Talk:Lions for Lambs/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

There are a number of problems with this article, and I think a lot of it has to do with the lack of a primary contributor to shape things up. I did not think that the article could address the problems quickly, so I have failed it. Below are some reasons why: Please let me know if you have any questions about my analysis. — Erik (talk • contrib) 19:24, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The prose leaves a lot to be desired. The writing is a little too casual, and there are some typos.
 * The "Production" section could be expanded. Reaction to the film's title should be placed in a "Release" section or a similar section.
 * "Promotion" should not be under "Production", and furthermore, there is a lot of focus on this private screening for Scientologists which I think is unnecessary. In addition, the coverage includes unnamed sources, and I do not think that such citations are very valid.
 * "Critical reception" has some good reviews, but there seems to be a lot of quoting of the reviews' article titles or subtitles. I think we should focus on what critics had to say about the film as substantially as possible, rather than identifying the headlines that were written to be attention-grabbing.
 * "Box office results" could be cleaned up in terms of prose and flow, and I think that there is far too much citing of whether or not the film was a box office bomb. Perhaps this was a topic of discussion at the time of its release, but in retrospect, I don't think this is disputable any more and should use a more comprehensive citation.
 * I think that the article could explore more about United Artists's expectations for Lions for Lambs and how the release impacted the studio.
 * It seems like with this film being relevant to current affairs, there should be some headlines relating the film to today's events.