Talk:Resident Evil: Retribution/Archive 1

Unreferenced material ...

... may be challenged or deleted. Does everyone know that? I hope so. Fleet Command (talk) 06:17, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Somebody really jumped the gun on this one. Presently, all the info on this movie can already be found on the Resident Evil (film series) page, which also states that the title Retribution is only a rumor. This article should be renamed at the least, deleted at the most. 184.0.73.147 (talk) 22:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:NFF, it is too soon to have a stand-alone article. I would support a merge to the film series article. We can have a stand-alone article if it is verified that filming has begun. Erik (talk | contribs) 22:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Is seinna is there?

I think sienna isn't in RE 5 even since RE 3 & 4.--தென்காசி சுப்பிரமணியன் (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes she is. —Mike Allen 06:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Residentevil-retribution-concept-teaser-poster..jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Residentevil-retribution-concept-teaser-poster..jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Michelle Rodriguez cast position

Should Michelle Rodriguez get a higher billing in the cast section of the main infobox? In this international poster right here, it is shown that Milla Jovovich and Rodriguez get the top billing in the film credits below.

Oxford Comma

The article needs to be consistent about whether it uses this or not, though I vote that it does.72.12.219.170 (talk) 06:55, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Becky is deaf?

Becky does use sign language. But I don't see any specific evidence that proves she is deaf. Alice, Carlos, and Rain talk to her. They would not have done it if she were deaf. Is there any source for this? -- Livy (talk) 11:25, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

If you watch the film and listen to her speak, she is quite clearly a deaf person. MisterShiney (talk) 22:47, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry that was a snappy comment and I realise this constitutes as original research. But you can be partially deaf or deaf but lip read. Signing is a way for deaf people who can talk, but not always make the right sounds and so it helps them to communicate. But in the film her dad tells her to talk too, I used to work in a special needs school and this is good for them to exercise vocal muscles and practice. MisterShiney (talk) 12:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Budget

There seems to be more than one site with differing budget statements for the film. I would go with IMDb and BoxOffice Mojo, who agree on a budget of sixty to sixty-five million. But there are also sources that say it is ninety to ninety-five, and someone has changed it to that. Can anyone offer good, sound advice about the reference this user has used to back up the budget info? --ProtoDrake (talk) 13:40, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Which sources mention $90–95 million? A quick search engine test shows $65 million in several results for me. Seems like that's the more concrete figure. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

A lot of sites just repeat whatever Box Office Mojo says, and annoyingly IMDB will sometimes list a budget figure Box Office Mojo will not have a budget figure listed despite the fact that IMDB/Amazon are the publisher of Box Office Mojo. I've known cases where they were directly contradicting the director and other cases where they rounded figures. I've found Variety and The L.A. Times to be generally reliable. Hollywood Reporter is sometimes informative but they frequently break the links on their website, so they are at best an annoying source.

In September 2012 Variety said around $60 million. That's the production budget, you may find sources that mention additional cost for prints and marketing. Most articles list just the production cost, but if other costs are known then I think they should be mentioned. -- 109.77.139.42 (talk) 00:25, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Plot

Just wathhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhched it. Suggest clarification of plot summary: In the early "suburbia" vignette, we *think* we are seeing Alice, but it's actually just another clone of Alice created by Umbrella for its simulations. We later see her dead when the real Alice discovers the body. I think the following is more accurate:

The story then begins with a suburban housewife who appears to be Alice living with her husband Todd (Oded Fehr) — a clone of Carlos Olivera — and deaf daughter Becky (Aryana Engineer). However, this idyllic life is disrupted when zombies attack and kill Todd. Alice and Becky escape to the streets and are rescued by Rain Ocampo (Michelle Rodriguez), who lets them ride in her car. As the three escape, they are hit by a truck, knocking Rain unconscious while Alice and Becky escape. Alice runs and is attacked by a zombified Todd. It is later revealed that this "Alice" is actually a clone of Alice created by Umbrella for a virus simulation. & then strike "The scene ends when" from the next paragraph.

