Talk:Smokin' Aces

message: According to several sources including the IMDB page linked at the bottom the release date was 2007 at least in north american. The original edit had it as 2006.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.223.5 (talk) 18:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of Release

message: In the movie's basic information box it states that this movie is "Preceded by Smoking Aces: Blowback" (aka Smoking Aces 2). Even though Smoking Aces: Blowback is a prequel it does not precede Smoking Aces since Smoking Aces came out first. It should say "Followed by Smoking Aces: Blowback". My reasoning is that the Followed By/Preceeded By section does not consider the continuation of the story or the story going back to cover the history (prequel). That section covers the release dates.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.167.235 (talk) 06:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Preceded" by?

message: Is there any info on how why the bounty was so cheap just to kill ace? 
And why did so many people wanted to kill ace?
And also, why did the FBI shoot Primo Sparazza?
-- Was the bounty cheap? I don't know what your circumstances are, but a million bucks would get me pretty far. If I were the kind of person who was up for killing people to begin with, a million bucks would operate as a pretty strong incentive.
-- The FBI shot Sparazza because he was really an undercover FBI agent and the FBI was convinced that he'd "gone over to the other side," so to speak.
Most bounties are a few grand to a couple hundred grand.... I think a million is a fair price for 1 target. It was only the mob people who wanted to kill him and if I can remember I think they sent out contracts or invitations to hitmen.  Welshy1791 03:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The bounty was too little

message: According to a Schuykill Underground Press article, there is a dispute that this movie is an allegory for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The FBI represent the Zionists who try to save Buddy Israel, and the Mafia represent the anti-Israeli Palestinian Arabs who want to see Buddy Israel killed. 
I've moved this to the talk page as unsourced and POV-laden material. Noclip 04:17, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What the hell are you talking about? --C.Logan 11:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: From article (Controversy)

message: In regards to the cast section, I'm not sure if I'm meant to have bolded the Agent part of the name.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, and please let me know if I am <3. Tony Schwarz 14:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cast

message: I haven't seen this film, but I can tell just by looking that the summary is quite long. Would anyone like to try narrowing it down? Xazy 23:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I tagged it, it's currently 2,345 words. Quadzilla99 00:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I removed the tags because the plot summary isnt that long its only 5 paragraphs. Also i moved the ratings box down a bit so thre wouldnt be such a huge gap between the opening paragraphs and where the plot description begins.Luciferian56 02:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Wrong on the last count. We don't use spoiler warnings for plot synopses. -R. fiend 23:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot Summary is Long

message: When Buddy levitates a card between his hands, is that a special effect or an actual card trick? If it's the latter, what's it called, how's it done and have we got an article on it yet? 63.215.28.84 13:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the outtakes (on the DVD), he screws it up, showing it's an actual trick. Looks to me like he's spinning it on his thumb. No clue how. --76.221.178.59 00:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Levitating Card 

message: In the 11th paragraph of the plot description, there is a menion of the "disturbed Ritalin-fueled boy". This would imply that the Ritalin is causing the boy's hyper-activity, but Ritalin is used to treat ADD. Should that line be changed? 70.101.136.215 05:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read that the Ritalin expired in 1997, so that must explain why it isn't having any effect.--Aml_0000 10:53, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Ritalin-fueled?"

message: When I first saw the movie, I thought pretty much the same way the article states, but recently I listed to the second commentary on the DVD, and Joe Carnahan states that in the original cut, it plays out differently with Watters not being caught and a gunshot still being heard with people running down the street in shock, but it was changed slightly because according to him, Sykes and Ivy actually became lovers in the film so he had to "give them hope" and even states on the DVD its not known what really happened in that scene. Should it be mentioned in the article that that point is opened ended due to what I wrote above?Raven6248 20:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Per WP:FILMPLOT, the plot section should state what is directly depicted in the film. We do not see Watters being shot, only the sound of gunshots, and I have updated that sentence to reflect that. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 20:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sykes, Ivy, and Watters Conclusion 

message: This really exists? That needs a citation... Ultimatemarvel (talk) 20:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comic Book tie-in  

message: I don't see a need for listing the deaths of characters in the cast list.  This is not common on wikipedia, and so people looking for basic details about the movie can easily have it ruined for them.  I know there's not usually a spoiler warning, but then usually the spoilers are in the plot summary where they can easily be avoided.  I'd recommend either getting rid of the death list or moving it to its own section with a proper title.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.215.7.125 (talk) 20:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler 

message: It's only a minute detail, but having just watched this film, this article did say... "Carruthers encounters Acosta, disguised as a security officer, in an elevator at the hotel. Carruthers senses something is wrong and both are disabled in a gunfight." Since both characters ended up dying of their injuries, I don't see how the description 'disabled' quite conveys what happened, whereas 'mortally wounded' clearly does, hence the edit.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.79.96.4 (talk • contribs) 
:Not only is Acosta not clearly shown as mortally wounded in the elevator, the film depicts him being taken from the hotel on a stretcher with an oxygen mask and his hand deploying his weapon. I will edit that section accordingly. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 20:56, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elevator shooting Carruthers/Acosta