Talk:The Fall Guy (2024 film)

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened:

April 28 to May 4, 2024 (15th)
May 26 to June 1, 2024 (15th)

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thanks for the article on the upcoming movie.

Bruxton (talk) 01:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Fall Guy poster

Please explain how the number of followers to a Twitter page (one that dates back to 2016) determines the veracity of the similarities between two movie posters. I suggest looking at the comparison photo the link goes to instead. It's very similar: https://twitter.com/Dangergodmovie/status/1779365570766311638 Media coverage of this is coming. Therealjoeo (talk) 23:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:TWITTER, this falls under an exceptional claim and needs multiple reliable sources. When and if it is in third party reliable sources, then we can discuss the inclusion. Mike Allen 01:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guinness World Record

The Guinness World Record with the 8,5 cannon rolls by Logan Holladay should be mentioned and the real stunt team. --Melly42 (talk) 09:50, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cherry picking budget figures

Despite the fact that Template:Infobox film clearly says Do not cherry-pick budget figures, some editors don't seem to understand this metaphor and seem to believe that removing older sources and replacing them with newer sources(diff) picking the ones they like better, somehow is not cherry picking! If you aren't going to follow the rules it should at least be discussed first.

This is made worse by the fact that the article body still doesn't mention the budget at all. Please note WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE is to summarize not supplant the article body. If the budget estimates vary then the article body should mention and discuss the various estimates. Editors do not anything about the budget for sure, they do not know what price the film was greenlit and went into production at, we do not know if the film went over budget, we don't know if there were rebates or tax credits (was that the gross or net budget?), those are only a few of the reasons why different budget figures might exist and why different figures should not be excluded. The documentation is clear, do not cherry pick. -- 109.79.70.39 (talk) 10:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TropicAces, you keep unconstructively reinstating in the infobox - which serves to summarize key facts about an article - a speculative number that is contradictory to not only what the two cited reputable industry sources report, but also contradictory to what the very same article you're using says: "Fall Guy expensive at $130M after Australian tax credits", "Fall Guy, which cost $130M". You are misrepresenting in the infobox what the sources reported the production cost to be, and overciting. As you might know, any notable speculation or qualifying minority viewpoint is written in the body of the article; we don't give it WP:UNDUE weight in the infobox or lead for that matter, and we don't misrepresent sources or include misleading info in the infobox. Lapadite (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guess I’m just confused, because by your own volition you are saying Deadline is reporting some of their sources say $150 million, which would then fall under Wikipedia’s guideline of not cherry-picking reported figures and listing the range. It’s not a “most are saying X so therefore we can’t include Y” situation, two numbers have been presented by the media, so both should be included in the infobox according, to the Template:Infobox film (“If there are conflicting estimates, do not cherry-pick; list each estimate either as an individual value or as a number range”) TropicAces (talk) 14:42, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t agree that adding a sourced range of reported budget amounts is cherry picking. Seems to be the opposite to me. TropicAces just doesn’t go around to pages adding random figures. They have contributed to opening box office numbers and budgets on film articles for years now—using the same guidelines we have always had. Mike Allen 15:31, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MikeAllen, I'm not saying it was deliberate, but TropicAces was certainly misrepresenting the Deadline article in prior edits, as they wrote that Deadline "reported several of their sources listed the final cost at $150 million" - when Deadline did not report that "several of their sources" or that the "final cost" was $150M; it instead reports the same the production cost that Variety and The Hollywood Reporter reported: "Fall Guy expensive at $130M after Australian tax credits", "Fall Guy, which cost $130M", and adds the speculative line: "Some have heard the production cost was even higher at $150M". All three sources stated that $130M is the production cost, yet the writing on the article was claiming that Deadline reported that it was $150M instead, thus cherry picking the content in the Deadline article and giving that speculative line the same weight as the $130M provided by all three sources. I had edited the context here.

The range of figures now given in the infobox with the contextual note is objective, as it actually reports what the cited sources state, as opposed to how it was at the time of the initial edits on this matter. Lapadite (talk) 00:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Death of the antagonist

I have seen this movie twice and for the life of me I can't remember a scene where "The police arrive, Tom makes a phone call, while standing near sensitive explosives, causing them to blow him up." It just cuts to the explosion while I Was Made for Lovin' You plays during the kiss. 2806:108E:13:54DD:EC7D:D710:205:FF2C (talk) 06:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a mid-credits scene. Happens pretty late in the credits. I've put it in the proper place in viewing sequence.--Rosicrucian ^Talk 22:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny and Amber comment - add as controvery?

Lots of headlines and and chatter regarding the line that was dropped after Emily & Ryan's characters get in a physical fight in the trailer -- "looks like Johnny and Amber were in here". All reported by The Cut, Hollywood Reporter, The Independent, and People. Was going to add a 'controversy' tab to this article but wanted to get others' opinions. With how notable the case was -- and also Jason Momoa (Heard's man co-worker in Aquaman) appearing in this film, I think it's worthy of an addition. But again, I'm newer here. Any opinions on if this is worth adding? Squiddyonwiki (talk) 02:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's all that notable. Some minor social media dustups. I don't think the line is even in the movie or if it was it goes by so fast I didn't notice it.. some people are too sensitive. Spanneraol (talk) 02:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heard.

Honestly, might start a tab on Depp v. Heard#Media coverage of 'representation in other media' as I know SNL did a whole spoof on it. I'm sure more references will appear. Squiddyonwiki (talk) 02:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Might make more sense there. Spanneraol (talk) 02:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cameos

Is it worth noting that the "prop crew members dressed as police" in the final scene are Lee Majors and Heather Thomas, who played Colt Seavers and Jodi Banks in the original TV series? 74.75.187.8 (talk) 23:10, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's already mentioned. DonQuixote (talk) 23:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So it does. Sorry. 74.75.187.8 (talk) 21:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about the dog?

In § Plot there's no mention of the part played by the dog, who only understands French commands. For shame!!! yoyo (talk) 10:19, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]