Thoughts? Giordanob (talk) 05:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)giordanob

Someone changed this edit I made without discussion. Any objections to a revert, adding back in the sentence "It is later revealed that this Alice is actually a clone of Alice created by Umbrella for a virus simulation"? Giordanob (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Norgizfox5041, can you please stop reverting this without discussion? Thx. Giordanob (talk) 01:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

False Reference/False Information

Published Sentence: "The Blu-ray and DVD for the film was released on December 21, 2012, and a sixth installment is planned by Sony.[5]"

Reference given: http://dailydead.com/resident-evil-retribution-blu-ray-release-details-and-cover-art/

Reference Check: The source doesn't give any information about a sixth installment and also no information about Sony's involvement. However, since the film rights belong to Constantin Film, the US distribution is done by Screen Gems which is owned by Sony. The involvement of Sony is obvious but not given in the named source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.114.141.172 (talk) 21:46, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Article too long tag?

This article is tagged as being too long. It seems to be the same length as any other equivalent article of a major motion picture. Could someone perhaps list parts that should be trimmed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.221.146.111 (talk) 15:41, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Too long tag

I've trimmed the cast section. I also see that the plot-section is pretty long. Any objections to shortening it? --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 09:34, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

I've shortened the plot-section. Removing the too long tag. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 08:40, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Many film plot summaries on wikipedia have long summaries. This plot summary is equal in detail and in length to the summaries for the plots of the "Star Wars" films. 71.80.205.197 (talk) 07:52, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

You seemed to have completely glanced over the fact that until recently this article was slapped with a Too long-tag. I did my edits to fix the issue. Not only did you revert my edits, you then suspiciously left the Too long-tag out. Now, the Cast-section was obscenely long. I'm okay on expanding the plot section but not in its original size which was also rather obscenely long. So please, propose a version here before re-inserting anything back into the article. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 16:43, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

The plot section needs to be as long as or slightly longer than the plot summaries used for the Star Trek and Star Wars films. The Too long-tag was not needed as the plot summary was not longer than many of the other films on this wiki. The cast section needs the character sections so the readers know the character's backstory. 71.80.205.197 (talk) 06:03, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Then please propose a version of the plot summary at the talk page, as I've already once requested you do. The length of the cast-section varies from one RE movie article to the next but the version originally posted here seemed incredibly overbloated (especially since the characters of relevance have links leading back to the the RE character articles). When I made my edits I did it since it seemed to me though that the length of the Plot and Cast sections was in question when the Tag was originally added; though as you can see from the talk page above, no-one ever bothered to actually outline what the specific length-issue referred to. I can request the person who added the Tag to add his two cents here as well. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 09:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Strike that. The Too Long tag was specifically for the Plot-section. I still stand by my trim of the Cast-section. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 09:03, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

• CaptainNtheGameMaster has asked me to explain why i placed a "plot" tag on this article in August 2015. At the time the plot was over 950 words. Under "Length" of WP:PLOTSUMMARIZE of Wikipedia:How to write a plot summary it notes that "The Film style guideline suggests that "plot summaries for feature films should be between 400 and 700 words".", a lot less then this article's plot length at the time. The 96min film length and that it is a sequel, suggested to me that the plot length could be reduced. Indeed, the "Length" sub-section goes on to state "While longer descriptions may appear to provide more data to the reader, a more concise summary may in fact be more informative as it highlights the most important elements. By focusing the reader's attention on the larger structures of a plot, without drowning it in trivial detail, a shorter summary can often help the reader to understand a work much better than an overlong one." That said, i see that the plot is under 150 words, which may be a bit short for the movies in this series, for example, the previous movie, Resident Evil: Afterlife (a good article) has a plot length of around 650 words, within Film style guideline length, so maybe some further details could be included, ie. naming what the city environments and creatures are, and including the concluding paragraph from the original plot?, hope this helps. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:31, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

I've created a new plot-section, using parts of the old plot-section. Hopefully, it's satisfactory. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 11:41, 10 August 2016 (UTC)