alt) and accolades table needs a caption (MOS:DTAB, something like |+ List of awards and nominations received by El Camino); otherwise good.
- Done
- Summary isn't the same thing as a caption (though it should be there as well, you're right) but I've just added it myself in this edit. — Bilorv (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- "Other licensed tracks include" – The given sources go into some detail on where the songs are used and what significance they have. A paragraph or two of prose would be good, or the same amount of information in list format if you prefer.
- I thought about that. However, not all of the songs have descriptions as to their appearances in the film, so it may be awkward leaving some without any information. And also, all of the listed tracks are barely audible when they are heard in the film (short clip on the radio, background music of the hotel, etc.), so it may not be noteworthy at all to mention their placements. Flowerkiller1692 (talk) 03:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough, I'm satisfied by this explanation. — Bilorv (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Copyediting:
- Not sure when/why infobox values were changed back to "> $6 million" and "~$40,000" from the GA review but I still prefer "more than $6 million" and "at least $40,000". Per MOS:NBSP, money amounts like "$6 million" should use . MOS:PERCENT favors "percent" over "%" in non-scientific articles.
- "Paul vowed that he would be eager to be involved" – redundant, better as "Paul was eager to be involved".
- "Joe leaves" – I'd say "Joe flees" because it's a pretty urgent getaway that he makes.
- "Jesse hides but holds one, Casey, at gunpoint after Casey finds him" – sounds repetitive with the double "Casey". Perhaps "Jesse hides but holds one, Casey, at gunpoint after being found by him"?
- "Casey distracts Lou" – Lou is not mentioned to be part of the present scene until this bit. Perhaps "Two police officers enter the apartment, after being distracted by Lou, and begin to search"?
- Mention that Galbraith calls the police e.g. "and refuses to help when Jesse is $1,800 short, calling the police".
- "Jesse shoots him with the Hammerless, which was concealed in his coat pocket and already aimed at Neil" – Simpler: "Jesse shoots him with the Hammerless, which was concealed in his coat pocket."
- "Casey fires at Jesse, but Jesse kills him." – I think someone who hadn't watched the film would wonder how. "but Jesse kills him with [whichever gun]" if the particular gun he uses is obvious? Or "but Jesse manages to shoot him dead"?
- "for the fifth season premiere of spin-off Better Call Saul" – the link spans too much text, just link "fifth season premiere", and remove "spin-off", which we know from previous mentions.
- "included the final scenes of Jesse and Ed Galbraith making their final exchanges" – replace one of the "final"s.
- "Cranston was heavily disguised when he was escorted from and throughout the set, while off the set he and Paul were told to avoid seeing each other." – This is comma splicing. Try: "Cranston was heavily disguised when he was escorted from and throughout the set and told to avoid seeing Paul when off-set."
- "as well as learning that the release date" should be "as well as by learning that the release date", I think, in order for it to mean "taken aback ... by learning that the release date".
- "at least 8.2 million viewers watched at least a few minutes" – replace one of the "at least"s
- I think ellipses need a non-breaking space before it and a space after it per MOS:ELLIPSIS.
- Montgomery of the BBC is given a bit too much weight, even if this is the only review in the paragraph. I'd definitely cut "And if television has recently been characterised as the ‘new cinema’ while cinema apparently infantilises itself with superhero movies and Disney remakes, then this gives lie to that narrative", a comment mostly not about El Camino. To avoid having this review in isolation as a short paragraph, I think I'd split it up so that "accusing the film of devolving into fan service [...] a character study without any character" goes under the paragraph about Pinkman's performance, and "it's a franchise extension as lazy and vacuous as anything dreamt up on the big-screen" goes in the "Comparisons to Breaking Bad" section.
- Done. Did the second part. Added a different review for the first part as well. Flowerkiller1692 (talk) 03:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Sancto of Little White Lies has too much weight as well, I'd cut "especially when series creators and writers strain too hard either to steer away from or stick to the original format".
