Ghostbusters 2016

[Totenkindly]

The women are all funny, talented actors. I think we might be looking at another case of Matthew Broderickism here.

coughcoughGodzillacoughcoughInspectorGadgetcoughcough

*groan*

But yeah. He's done crap now for years; just didn't find proper vehicles for his style of talent.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

*groan*

But yeah. He's done crap now for years; just didn't find proper vehicles for his style of talent.

In a Parallel Universe, he got all the good Cusack roles and probably made Ferris Bueller 2.

 

[Totenkindly]

In a Parallel Universe, he got all the good Cusack roles and probably made Ferris Bueller 2.

Man, and I really wanted to see Matthew Broderick in "Dragon Blade." Sigh.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Man, and I really wanted to see Matthew Broderick in "Dragon Blade." Sigh.

So who played who in Road to Wellville?

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

James, you misogynistic mass of shit lord.

The Original Ghostbusters Is A Crime Against Women | The Daily Caller

 

[Riva]

+1

She is spot on. This might be a hint to holywood that fans are tired of seeing remakes.

---------------

And also, what's with the black character?

'Look you white girls do the science stuff and I'll do the street stuff.'

If some old white dude said that I am certain they would paint him as a racist.

 

[Grand Admiral Crunch]

Who else is psyched to see this awesome movie?

 

[SearchingforPeace]

Reviews are coming in and they are baaaaaaaaad.......

 

[Grand Admiral Crunch]

Reviews are coming in and they are baaaaaaaaad.......

Just misogynists being woman-haters. No one I know has gone to see the movie and come back complaining.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

Just misogynists being woman-haters. No one I know has gone to see the movie and come back complaining.

Here is the Hollywood Reporter 'Ghostbusters': Film Review - Hollywood Reporter

And Richard Roeper 'Ghostbusters' reboot a horrifying mess | Chicago Sun-Times

And US Weekly 'Ghostbusters' Remake Is Not Ready for Slime Time - Us Weekly

And Variety ‘Ghostbusters’ Review: Paul Feig Remake Is Shadow of 1984 Original | Variety

I have no interest in watching it any time soon....

 

[gromit]

As a huge GB fan I'm looking forward to the new one. I like all of those people very much. I did sigh a little at the "three white scientists and the black subway attendant" thing. Like, why couldn't Melissa McCarthy be the subway attendant? Still, I adore Leslie Jones probably the most out of all four of them.

Me too! To everything. I like the actors and I'm excited to see it. Looks like it's doing well on Rotten Tomatoes.

 

[gromit]

It is weird. Old "classic" movies get remade all the time and a lot of the remakes are shitty. People whine about it of course but there is nowhere near this level of anger.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Reviews are coming in and they are baaaaaaaaad.......

That's patently false. The film is 78% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, with 86 reviews so far.

EDIT: To me, that's somehow like the perfect score. Not bad enough to validate the unjustified hatred (as opposed to justified disinterest, to be clear), not mixed enough to be an obvious example of polarization, but not such an awesome 99% as to raise some kind of skepticism. It's like the perfect "there's no story here, now shut up" score.

 

[Trash Panda]

this trailer looks better.

i like melissa mccarthy and christen wig. will be looking to see what reviewers say when it comes out.

Uh yeah, I'm excited. I'm excited for the ratchet black character because I love women like that and i dont think its racist (because there are people like that irl and theyre hilarious...?) I'm excited for wiig, I love all of her weird indie movies. McCarthy is great.

I didn't care for the old ghost busters even though I am a fan of bill murray. its corny like everything from the 80s. I liked it, but I didn't love it and wouldn't seek it out and watch it again.

I don't understand why this has to be a political issue. Its a movie. the fact that people are so hyped about an all female cast is ridiculous. If it were all men people would be over the moon about it and be interested but because its women its turned into a part of "the liberal/left agenda". Here's a thought, maybe its because these particular women are some of the best in the industry right now, gender aside. They're at the top of their game, people love to see their work and have been willing to pay to see it for years.

Pull the sticks out of your assholes, people. Fuckin hell.

