Talk:Enter the Ninja

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Enter the Ninja. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111007182427/http://insomniacentertainment.com:80/2011/10/05/enter-the-ninja-finally-coming-to-dvd-via-mgms-limited-edition-collection/ to http://insomniacentertainment.com/2011/10/05/enter-the-ninja-finally-coming-to-dvd-via-mgms-limited-edition-collection/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:51, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Having trouble finding a 1981 release date for this film. IMDb declares a few European releases in 1981 (Turkey, West Germany, France, etc.) and even an American one, but AFI is a bit stodgy on giving a specific release date outside an LA premiere in 1982. Can anyone find any non-imdb sources that are a bit more specific? Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:53, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Managed to get some newspapers bits about it screening in '81 in the United States. If any more specific details can be found, please add 'em! Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:14, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Release

message: Per WP:FILMLEAD, we are supposed to include information about the plot in the lead, MOS:FILM statement declares "In terms of plot, it is sufficient to merely include the general premise of the film in the lead section and identify actors' roles in the premise.". This is being done. I admit it was poorly written before, but saying it does not need to be included as the plot is just below is against the rules of the wikiproject. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Golan-Globus is not the production company. They were the 2 producers: Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus who owned and operated Cannon, which IS the production company under which they produced their films including this one. During the time they ran Cannon together, Golan-Globus productions simply identified the Cannon films which they made together for their company Cannon Films, Inc./The Cannon Group. Cannon is the production company/studio which made the films. For more information see the 2 documentaries Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films and The Go-Go Boys: The Inside Story of Cannon Films, and these 2 articles: https://wearethemutants.com/2017/08/08/cannon-films-print-advertisements-in-variety-1979-1986/, https://www.upi.com/Archives/1986/06/06/Upstart-production-company-makes-mark/3862518414400/ Chanbara (talk) 20:30, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting that you say Golan and Globus are the producers, when your opening credits you posted earlier do not state that (neither do either the AFI or BFI sources). Cannon and Golan-Globus are definitely related, but my sources and the film itself say the production company is Golan-Globus. I've seen the film you are talking about, but it doesn't change the fact that the official production company is still Golan-Globus. Also, it is a company, as in this book here, where it says photos are courtesy of Golan-Globus Productions. Its not a name for them both as producers, it is a production company. As for the ad in Variety, the credits on that poster certainly are promoted by Cannon, but the credits on still says "A Golan-Globus Production". So you are incorrect on Golan-Globus not being a production company credited for the film. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:32, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, Golan-Globus is Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus. In this film it is their production because Golan is the director and Globus is producer of this film. Globus was also a producer (uncredited) and is the one who decided to pull Alston as director and replace him after seeing the early dailies, The company is Cannon. Golan-Globus is a division of Cannon (their company). No idea why this is a sticking point with you. There is no question about this anywhere including the 2 documentaries which focus on the Cannon Films and includes these 3 films because they are Cannon films. Cannon is the company that encompasses Golan-Globus. Claiming that these are not Cannon films but are Golan-Globus productions makes no sense, because they are Golan-Globus productions for Cannon (the production company/studio). Also, after Golan left Cannon, Christopher Pearse took over as co-owner of Cannon and Cannon films made by him and Yoram Globus were credited as 'Globus-Pearce productions'.Chanbara (talk) 23:03, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

text: You are saying a lot of things without anything to back you up, I've provided several sources. How is Globus a producer on the film? Where's your source on this? I'm more curious why you insist on stating these are Cannon productions in the lead, which I have asked before, and you have yet to answer. How is this essential for readers? Also, on searching up Globus-Pierce Productions, nothing, and I mean nothing comes up online whatsoever. Not in books, not in news, nada. Please avoid original research without backing it up, and respond to my questions I've repeated here so we can come to a quick solution. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:53, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not everything is available on the web. I have articles about the film in martial arts magazines from the 1980s which speak about the film. In these they reveal how Menahem Golan was the producer who decided to take over directing duties on the film from Alston. Your insistence that this is not a Cannon film is simply not true, no matter what your incomplete sources claim. Your sources also claimed that the film was partially shot in Japan. As for Globus-Pearce, again not everything can be found on the web, especially where credits on B-movies are concerned. You need to look at the film prints. Some Cannon films which were credited as "Globus-Pearse productions" are "Delta Force 2: The Colombian Connection" and "A Man Called Sarge",etc...  