Ghostbusters - It Has Women in It!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

KissingSunlight:

To be fair, the negative backlash was because this movie was another nostalgic cash grab. This time with a gimmick of having the cast being gender-swapped. A lot of people saw through this and called "Bullshit!" This offended people who thought criticizing a movie with a female cast was misogynist. Thus we had this controversy. If this debate was left to the keyboard warriors online, I wouldn't have held it against the movie. When the movie director, actresses, and the studio executives started to accuse people critical of this movie of being sexist. That was when I lost respect for them. Now, I am torn between my interest of seeing this movie and rewarding them for being cynical jerks hoping to profit from insulting their audience.

No, 900'000 people did not see the movie as a "nostalgia cash grab". If you're claiming they did, then you're calling them all hypocrites. No other "nostalgia" movie received this negativity. In fact, other movies get praised for it.

The movie did not deserve the ridiculous backlash that it received. People were being absolutely ridiculous about the trailer. The response from the studio was entirely warranted.

The outrage was essentially a bunch of morons judging a product with absolutely no legitimate basis. They simply placed contempt for EXTREMELY petty reasons. I watched the trailer, and it wasn't terrible. Not great, but it wasn't awful enough to be THE most hated trailer.

I have problems with the movie. I'm not saying that it's a great movie. But I'm not going to fault the studio on their response to the criticisms. Honestly? The angry mob were just a shameful example of nerd culture.

weirdee:

Xpwn3ntial:

weirdee:
Here's some of it

This doesn't look real. It looks like something Cracked would do for one of their photoshop weeklies.

we could only hope that some dedicated con job actually went through the trouble of making so many slides, but that's not the kind of efficient work ethic that gets you paid at buzzfeed

Well, notice the "Lost Ark" thing on the After Earth lineup is a Starcraft 2 Wings of Liberty thing, there's also a Gears of War cover behind "Exodus". I think Exodus might be a... Call of Duty cover? Maybe Medal of Honor

shrekfan246:

weirdee:
Here's some of it

Wait, people are actually still surprised that massive billion-dollar corporations do things mostly by way of focus testing, and plan out franchises long in advance of anything actually being proven successful?

Wow.

Kinda thought that was common knowledge for the demographic of this website at this point.

It is, but we still have to be mad about it. Frothing and foaming at the mouth, mad.

Aren't you mad, man? Aren't you livid? You should be physically shaken with anger right now, my friend. Grab your pitchfork and join the fray!

Hawki:
"Ghostbusters - It Has Women in It!"

Well, that's all I need to know. This is an outrage, a travesty, a rape of my childhood! I can't go on in the knowledge that a remake bears actors of different gender and zzz...

Hey! Wake up! This is no time to be falling asleep. There are angry sexists/SJWs/nerds/bigots/misogynists/misandrists[1] to fight!

I catch you laying down on the job again, Hawki, and there'll be hell to pay.

[1] Choose whichever demographic best suits your taste in target.

Jesus, so many conflicting opinions. Just someone tell me if it's good or not!

I mean, I would watch it myself, but I don't want to.

Bob_McMillan:
Jesus, so many conflicting opinions. Just someone tell me if it's good or not!

I mean, I would watch it myself, but I don't want to.

It's an ok, but unmemorable action-comedy seems to be the gist of it.

Bob_McMillan:
Jesus, so many conflicting opinions. Just someone tell me if it's good or not!

I mean, I would watch it myself, but I don't want to.

Its not

Its just another robocop reboot, its just another total recall reboot, its just another conan reboot...

Only that it beats you over the head with the narrative that all males are horrible, sexist and incompetetend, while women are the only ones getting shit done in the movie.

It is forgettable, bland and its humor is saturday night live sketch after saturday night live sketch, and not the good kind mind you.

The movie is full of plotholes and violates its own established canon, (the weapons can only be used to hold ghosts, whoops in the last fight we aparantly destroy ghosts with the same weapons!) They go from proton packs that need a generator on a movable table to function to proton knuckledusters in the spawn of a single day it seems, the main villain suddenly achieves godlike powers despite the only thing he did was die and become a ghost... only to not use his incredible powers of mindcontrol on the main protagonists when he can somehow mind controll an entire army of police officers and soldiers with the flip of a finger... etc etc.

