Talk:Action film

Re-write

So....I re-wrote the entire article. I've been slowly trying to clean up articles on film genres (see Horror film, Thriller film, Mystery film, etc.) Most of this was unsourced or just did not have any real clear information (citing IMDb, citing nothing, having a history section just be a list of popular films with little context to the a history). I've basically tried to make it stick to scholarly information and publications and cleaned out fillers on actors, etc. It needs some expansion still, but I would appreciate some checking in on this.

My main issues with my own re-write:

• It's very Hollywood centric, which I think is fine for now, we can build on it like I have in the horror film section on regional areas.
• Action history kind of cuts off around 2010. There is a new book Yvonne coming out this year which covers the 21st century action film.
• Some weird issues: Is a martial arts film a sub-genre of the action film? They exist before the contemporary understanding of what action cinema exists, so I don't think it would be 100% correct to call it that.
• I've removed most of the hybrid genres which just all politely say "science fiction action is action and science together. action horror is action and horror together." These are all kind of...useless and felt as embarrassing as these films can be ;)

I look forward to anyone's response on this. Andrzejbanas (talk) 06:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I just wish you hadn't deleted insightful sources such as this and this. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Nothing's deleted. It's all accessable via the article history. But I'll be honest, I don't see the The Flickering Myth as being a strong source. It honestly appears to be a blog? Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

First, let me just say that any effort in cleaning up these genre articles is greatly appreciated! I think a lot of editors in the film project get bogged down with other tasks, so much so that these articles tend to fall by the wayside.

Flickering Myth is a blog site, but it is self-proclaimed as one of UK's "most influential" (at least at one time, but is that still true?). The site also appears to be run by subject matter experts as well. However, the site's presentation is sub-par IMO and gives off unprofessional vibes. I wouldn't mind if it's cited sparingly, but for any strong claims, I think it's best used as a complementary source only. My 2¢ --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! This one has been the most fun to do some research and reading on so far. There citations seem relatively not in-depth (the action horror one reads like a fanzine, there is almost no insight whatsoever.) I do recall the phrase arthouse action being tossed around, but I think it needs more critical depth than the other citation also currently has. On googling, i'm just surrounded by listicals which barely register. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I've basically moved the Hong Kong section into part of the main history. Research best suggests it should be understood from two angles: the Hong Kong film history of it and the Hollywood-style. That way, you can say Hollywood-style and still include things that obviously aren't American like Mad Max 2 in it. I have found information on more specific Australian mode of action films, so i'll try to include that in the future.Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Arthouse action film into Action film

On trying to look up serious journalism on the topic, I've come up empty-handed. This sub-genre is mostly from a blog, with no real industry observation. It appears to be just used amongst enthusiastic bloggers irregularly and with no cohesion to what constitutes the genre. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:54, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

I nominate to keep this article as it is Espngeek (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't really address that there is no real serious journalism or critical analysis of what the genre is. Could you provide some @Espngeek:? Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Define "serious journalism" in order for this article to merge Espngeek (talk) 03:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Like, non-blogs or listicles that can discuss the genre. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:22, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Can we merge this article already? Espngeek (talk) 15:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I would generally just have this re-direct at this moment. The list generally does not state the genre claimed for most films. We'd still need a better citation for the genre lead, but if you are comfortable, I'm happy to do that. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Going to go ahead and move it as there hasn't been any real discussion beyond this. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Espngeek:. I have yet to really find anything referring to this genre in any serious history, discussion, or more than one multiple source outside cheap listicles trying to categorize this genre. I'm proposing it gets removed if we can't find anything more detailed and as this article is expanding. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Its been over a month and I have not heard from ESPNgeek and have not found any real serious writing or articles trying to define or give any serious critical insight to this sub-genre. I'm going to remove it from the article for now, and suggest potentially re-adding it when more material is discovered. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Though, "Arthouse Action" is not mentioned at any point in the article.--2A02:560:5448:9E00:7597:B9A4:F503:549B (talk) 22:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

No content was found that Wikipedia listed as a reliable sources were found to discuss the topic in any sort of depth. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Some films (Inception, No Time to Die) are described as both arthouse and action by some critics, but I guess that's not enough to define it as genre. The article arthouse action film should be completely deleted then, if there are no reliable sources. --2A02:560:547D:7E00:5D7C:BBAE:6046:84FA (talk) 18:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I mean, its a start, but beyond it just being briefly described as such, we'd probably want some article that has a bit more meat on its bone about the genre itself, or better yet, a few articles/academic research/etc. I was hoping to find some when i re-did the article, but alas, I did not come up with much. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