- "you’ll be as lost as Badger without Skinny Pete if you tried to watch this sharp and compelling sequel without having seen the series" – not a particularly enlightening quote. Just "Richard Roeper of Chicago Sun-Times concurred, saying that viewers would be lost if they had not seen the series."
- Use straight apostrophes and quotation marks rather than curly ones per MOS:CURLY.
No concerns over reliability of sources or citation style. Source spotchecks: #2, #6, #14, #25, #45, #63, #88, #94 as of this oldid. Issues found:
- "stated to be more than the $6 million that "Felina" cost to produce" – The source says "an episode" rather than "the finale", whilst the infographic contradicts this a little with the infographic at the bottom saying "$6M cost per episode by the end of season 5". Do we have another source for it being "Felina" that costs $6M?
- The source itself says all who were interviewed declined to disclose how much it cost to produce, so I doubt it will have any other sources. However I did change the text in the body to more directly reflect what was in the source. Flowerkiller1692 (talk) 04:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- It's El Camino's budget that wasn't commented on, not necessarily season 5 of BB's. Afraid it's still not quite right. You say: "more than the $6 million that each episode of the final season cost to produce" but the source says "by the end of season 5", which presumably means part or all of season 5B (the second half), but not all of season 5. It needs to be very specific. Perhaps: "more than the $6 million which an episode budget in the final season of Breaking Bad had". — Bilorv (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Bilorv: That's still a bit awkwardly worded....I changed it to "The film's unspecified budget provided was stated to be more than the $6 million per episode budget in the show's final season." Flowerkiller1692 (talk) 20:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps we're still speaking past each other: the issue is that the source doesn't say "$6 million per episode". It just says that at least one episode had a budget of at least $6 million. We need wording that's different from the source, but implies that at least one episode had a budget of at least $6 million, without implying anything stronger. Your wording implies that the overall average budget for the 16 episodes of season 5 was $6 million i.e. that season 5 had a budget of $80 million (not a fact we know). — Bilorv (talk) 22:35, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Bilorv: Alright. does this seem more in line: "more than the $6 million budget for an episode that aired in the show's final season"? Just so I am not quoting the source directly. Flowerkiller1692 (talk) 23:35, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- [We say] "He described the film's contents and resulting score as more cerebral and psychological, rather than relying on fast-paced adrenaline" vs. [ref #45] "The movie is much more cerebral. It’s much more psychological. While there’s plenty of tension, it’s not so much of that fast-paced adrenaline." It is difficult to get the balance of not overquoting, not misrepresenting and not close paraphrasing, but I think we do need quote marks here: "He described the film's contents and resulting score as more "cerebral" and "psychological", rather than relying on "fast-paced adrenaline"".
- #63 doesn't seem to be the right reference for the sentence "Sixty-two hours before the release ...", but #64 (next ref cited) seems to cover that information. I'm a bit confused about what "the social media channels of Breaking Bad" are though, with #64 saying "The channel, which is exclusively available on the Samsung TV Plus platform ..."
- The source says "the twitter accounts" so I changed it to that. Nothing really ever said 62 hours so I removed that as well Flowerkiller1692 (talk) 03:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work overall, no concerns about comprehensiveness, quality of research or length. Good use of images. — Bilorv (talk) 21:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Just one budget comment needing more work or discussion, and the rest is addressed. Appreciate the very speedy response. — Bilorv (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I notice Theironminer has made some plot edits, raising some concerns (as of this oldid):
- Per MOS:CURRENCY, the article needs to use "US$" on the first mention (rather than just "$").
- Ed calling police needs to be mentioned, as a significant plot point.
- Lou should be mentioned in the present-day scene, and it's not clear where Casey disappears to in the Neil vs. Jesse argument otherwise.
- Removing mention of Albuquerque means the plot's setting is unclear.
— Bilorv (talk) 22:35, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I fixed your points with exception of the third, because to be fair he removes mention that Casey disappears with Lou, which isn't that big of a plot point. Flowerkiller1692 (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
|