All in all a dime a dozen cash grab reboot that plays on peoples nostalgia (even thought they did everything they could to insult and piss these people off) and has no right to exist in the first place, just like all the other reboots of the last couple of years.

The only real offensive part imo is how openly and blatantly sexist it is against men, something the original never was towards females and thus comes off as overly hatefull because paul feig aparantly hates his own balls.

So if you can stomach every male character in the movie being a primitive, incompetend and sexist asshole, while having a love for shitty CGI and lame jokes, while having the ability to keep suspension of disbelief even thought the movie has plotholes the size of jupiter... this reboot is for you!

Otherwise.. wait till its on netflix to watch it... dont reward sony with your money for shitting out this trainwreck.

Interesting to see how a better than average review is so easily skewed to a perspective that suits the reader. I mean, it's almost like the glass half full/empty thing playing out, except it's measured just above halfway (dare i say "60%"?) with quite positive wording, yet it's still skewed below the line for those unwilling to accept. How intriguing this all is.

Seems like a good movie that got hit with bad marketing and awful responses to the legit critique of the first trailer. Calling anyone who's a critic of your product a misogynist didn't work in Gamergate, it didn't work here either.

Hawki:
"Ghostbusters - It Has Women in It!"

Well, that's all I need to know. This is an outrage, a travesty, a rape of my childhood! I can't go on in the knowledge that a remake bears actors of different gender and zzz...

That title also triggered me. When I see the word "ghost" and "busters" it triggers me. When I see a female lead, it triggers me. When I wake up and see pink, it triggers me. I breathe and it triggers me. You know, the world triggers me and my childhood has also been triggered.

(Joke, kids. That was a joke. Pink is life, pink is bae)

Bob_McMillan:
Jesus, so many conflicting opinions. Just someone tell me if it's good or not!

I mean, I would watch it myself, but I don't want to.

Congratulations! You just discovered that things can be catalogued in something more than just "good" or "bad". My recommendation to dissipate the confusion: ask those who you trust (instead of just Internet strangers).

...I'm still waiting for it to hit retail.

Karadalis:

Its just another robocop reboot

Am I the only person that actually liked that movie for what it was? It keeps popping up but I would actually say it's nothing alike in the long run other than taking an established franchise name and doing nothing with it but cash in, and even then I'd say the movie does something close to reimagining, just not properly which creates so many logical holes it ruins the experience.

Kibeth41:

KissingSunlight:

To be fair, the negative backlash was because this movie was another nostalgic cash grab. This time with a gimmick of having the cast being gender-swapped. A lot of people saw through this and called "Bullshit!" This offended people who thought criticizing a movie with a female cast was misogynist. Thus we had this controversy. If this debate was left to the keyboard warriors online, I wouldn't have held it against the movie. When the movie director, actresses, and the studio executives started to accuse people critical of this movie of being sexist. That was when I lost respect for them. Now, I am torn between my interest of seeing this movie and rewarding them for being cynical jerks hoping to profit from insulting their audience.

No, 900'000 people did not see the movie as a "nostalgia cash grab". If you're claiming they did, then you're calling them all hypocrites. No other "nostalgia" movie received this negativity. In fact, other movies get praised for it.

The movie did not deserve the ridiculous backlash that it received. People were being absolutely ridiculous about the trailer. The response from the studio was entirely warranted.

The outrage was essentially a bunch of morons judging a product with absolutely no legitimate basis. They simply placed contempt for EXTREMELY petty reasons. I watched the trailer, and it wasn't terrible. Not great, but it wasn't awful enough to be THE most hated trailer.

I have problems with the movie. I'm not saying that it's a great movie. But I'm not going to fault the studio on their response to the criticisms. Honestly? The angry mob were just a shameful example of nerd culture.

I started my timeline earlier than the trailer release. I was addressing all the people who were complaining that the movie would "ruin their childhood". Which is a silly hyperbole. Their point was to call out this movie for what it was going to be. Nostalgic cash grab with a pointless gimmick. Then the trailer came along. I agree with you. I wasn't thrilled with the trailer. I didn't think it was that bad. However, a lot of people had a stronger negative reaction to the trailer and voted it down. That still doesn't give the studio any justification to claim that people who are critical of the movie are misogynists.