I have given you sources to prove that Enter the Ninja (and the 2 follow-up films) are all Cannon films (the documentaries etc...). No idea why you have such a problem mentioning the company responsible for making this film. It is very common to see companies mentioned in the lead (ex: Raiders of the Lost Ark). Chanbara (talk) 00:36, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The AFI is a legitimate source and you have not proven it was not shot in Japan either for that matter, just because the print says it was shot elsewhere, does not necisarily mean that it could not have also been shot in Japan. You say you have sources but you can't grab one to show me outside asking me to watch a film. If you want your content added with sources, the onus is on you to actually provide the sources. As you have not shown any importance on why Cannon should be listed other than "other articles do it", I'm suggesting we remove it from the lead , I know you asked why, but if you read my posts you'll understand but I'll repeat myself again. Its not important for readers to know this as it does not increase or decrease the understanding of the film or the series and there is no mention of Cannon elsewhere in the article. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:13, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not true. I've given you numerous sources that prove that it is a CANNON film and that Golan-Globus productions was a subset of Cannon, including on-line articles, post-release Variety trade ads, documentaries, etc... I would add these references to the lead but you will just remove them like you did with my other references. The most notable and well known things about Enter the Ninja are that it was the first of Cannon's ninja films (followed by Revenge of the Ninja and Ninja III, and the American Ninja series) which started the 1980's ninja craze and the career of Sho Kosugi who stared in and was the most recognizable face of these types of films. Not mentioning Cannon in the article but including Golan-Globus productions as if it is something different/separate (but links to a subsection of the Cannon films wikipedia page) is ridiculous.Chanbara (talk) 10:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: Moreover, you stated that "there is no mention of Cannon elsewhere in the article", but actually it is mentioned and was added by YOU with AFI references under the Production section. So there should no longer be any objection on your part to include it in the lead as it is commonly done on Wikipedia and referenced in the article. Issue resolved. Please remove the tags that you added after the "from The Cannon Group" in the lead. Thanks. Chanbara (talk) 11:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: I am not doubting Cannon and Golan-Globus are related, but you are ignoring the rules I am suggesting and are using old edits which and sources which I agree with you, were not accurate. I can't tell how serious you are about me removing the tags, but if it ends the bits-and-bobs of this conversation I'll go forward and do it. Please note, you have to find specific information on what you are saying. I have provided a film-related source that specifically states Golan-Globus as the production source. You have declared information and told me to look it up myself, which goes against the wiki rules mentioned above. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:46, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that you did not just remove the tag but the entry in question! Not what I stated or what you said you were going to do. The Variety ad which is FROM/BY Cannon AND the theatrical trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f70sKbqr3g) which specifically ends with "From Cannon" should be more than enough to allow the "from Cannon" entry so I'm placing it as it was without your tags. End of discussion. Or we can take it to Arbitration.Chanbara (talk) 14:01, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: I agree with your source and have seen the trailer (no need to link to it again really). The ad does say they are from Cannon but they Variety source in the credits on the poster also says "a Golan-Globus Production" and lists separate producers. So I'll repeat, my sources have declared it a Golan-Globus production. Cannon is part of it, but you have not explained the relevance of using Cannon here, other than screaming at me "cannon is involved!", which I've stated is the case. You have not disproven my sources that state Golan-Globus is the production company. I'm tempted to let this go as you are clear not getting it. Please take it to arbitration as this is ridiculous. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:36, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: I would also suggest reading the following here. It helps you decipher what is a production country. Presenting the film does not make it a production company, being associated with one does not make it the primary company either. We should make this clear. As the credits state its a Golan-Globus production, it may be a sub-sidiary of Cannon, but they are not the producers or uncredited producers as you seem to declare, as you have not provided a source. It goes against general way to read credits.Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:47, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I never said anything about removing Golan-Globus productions, nor have I tried to disprove they produced the film(s). I have always said that Golan-Globus is one of the companies/divisions that is part of The Cannon Group (along with Cannon Films, Cannon International, etc...). Also the entry clearly says "FROM" (not "produced by") which is EXACTLY what is said on the trailer, so the meaning is the same and the Golan-Globus Production info in the data sheet does not conflict with it in any way (especially when it links to the SAME Cannon Wikipedia page). The only conflict or contradiction that exists between Golan-Globus and Cannon is in your mind. They are one in the same, or more specifically Golan-Globus is a sub-company inside The Cannon Group, which is why they are included in the same Wikipedia page.  