2004 when an agent of the Creative Artists Agency gave Philippe Rousselet the script – surely the starting point should be the writing of the script?
• The idea for Lord of War originated prior to 2004 when an agent of the Creative Artists Agency gave Philippe Rousselet the script – this is the first time Rousselet is mentioned after the lead. The reader should be informed who he is (and the name should be linked).
• The idea for Lord of War originated prior to 2004 when an agent of the Creative Artists Agency gave Philippe Rousselet the script – this wording is ambiguous. Is it "originated prior to [2004 when an agent] [...]" or "originated [prior to 2004] when an agent [...]"? In other words, was the script given to Rousselet in 2004 or prior to 2004 (the rest of the paragraph makes it clear that it has to be the latter as it was before the start of the Iraq War, which began in 2003, but the reader shouldn't have to do the mental legwork of figuring that out).
• but could not find an American studio that would take it on, as it was right before the beginning of the Iraq War – should probably explain why that made them unwilling to do so.
• An additional setback was that scenes in the script were written to occur in up to 13 different countries – that's not a setback; a setback is unexpected. I might describe it as a complicating factor, perhaps.
• as the expected expenses increased, Section 48 laws disqualified the film from making use of it – I'm going to go out on a limb and say most readers will not be sufficiently familiar with the relevant laws to understand what this means.
• As with Rousselet, Amir Mokri should be introduced and linked at first mention.
• Amir Mokri made it a point to have the camera move as Yuri moved, in reference to Yuri's constant travelling as an arms dealer. – this is interesting, but it seems a bit out of place in this section and shouldn't have an entire separate paragraph devoted to it.
• The "Yuri Orlov inspiration" subsection seems a bit out of place here.
• Using a photograph of a living person in handcuffs should probably be avoided when there are other options available.
• Screen Rant is a barely-reliable low-quality source that should really only be used for straightforward statements of fact within its area of competency (entertainment, roughly speaking), and then only if no better source can be used instead. It should never be used for anything controversial, WP:BLP material, or any kind of analysis.
• In 2015, the National Security Archive reported that Yuri was primarily based on Sarkis Soghanalian, an Armenian-Lebanese arms dealer. – what the source says is "he was an inspiration for Nicholas Cage's character Yuri Orlov in the 2005 film, Lord of War", a significantly weaker statement.

Release

• Avoid "internationally" when you mean "outside the US and Canada". See MOS:DOMESTIC.
• Giving details about the opening weekend in the US and Canada but no information about any other territories apart from the combined gross in all of them is a pretty clear example of WP:Systemic bias.
• The "Critical reception" subsection is rather heavy on verbatim quotes. It would probably be better to paraphrase and summarize a bit more than is done currently.
• listed by the British Film Institute as an inspired opening sequence of the 21st century – the BFI is generally speaking a good source to use, but a listicle like this is not really.
• Comic Book Resources is similar in quality to Screen Rant, and what I said about the latter above also applies to the former. This article might be an exception as a review seeing as the author is a Rotten Tomatoes-approved critic, but I would avoid using it unless it makes some valuable point that no other source makes.
• Shortly after the film released Amnesty International, a non-governmental organization focusing on human rights, endorsed the film for illustrating the danger of international arms trade when left unchecked. – I don't think this counts as an accolade, exactly.

Home media

• I am not convinced dvdsreleasedates.com counts as a reliable source.

Sequel

• was scheduled to begin filming in the fall of 2023. It was delayed by eight months – it should be made more clear whether it was delayed eight months to the fall of 2023 or from the fall of 2023.
• Linking to the more general strike action rather than the more specific 2023 Writers Guild of America strike and 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike is a bit odd.
• Cage is returning – we can say that he is reported to be, or that he will (reportedly) be, but not that he is until the movie has entered production.

Summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   See my comments above.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   See my comments above on the WP:LEAD in particular.

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   See my comments above.

   C. It contains no original research:

   See my comments above.

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   Earwig reveals no copyvio, and I didn't spot any instances of unacceptably WP:Close paraphrasing.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   The article is, as noted above, rather thin on most fronts. A pretty clear example where something is missing is that the pre-production section starts with the script already written.

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   The article does not at all times distinguish between facts and opinions sufficiently clearly, as noted.

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   The poster is fair use, and the other image is PD.

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   This is a decent start for an article, but it needs more work to become a WP:Good article.

@Sirdog: Thank you for your work on the article, and your first WP:Good article nomination. I'm closing this as unsuccessful, as the article does not currently meet the WP:Good article criteria and getting it up to those standards would both take more time and effort than I can reasonably expect you to devote to it within the near future. As such, I think it better to close this now so you can work on improving the article at your own pace without the pressure of a looming deadline. This also means that you can get a fresh assessment once you're done, assuming you choose to renominate it (which I would encourage).

The strongest part of the article is by far the "Critical reception" subsection. It is plain to see that a fair amount of time, thought, and care went into writing it (as well as just locating the relevant sources). I would suggest as a first step for improving the article that you attempt to find additional sources on the production aspect of the film, and then perhaps sources analysing the film (as opposed to reviewing it—though the lines get fuzzy at times). I am confident you can expand and improve this article even further, and I look forward to seeing it renominated in the future. TompaDompa (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Just to note

Just wanted to get documented on the talk page (which I should have done 6 months ago...) that I created User:Sirdog/ArticleDev/Lord of War to work on the points presented in my reviewer's very generous GA review. I've addressed (atleast since my last edit to the article, as it's been some time) almost all of them. Or, well, I believe so.

I've been very hesitant to re-nominate given that I do not believe sufficient reliable and secondary sourcing exists (or otherwise is within my means to access) to describe the film's production, and even for GA's lesser "breadth" standard I'm not certain this article can survive said standard without that. Anyone who happens to float by and see this please feel free to ping me with any advisements or what not. —Sirdog (talk) 08:42, 5 August 2024 (UTC)