You may disagree that this movie deserved the angry mob treatment that it had received. I agree that angry mobs should be reserved for serious issues that demand such a reaction. Movies, regardless how bad they are, don't deserve the angry mob treatment. My point is that if so many people had a problem with different aspects of the movie. They should have listened and reacted diplomatically to their complaints. Instead of dismissing these people as being sexist.

Newsflash: The first film had women too.

This is what I expected. Paul Feig doesn't make great movies, he makes movies run the gamut from ok to pretty good, not great. I'll definitely check it out. Fun fact, when I was a wee lad, my best friend and I spent 5 consecutive Halloweens dressed as Ghostbusters. I think I will ultimately probably enjoy it based on reviews I have read. The worst part of this film looks to be that horrible theme song. I feel like these day, when you see a song by Fallout Boy and Missy Elliot, it's most likely just over produced trash, which is what it sounds like. Song by formula, not by inspiration.

RedRockRun:
Newsflash: The first film had women too.

Hey whoa! Next you'll be saying this isn't an 'All female cast' 'cause there are dudes in it!

vallorn:

That's honestly the kind of thing that induces me to avoid most Sony Pictures products like the plague. Especially this one.

Wait so am I interpreting things wrong, or was After Earth intended to be a movie to launch a multi-media IP reaching movies, gaming, novels, graphic novels, figures, toys, clothing and beyond?

How. How? HOW! How

Silentpony:

Hey whoa! Next you'll be saying this isn't an 'All female cast' 'cause there are dudes in it!

Whoa, whoa, whoa... You're telling me the new film has men in it?

Bullshit. I don't buy it, dude. Why else would the movie be marketed as the 'all female Ghostbusters'?

Well, I'm glad if nothing else that Patty Jones' character isn't as one-note as she appears in the previews.

(I know that preview editors often have a rough job, working with limited and sometimes unfinished footage that they have to piece into an attractive pitch for their product- but boy, does it seem like we've seen some absolute horrorshow trailers in the past few years.)

Look, if you strip back the frankly appalling behaviour of both the dark corners of the internet who took umbrage and the people at Sony who don't know what public relations are, the movie is largely a run of the mill comedy. Also, who did Andy Garcia owe money to that he had to accept a role in this lukewarm effort?

Some of it works, I liked McKinnon's character and Wiig has her moments and Chris Hemsworth, bless his soul, is game for playing the walking non-sequitur. That said, I have some thoughts on how they can improve the sequel if they're going forward with one:

1. Have the principal cast (McKinnon, Wiig, McCarthy, and Jenkins) hang out more as people: this will help build chemistry.

2. Give Hemsworth and Jenkins better roles. Movie scientists are notorious for being shitty at handling bureaucracy and money so there's no reason that Hemsworth couldn't be their guy who manages the cash and legalese. Also, I think Jenkins should be (either through retcon or new plot development) an actual city historian for New York. They don't need to be scientists to be valuable to the team.

3. Stop killing your tension and dial down on physical comedy: I suspect this is an issue of translation more than anything else since broad physical comedy is easier to translate than wordplay but yeah, cut that shit out.

Also, they missed a golden opportunity to have the soldiers and cops be directed to recreate parts of the Thriller music video.

I could've done without Hemsworth dancing in the credits, but I heard there was an after-credit scene (yes it's exactly what you think it is). Other than that, it was an enjoyable popcorn flick, a solid C+. The various cameos were a little out there, but it was nice seeing the old crew. And btw, after seeing

in this movie and their age now, how's this gonna figure into

Kibeth41:
No other "nostalgia" movie received this negativity. In fact, other movies get praised for it.

Bullshit. The Robocop reboot got slammed, the Turtles movies got eviscerated (a HELL of a lot more so than the GB remake), Transformers, GI-Joe, the new Superman films. All of them received easily as much if not more so negativity than the GB reboot and I could go on. But because the garbage that calls itself "journalists" couldn't make a "haters are sexist" story out of the negativity (because those films didn't base their ENTIRE marketing campaign as "if you don't praise this you're scum") the negativity never got the attention.

LordLundar:

Kibeth41:
No other "nostalgia" movie received this negativity. In fact, other movies get praised for it.