 

[1487610420]

any links yet

 

[Cowardly]

I think gender-bending can be very interesting. I was thinking about some of my favorite stories and I think that it genuinely alters how they're viewed when all genders are switched. Imagine for example Harry Potter, in which you have the shy bespectacled heroine, the female red-haired ditz and the knowledgeable male activist. I'd watch that.
I prefer the same story with all genders switched.

I think human skin and the removal of those horns would be quite sufficient to make me wanna tap that.​

I don't think the film would be exactly popular if it had only men (the complaints I read on YouTube didn't focus only on the characters' genders but also on the film itself). However, I don't believe this movie would provoke so much anger if it hadn't been released during the apex of anti-feminism. The fact that the Ghostbusters themselves are an imaginative representation of law enforcement, which is traditionally masculine, also contributes to such dissatisfaction.

My favorite Ghostbuster is female.

I don't want my boy to play with the chick Ghostbusters action figures because it'll turn him gay

That depends greatly on how he plays with them.

 

[93JC]

That's patently false. The film is 78% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, with 86 reviews so far.

EDIT: To me, that's somehow like the perfect score. Not bad enough to validate the unjustified hatred (as opposed to justified disinterest, to be clear), not mixed enough to be an obvious example of polarization, but not such an awesome 99% as to raise some kind of skepticism. It's like the perfect "there's no story here, now shut up" score.

It's 78% on the strength of puff pieces, many of which go off on a tangent about how the movie had been maligned by misogynists, and the only reason anyone could possibly dislike it is if they're women-haters.

The "top critics" score is a much less generous 48% ("rotten"). [EDIT: They've also only counted about 85 reviews (21 "top critics") so far. That's less than half of what a summer "tentpole" film would normally get, meaning there's probably another 80-120 reviews out there that haven't been published yet.] Richard Roeper of the Chicago Sun-Times summarized the film as follows:

So bad.

“Ghostbusters” is a horror from start to finish, and that’s not me saying it’s legitimately scary.

More like I was horrified by what was transpiring onscreen.

How could so many talented, well-meaning artists, who clearly loved and respected the original, produce such a raggedy-looking, thuddingly unfunny, utterly unnecessary reboot?

For months, controversy has swirled around the new “Ghostbusters” movie. The trailer was reportedly the most hated in YouTube history, for what that’s worth (or not worth), which led to some pundits saying some of that hate was rooted in sexism.

Others said the fact the Leslie Jones character wasn’t a scientist and seemed to have a role that called for her to play into stereotypes smacked of racism.

Of course, people were voicing these opinions without having seen the entire movie. Well, I have seen it — and while I believe the concerns about racial stereotypes were overblown, “Ghostbusters” is one of the worst movies of the year for multiple other reasons, including:

• Bad acting.
  
• Uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music.
  
• Cheesy special effects.
  
• A forgettable villain.
  
• A terrible script.

​

And that's exactly what the trailer made it look like: bad acting, uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music, cheesy special effects, and a terrible script. These things have nothing to do with the main characters being played by women, and everything to do with the movie looking like a hackneyed piece of shit meant to cash in on the nostalgia people like me have for the original film.

You'd have to pay me to see this movie.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

It's 78% on the strength of puff pieces, many of which go off on a tangent about how the movie had been maligned by misogynists, and the only reason anyone could possibly dislike it is if they're women-haters.

The "top critics" score is a much less generous 48% ("rotten"). [EDIT: They've also only counted about 85 reviews (21 "top critics") so far. That's less than half of what a summer "tentpole" film would normally get, meaning there's probably another 80-120 reviews out there that haven't been published yet.] Richard Roeper of the Chicago Sun-Times summarized the film as follows:

So bad.

“Ghostbusters” is a horror from start to finish, and that’s not me saying it’s legitimately scary.

More like I was horrified by what was transpiring onscreen.

How could so many talented, well-meaning artists, who clearly loved and respected the original, produce such a raggedy-looking, thuddingly unfunny, utterly unnecessary reboot?

For months, controversy has swirled around the new “Ghostbusters” movie. The trailer was reportedly the most hated in YouTube history, for what that’s worth (or not worth), which led to some pundits saying some of that hate was rooted in sexism.

