This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Animation: Films Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Animated films work group (assessed as Low-importance). Comedy 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 articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Film: Canadian / Korean / Animated 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 articles This article is supported by the Canadian cinema task force. This article is supported by the Korean cinema task force. This article is supported by the Animated films task force. Canada: Cinema Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the joint Canadian film and cinema task force

Here are some links about this film: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3486626/ http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_nut_job_2/ http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/113912-the-nut-job-2-is-coming-on-january-15-2016#/slide/1 http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-the-nut-job-2-sequel-announced-20140123-story.html http://variety.com/2014/film/news/nut-job-2-set-for-jan-15-2016-1201068101/ Greshthegreat ( talk)

• Is there any particular reason why Surly is called a "purple squirrel" when he's obviously a black squirrel that sometimes looks purple in the light? 74.77.27.153 ( talk) 07:16, 24 January 2014 (UTC) reply
  • If you actually look at some of the pictures flying around on Google Images you'll see he's actually purple. Also, see the purple squirrel article, I think it offers some insight into why he's a purple squirrel. 75.156.68.5 ( talk) 03:17, 14 April 2014 (UTC) reply
  • That's why I'm asking. I've been all over Google Images and about half of them show him with bright purple fur. In the others, he's distinctly black. It's very confusing. 74.77.24.150 ( talk) 20:17, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply

For the NPR review the article says, "If you're able to forgive the movie's occasionally nutty (and groan-worthy) jokes, it delivers an interesting and satisfying answer." This doesn't sound like a strictly positive review at all, and I would go as far to classify this as mixed. Even the existing quote, "Once Surly and Buddy case the joint, develop a plan, and deal with the inevitable surprises, The Nut Job could be any classic caper flick." doesn't even sound positive either. Just throwing that out there because I find it really strange. 75.156.68.5 ( talk) 03:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC) reply

yes it was. from Videomadman xxxx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.3.92.47 ( talk) 18:24, 7 August 2014 (UTC) reply

For such a minor, uncomplicated movie, 990 words is way too long and WP:INDISCRIMINATE for the critical-reception section. It needs to be trimmed by half. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 23:33, 1 November 2014 (UTC) reply