Bullshit. The Robocop reboot got slammed, the Turtles movies got eviscerated (a HELL of a lot more so than the GB remake), Transformers, GI-Joe, the new Superman films. All of them received easily as much if not more so negativity than the GB reboot and I could go on. But because the garbage that calls itself "journalists" couldn't make a "haters are sexist" story out of the negativity (because those films didn't base their ENTIRE marketing campaign as "if you don't praise this you're scum") the negativity never got the attention.

Those movies were disliked, but none as much as Ghostbusters.

Turtles and Transformers had a good number of fans. GI-Joe was swept under the rug, and Robocop received pretty average ratings, so I've no idea what imaginary ratings you're looking at.

Seeming as you're incapable of doing this yourself, I'm going to do the comparisons for you.

Here are the Metacritic reviews for Robocop:
image

They're not great, but they're pretty average.

Here are the Metacritic reviews for Ghostbusters:
image

So yeah... Don't try bullshitting me and telling me that movies like Robocop and G.I Joe were hated as much as Ghostbusters. No one's arguing that they're *good* movies. The argument is that the bandwagon hate isn't there because people dislike the "nostalgia cash-in" factor. Otherwise, other movies would have received the same torches and pitchforks treatment.

And FYI: Superman isn't a nostalgia cash grab. It's a comic book adaptation. If you're going to argue otherwise, then you need to not cherrypick, and argue that ALL comic book movies are nostalgia cash grabs. Which actually reinforces my point, that movies get praised for it.

People can rationalize the hatred to themselves all they want. But as it stands, the hatred that Ghostbusters received was an absolute disgrace from the nerd community.

Kibeth41:

People can rationalize the hatred to themselves all they want. But as it stands, the hatred that Ghostbusters received was an absolute disgrace from the nerd community.

So we're saying all of the negative comments it has received is solely from nerds? Define the term please.

LegendaryGamer0:
Define the term please.

Nerd (adjective: nerdy) is a descriptive term, often used pejoratively, indicating a person that is overly intellectual, obsessive, or lacking social skills. Such a person may spend inordinate amounts of time on unpopular, obscure, or non-mainstream activities, which are generally either highly technical or relating to topics of fiction or fantasy, to the exclusion of more mainstream activities.[1][2][3] Additionally, many nerds are described as being shy, quirky, and unattractive,[4] and may have difficulty participating in, or even following, sports. Though originally derogatory, "Nerd" is a stereotypical term, but as with other pejoratives, it has been reclaimed and redefined by some as a term of pride and group identity.

Yes, I copied and pasted the term from Wikipedia. Because I didn't feel the need to spend more time than that on a pointless question.

So we're saying all of the negative comments it has received is solely from nerds?

Yes, because others don't have an interest that is particularly invested enough to rage at the existence of a movie.

Kibeth41:

Yes, I copied and pasted the term from Wikipedia. Because I didn't feel the need to spend more time than that on a pointless question.

The point comes next.

Yes, because others don't have an interest that is particularly invested enough to rage at the existence of a movie.

You clearly don't know people. Ghostbusters fans in general are attacking the movie and a fan is not ipso facto a nerd, unless you're just calling everyone who is attacking it a nerd, in which case you're just namecalling which says all it needs to on its own. Or, you're calling anyone that cares about something a nerd, in which case please see the previous sentence again.

I can say now that this movie has given me a headache and I haven't even seen it yet.

recommends people go see ghostbusters movie,didn't like the wow movie. Is it just one person rating movies,or a team if not can we get multiple people.

Karadalis:

Bob_McMillan:
Jesus, so many conflicting opinions. Just someone tell me if it's good or not!

I mean, I would watch it myself, but I don't want to.

Its not

Its just another robocop reboot, its just another total recall reboot, its just another conan reboot...

Only that it beats you over the head with the narrative that all males are horrible, sexist and incompetetend, while women are the only ones getting shit done in the movie.

It is forgettable, bland and its humor is saturday night live sketch after saturday night live sketch, and not the good kind mind you.

The movie is full of plotholes and violates its own established canon, (the weapons can only be used to hold ghosts, whoops in the last fight we aparantly destroy ghosts with the same weapons!) They go from proton packs that need a generator on a movable table to function to proton knuckledusters in the spawn of a single day it seems, the main villain suddenly achieves godlike powers despite the only thing he did was die and become a ghost... only to not use his incredible powers of mindcontrol on the main protagonists when he can somehow mind controll an entire army of police officers and soldiers with the flip of a finger... etc etc.