To not include the name of the parent company Cannon (again not saying to remove Golan-Globus production) which is not only what is always in BOLD on print ads, posters, video releases, trailers, etc... , but which is always referred to by virtually everyone who knows anything about these films is truly ridiculous. Here are just a few examples to show how prevalent and important Cannon is when speaking about these films (from books, video companies, reviewers, and even the CD soundtrack release): https://www.filmcomment.com/blog/kaiju-shakedown-cannon-ninja-films/, http://www.studioremarkable.com/reviews/dueling-with-the-cannon-films-ninja-trilogy/10279/, https://www.mikefury.net/blog/cannon-ninja-trilogy, https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=_1SDBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA134, http://cinema.wisc.edu/blog/2015/03/04/maureen-rogers-enters-cannons-ninja-cycle, https://lwlies.com/articles/the-ninja-trilogy-eureka-cannon-films/, https://eurekavideo.co.uk/movie/the-ninja-trilogy/, https://www.varesesarabande.com/products/revenge-of-the-ninja-we-hear-you-series.  There is absolutely no reason that Wikipedia readers should be left out of the dark that these are FROM Cannon. Chanbara (talk) 15:23, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding you.  Thanks for bolding things, but you know, I can read. So let's talk. You say it says "From", which does not mean its a production company, it could mean its distributor. (from my link above and the credits, it would seem that way officially on paper). I'm not denying that Golan-Globus productions is part of Cannon, but I would also suggest seeking out sources that aren't from blogs. Anyways, back to the point here I think if you want to say cannon in the lead, we should probably explain the relationship between Golan-Globus is associated with Cannon somewhere in the article. What do you think? Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:09, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I bolded it as much for myself and anyone else who might read this talk page, so that the parts related to this conversation are easier to spot (instead of just including these parts and editing the full text). The PDF scan of the Press Kit might appear on a blog, but it is not a blog post (not someone's blogging text), so I really don't see why this should make any difference. Putting the same raw PDF on some other site would not change it in any way. This is a great find as the info in it is from 1981 and came straight from the company specifically for the press and undoubtedly used in Variety, etc... I'm all for adding something to the article explaining the relationship between Golan-Globus and Cannon. Go for it. Sounds like we're finally on the same page. My goal is not to include any false information, it is to NOT exclude any true and important information as is the case with Cannon (and Golan-Globus).Chanbara (talk) 00:34, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. I have Been trying to finding specific information on what is Golan-Globus specifically in Cannon, but have been having a bit of a struggle with it. I'll try to do more research if I can. And I think you misunderstood, I think the Press Kit is ok, its more about the fan blogs, it's more of a grey area. Anyways, let's focus on getting the relationship down here.Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:55, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead

message: Cannon is mentioned in the lead but the official production company involved with the film is Golan-Globus. This is currently in the article and is unsourced. I do not see the relative importance of including it as the name means very little to the average reader and there is no context and worse, its not specific and addition to it is based on original research. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:00, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Golan-Globus is not the production company. They were the 2 producers: Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus who owned and operated Cannon, which IS the production company under which they produced their films including this one. During the time they ran Cannon together, Golan-Globus productions simply identified the Cannon films which they made together for their company Cannon Films, Inc./The Cannon Group. Cannon is the production company/studio which made the films. For more information see the 2 documentaries Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films and The Go-Go Boys: The Inside Story of Cannon Films, and these 2 articles: https://wearethemutants.com/2017/08/08/cannon-films-print-advertisements-in-variety-1979-1986/, https://www.upi.com/Archives/1986/06/06/Upstart-production-company-makes-mark/3862518414400/ Chanbara (talk) 20:30, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting that you say Golan and Globus are the producers, when your opening credits you posted earlier do not state that (neither do either the AFI or BFI sources). Cannon and Golan-Globus are definitely related, but my sources and the film itself say the production company is Golan-Globus. I've seen the film you are talking about, but it doesn't change the fact that the official production company is still Golan-Globus. Also, it is a company, as in this book here, where it says photos are courtesy of Golan-Globus Productions. Its not a name for them both as producers, it is a production company. As for the ad in Variety, the credits on that poster certainly are promoted by Cannon, but the credits on still says "A Golan-Globus Production". So you are incorrect on Golan-Globus not being a production company credited for the film. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:32, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, Golan-Globus is Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus. In this film it is their production because Golan is the director and Globus is producer of this film. Globus was also a producer (uncredited) and is the one who decided to pull Alston as director and replace him after seeing the early dailies, The company is Cannon. Golan-Globus is a division of Cannon (their company). No idea why this is a sticking point with you. There is no question about this anywhere including the 2 documentaries which focus on the Cannon Films and includes these 3 films because they are Cannon films. Cannon is the company that encompasses Golan-Globus. Claiming that these are not Cannon films but are Golan-Globus productions makes no sense, because they are Golan-Globus productions for Cannon (the production company/studio). Also, after Golan left Cannon, Christopher Pearse took over as co-owner of Cannon and Cannon films made by him and Yoram Globus were credited as 'Globus-Pearce productions'.Chanbara (talk) 23:03, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

text: You are saying a lot of things without anything to back you up, I've provided several sources. How is Globus a producer on the film? Where's your source on this? I'm more curious why you insist on stating these are Cannon productions in the lead, which I have asked before, and you have yet to answer. How is this essential for readers? Also, on searching up Globus-Pierce Productions, nothing, and I mean nothing comes up online whatsoever. Not in books, not in news, nada. Please avoid original research without backing it up, and respond to my questions I've repeated here so we can come to a quick solution. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:53, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not everything is available on the web. I have articles about the film in martial arts magazines from the 1980s which speak about the film. In these they reveal how Menahem Golan was the producer who decided to take over directing duties on the film from Alston. Your insistence that this is not a Cannon film is simply not true, no matter what your incomplete sources claim. Your sources also claimed that the film was partially shot in Japan. As for Globus-Pearce, again not everything can be found on the web, especially where credits on B-movies are concerned. You need to look at the film prints. Some Cannon films which were credited as "Globus-Pearse productions" are "Delta Force 2: The Colombian Connection" and "A Man Called Sarge",etc...  I have given you sources to prove that Enter the Ninja (and the 2 follow-up films) are all Cannon films (the documentaries etc...). No idea why you have such a problem mentioning the company responsible for making this film. It is very common to see companies mentioned in the lead (ex: Raiders of the Lost Ark). Chanbara (talk) 00:36, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The AFI is a legitimate source and you have not proven it was not shot in Japan either for that matter, just because the print says it was shot elsewhere, does not necisarily mean that it could not have also been shot in Japan. You say you have sources but you can't grab one to show me outside asking me to watch a film. If you want your content added with sources, the onus is on you to actually provide the sources. As you have not shown any importance on why Cannon should be listed other than "other articles do it", I'm suggesting we remove it from the lead , I know you asked why, but if you read my posts you'll understand but I'll repeat myself again. Its not important for readers to know this as it does not increase or decrease the understanding of the film or the series and there is no mention of Cannon elsewhere in the article. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:13, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not true. I've given you numerous sources that prove that it is a CANNON film and that Golan-Globus productions was a subset of Cannon, including on-line articles, post-release Variety trade ads, documentaries, etc... I would add these references to the lead but you will just remove them like you did with my other references. The most notable and well known things about Enter the Ninja are that it was the first of Cannon's ninja films (followed by Revenge of the Ninja and Ninja III, and the American Ninja series) which started the 1980's ninja craze and the career of Sho Kosugi who stared in and was the most recognizable face of these types of films. Not mentioning Cannon in the article but including Golan-Globus productions as if it is something different/separate (but links to a subsection of the Cannon films wikipedia page) is ridiculous.Chanbara (talk) 10:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: Moreover, you stated that "there is no mention of Cannon elsewhere in the article", but actually it is mentioned and was added by YOU with AFI references under the Production section. So there should no longer be any objection on your part to include it in the lead as it is commonly done on Wikipedia and referenced in the article. Issue resolved. Please remove the tags that you added after the "from The Cannon Group" in the lead. Thanks. Chanbara (talk) 11:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: I am not doubting Cannon and Golan-Globus are related, but you are ignoring the rules I am suggesting and are using old edits which and sources which I agree with you, were not accurate. I can't tell how serious you are about me removing the tags, but if it ends the bits-and-bobs of this conversation I'll go forward and do it. Please note, you have to find specific information on what you are saying. I have provided a film-related source that specifically states Golan-Globus as the production source. You have declared information and told me to look it up myself, which goes against the wiki rules mentioned above. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:46, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that you did not just remove the tag but the entry in question! Not what I stated or what you said you were going to do. The Variety ad which is FROM/BY Cannon AND the theatrical trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f70sKbqr3g) which specifically ends with "From Cannon" should be more than enough to allow the "from Cannon" entry so I'm placing it as it was without your tags. End of discussion. Or we can take it to Arbitration.Chanbara (talk) 14:01, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: I agree with your source and have seen the trailer (no need to link to it again really). The ad does say they are from Cannon but they Variety source in the credits on the poster also says "a Golan-Globus Production" and lists separate producers. So I'll repeat, my sources have declared it a Golan-Globus production. Cannon is part of it, but you have not explained the relevance of using Cannon here, other than screaming at me "cannon is involved!", which I've stated is the case. You have not disproven my sources that state Golan-Globus is the production company. I'm tempted to let this go as you are clear not getting it. Please take it to arbitration as this is ridiculous. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:36, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: I would also suggest reading the following here. It helps you decipher what is a production country. Presenting the film does not make it a production company, being associated with one does not make it the primary company either. We should make this clear. As the credits state its a Golan-Globus production, it may be a sub-sidiary of Cannon, but they are not the producers or uncredited producers as you seem to declare, as you have not provided a source. It goes against general way to read credits.Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:47, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I never said anything about removing Golan-Globus productions, nor have I tried to disprove they produced the film(s). I have always said that Golan-Globus is one of the companies/divisions that is part of The Cannon Group (along with Cannon Films, Cannon International, etc...). Also the entry clearly says "FROM" (not "produced by") which is EXACTLY what is said on the trailer, so the meaning is the same and the Golan-Globus Production info in the data sheet does not conflict with it in any way (especially when it links to the SAME Cannon Wikipedia page). The only conflict or contradiction that exists between Golan-Globus and Cannon is in your mind. They are one in the same, or more specifically Golan-Globus is a sub-company inside The Cannon Group, which is why they are included in the same Wikipedia page.  To not include the name of the parent company Cannon (again not saying to remove Golan-Globus production) which is not only what is always in BOLD on print ads, posters, video releases, trailers, etc... , but which is always referred to by virtually everyone who knows anything about these films is truly ridiculous. Here are just a few examples to show how prevalent and important Cannon is when speaking about these films (from books, video companies, reviewers, and even the CD soundtrack release): https://www.filmcomment.com/blog/kaiju-shakedown-cannon-ninja-films/, http://www.studioremarkable.com/reviews/dueling-with-the-cannon-films-ninja-trilogy/10279/, https://www.mikefury.net/blog/cannon-ninja-trilogy, https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=_1SDBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA134, http://cinema.wisc.edu/blog/2015/03/04/maureen-rogers-enters-cannons-ninja-cycle, https://lwlies.com/articles/the-ninja-trilogy-eureka-cannon-films/, https://eurekavideo.co.uk/movie/the-ninja-trilogy/, https://www.varesesarabande.com/products/revenge-of-the-ninja-we-hear-you-series.  There is absolutely no reason that Wikipedia readers should be left out of the dark that these are FROM Cannon. Chanbara (talk) 15:23, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding you.  Thanks for bolding things, but you know, I can read. So let's talk. You say it says "From", which does not mean its a production company, it could mean its distributor. (from my link above and the credits, it would seem that way officially on paper). I'm not denying that Golan-Globus productions is part of Cannon, but I would also suggest seeking out sources that aren't from blogs. Anyways, back to the point here I think if you want to say cannon in the lead, we should probably explain the relationship between Golan-Globus is associated with Cannon somewhere in the article. What do you think? Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:09, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I bolded it as much for myself and anyone else who might read this talk page, so that the parts related to this conversation are easier to spot (instead of just including these parts and editing the full text). The PDF scan of the Press Kit might appear on a blog, but it is not a blog post (not someone's blogging text), so I really don't see why this should make any difference. Putting the same raw PDF on some other site would not change it in any way. This is a great find as the info in it is from 1981 and came straight from the company specifically for the press and undoubtedly used in Variety, etc... I'm all for adding something to the article explaining the relationship between Golan-Globus and Cannon. Go for it. Sounds like we're finally on the same page. My goal is not to include any false information, it is to NOT exclude any true and important information as is the case with Cannon (and Golan-Globus).Chanbara (talk) 00:34, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. I have Been trying to finding specific information on what is Golan-Globus specifically in Cannon, but have been having a bit of a struggle with it. I'll try to do more research if I can. And I think you misunderstood, I think the Press Kit is ok, its more about the fan blogs, it's more of a grey area. Anyways, let's focus on getting the relationship down here.Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:55, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Cannon inclusion in lead