Others said the fact the Leslie Jones character wasn’t a scientist and seemed to have a role that called for her to play into stereotypes smacked of racism.

Of course, people were voicing these opinions without having seen the entire movie. Well, I have seen it — and while I believe the concerns about racial stereotypes were overblown, “Ghostbusters” is one of the worst movies of the year for multiple other reasons, including:

• Bad acting.
  
• Uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music.
  
• Cheesy special effects.
  
• A forgettable villain.
  
• A terrible script.

​

And that's exactly what the trailer made it look like: bad acting, uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music, cheesy special effects, and a terrible script. These things have nothing to do with the main characters being played by women, and everything to do with the movie looking like a hackneyed piece of shit meant to cash in on the nostalgia people like me have for the original film.

You'd have to pay me to see this movie.

Like any critic,Roeper is pretty much hit and miss on his opinions. This is a guy that gave thumbs down to Fellowship of the Ring.

Generally people don't give me advanced analyses of Rotten Tomatoes scores. I assume it takes a kind of motivated reasoning for one to bother.

"a hackneyed piece of shit meant to cash in on the nostalgia", those come and go, a dime a dozen, with hardly a peep. This film generated far more noise that one typically does, and the only reason for that is people taking issue with the female cast.

I haven't seen it. I was nonplussed with the trailer and always skeptical of a third Ghostbusters movie, anyway. I probably still won't see it. But there's no ignoring this film received more resistance than it otherwise would have or probably should have because of sexism.

 

[Crabs]

That's patently false. The film is 78% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, with 86 reviews so far.

EDIT: To me, that's somehow like the perfect score. Not bad enough to validate the unjustified hatred (as opposed to justified disinterest, to be clear), not mixed enough to be an obvious example of polarization, but not such an awesome 99% as to raise some kind of skepticism. It's like the perfect "there's no story here, now shut up" score.

To put things into perspective, the Revenant (which currently has a score of 82% on Rotten Tomatoes) was nominated for 12 Academy Awards and won Best Director and Best Actor. If that doesn't shed light on how inconsistent and non-objective the critics are being toward GB16' then you are delusional. Many of the reviews are being overly positive to counter the justified negativity directed at this movie. It's purely political.

Like any critic,Roeper is pretty much hit and miss on his opinions. This is a guy that gave thumbs down to Fellowship of the Ring.

Generally people don't give me advanced analyses of Rotten Tomatoes scores. I assume it takes a kind of motivated reasoning for one to bother.

"a hackneyed piece of shit meant to cash in on the nostalgia", those come and go, a dime a dozen, with hardly a peep. This film generated far more noise that one typically does, and the only reason for that is people taking issue with the female cast.

I haven't seen it. I was nonplussed with the trailer and always skeptical of a third Ghostbusters movie, anyway. I probably still won't see it. But there's no ignoring this film received more resistance than it otherwise would have or probably should have because of sexism.

Bullshit! Swapping the gender of the main cast showed a complete lack of creativity, but that's not why most fans hate this garbage. EVERYTHING about this movie looks terrible.

This is the level of absurdity that we're dealing with here. If that doesn't make you vomit then you were never a true Ghostbusters fan in the first place. You can join the rest of the sellouts in the theater.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

To put things into perspective, the Revenant (which currently has a score of 82% on Rotten Tomatoes) was nominated for 12 Academy Awards and won Best Director and Best Actor. If that doesn't shed light on how inconsistent and non-objective the critics are being toward GB16' then you're delusional. Believe whatever you want.

What is your point? Are you suggesting I use the Academy as the objective standard for what's good, because...

Bullshit! Swapping the gender of the main cast showed a complete lack of creativity, but that's not why most fans hate this garbage. EVERYTHING about this movie looks terrible.

How would swapping the genders be any less creative than leaving them all the same?

Like I said, it didn't look good to me, but that doesn't mean I can't see the sexism. You didn't really address the point about the conspicuous difference in responses.

Suppose we can talk about the objective quality of the film, you know it's possible for a film to be both be bad, and treated as still worse than it is because of sexism?

Besides, this movie had push back before it even released a trailer, and even after the trailer, that still means hostility from so many people who didn't see the film.