On trying to find anyone discussing it as a genre, the only thing I found that goes a little indepth is this Collider listicle. Its not really that useful to apply as they say in the same paragraph that "arthouse" "the term isn't a genre in the same way that drama, comedy, or thriller are all types of genres. Arthouse can sometimes be a genre but it also feels like the term describes a type of movie, based on its style and overall feel." and "Regardless of whether it's seen as a genre or something else, "arthouse" can be combined with all sorts of other genres to give you, for example, arthouse drama films or arthouse horror movies. And while arthouse films may sound as though they're in opposition to something with broad appeal, like the action genre, it's very much possible to have arthouse action movies; artistic and offbeat yet exciting and action-packed movies. These are rare but fascinating films, with the following being examples of some of the best arthouse action films of all time." I'm going to suggest we keep have it re-direct to "Hybrid genre" section which probably better captures the seemingly convoluted nature of the term. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Sub-genre removal

I've removed a recent addition of sub-genres. Without context or real unique specifics, I think the hybrid genre section covers basically what would be expected. They are hybrids and are used in different contexts depending on who is calling it that. Trying to define them won't agree with anyone. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC) To follow up on this, I do not think it's a great idea to make the hybrid genre thing a dumping ground for listing numbers of hybrids. I have confidence in a reader they can understand what a hybrid genre means from the few examples and that they are all vague in how they can be interpreted. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

History

The history section actually drops anything what happened before 1960s; e.g. The Great Train Robbery (1903 film) had already anthing what later would be substantial to action movies, stunts, shootouts, pursuits. In the 1930s serial films did the same. For sure these weren't pure action films yet, but important precedessors. --2A02:560:5491:6700:8B0:DB6D:4BA9:C9C9 (talk) 14:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

There were tons of films with scenes of stunts and scenes of spectacle and other action-film-esque materia, but they weren't described as action films as we would know them today. It would be an Anachronism to refer to these films that way and to assume they were the forebarers would also be presumed. The article goes into detail about this already. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:52, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

The great train robbery was one of the longest and most detailed movies of that time. It is relevant so. No, the article doesn't go into detail about the history yet at all. There is a brief mention of "action adventure" from 1910s but the Hollywood section of history omitts anything before Bullit (1968), although there are many movies defining the action genre before: North by Northwest 1959, James Bond since 1962... The whole history of action movies between 1910 and 1960 isn't written yet at all in this article.--2A02:560:5448:9E00:7597:B9A4:F503:549B (talk) 22:18, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

That's because the sources from academics state that the global idea of what is considered in contemporary minds as the action film does not really register until around the 1980s. (the article goes into this). And it states several films contain "scenes of action", they aren't really about that prior. While the Bond films are definitely early precursors to the style, their influence as action films is far less wide than their influence or status as spy films. This isn't my opinion, this is what I've read from the several academic books and journal entries on the topic @-2A02:560:5448:9E00:759: Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

If the history of Shanghai/wuxia films is told here from its beginnings, for the american film it should be the same. It should be described where the action genre got its influence from, before it was identified as proper genre. A academic source what states the influence of older film genres (serial films, western (genre), adventure films, wuxia, maybe film noir...) on the action genre would by worthy.

• Here is something about North by Northwest.
• The Action hero article offers many things which could be included here. --19:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

The term "action hero" did not come up much in studies specifically to this genre. While the Toronto Star article does call North by Northwest an action film or an influence on Bond, there is little depth in applying it to the genre. That said, we don't need an article to re-gurgitate the history of westerns, film noir, adventure films, etc within this article. This is about action films, not those specific genres. I can try to expand it with some information from these sources, but as stated in the article "The formative [action] films would be from the 1960s to the early 1980s where the Anti-hero appears in cinema, featuring characters who act and transcend the law and social conventions. This appears initially in films like Bullitt (1968) where a tough police officer protects society by upholding the law against systematic corruption." These are the films that form the basis beyond just having action scenes, as action scenes are already evident in several other genres, including westerns, adventure films, and such. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)