All in all a dime a dozen cash grab reboot that plays on peoples nostalgia (even thought they did everything they could to insult and piss these people off) and has no right to exist in the first place, just like all the other reboots of the last couple of years.

The only real offensive part imo is how openly and blatantly sexist it is against men, something the original never was towards females and thus comes off as overly hatefull because paul feig aparantly hates his own balls.

So if you can stomach every male character in the movie being a primitive, incompetend and sexist asshole, while having a love for shitty CGI and lame jokes, while having the ability to keep suspension of disbelief even thought the movie has plotholes the size of jupiter... this reboot is for you!

Otherwise.. wait till its on netflix to watch it... dont reward sony with your money for shitting out this trainwreck.

Wow. I'm glad I read this even though it's full of spoilers, because breaking established logic is one of my biggest pet peeves in movies.

I was worried about the CGI when I saw the first trailer. The ghost vomits (another problem) on Wiig and the vomit looks real and the ghost completely CGI. I hoped that this was just an early trailer problem, but seeing the release trailer made me sigh in disappointment as there was clearly no effort to make the ghosts look as real as they did in the originals - although clearly better than the release trailer. Why not invest in making CGI that actually mimics the ghosts from the first movie? Stupid cash grab :(.

Do the ghosts look as fake to everyone else as I think they do?

PS: I also hate the equipment redesign

PSS: I thought the Total Recall remake sucked, but the Robocop remake was decent - at least Robocop still looked cool and asked interesting questions (without the R-rating it could never surpass the original though), while Total Recall removed everything cool about the original - going to Mars, trading a colorful colony with just being on a grey Earth, etc.

So we went from the trailers making it look atrocious, to it merely being aggressively 'Eh'.

Well, I guess that's technically a step up.

Still don't think I'll see it though, that doesn't exactly sound like the best of sales pitches, and I'm disinclined to reward cynical cashgrabs.

Bob_McMillan:
Jesus, so many conflicting opinions. Just someone tell me if it's good or not!

I mean, I would watch it myself, but I don't want to.

If you've seen Pixels, you know what to expect from Ghostbusters 2016.

You know, I've teetered back and forth during this whole controversy trying to figure out which "side" I hate the most, but the film's obsessive haters have been putting in a pretty strong candidacy for the worst group in this whole mess. If there's one piece of bullshit that just needs to die it's this idea that giving the film a positive review is the safe option as far as backlash is concerned. Despite all this talk about the big bad feminist monster that supposedly commands so much fear over the critics, these people don't seem to realize that they are the power here.
I've been playing a fun little game, it's called "spot the positive review." How it works is, you search for Ghostbusters reviews on Youtube, and by looking at the like:dislike ratio alone, making a guess as to how positive the review will be.
It's pretty telling of just which opinion is the safe one.

A score of around ~95% likes indicates that they despised the movie.
A score of around ~85% - 95% indicates that they thought it was pretty bad, but still had a few positives.
A score of around ~75% - 85% indicates that they thought it was mediocre to alright.
And a score of less than that indicates that they actually quite liked it.

The people calling anyone who liked the film paid shills, cowards who are to afraid to give their True Opiniontm, cucks, or all of the above, far out weighs the number of feminists calling people misogynists. It's absolutely cringe-worthy watching all these people try so hard to pretend they're the put upon rebels, rather than the orthodoxy.

(takes head out of hands)

Okay, now that the furor has calmed a little, can I have my say?

I am in my mid 30's, I saw Ghostbusters at about five/six years of age and it was a total game changer for me and many of my friends at school. We had never seen anything like it before. In the 1980's, we had some of the lamest movies around - especially for kids - like "American Rabbit" (sighs). Then, Ghostbusters came along. A movie designed for adults and kids (it was PG in the UK) and it worked on so many levels.

At that age, I was terrified of ghosts and the paranormal, again like many kids. And then GB came along with the message "Science? Oh, yeah... Science can kick the paranormals butt." So, for me - and this will be from my angle - it was such a shockingly deep and resonant message. Hell, I fell in love with science that day and I will be frank that GB may have led me to become interested in real and science fiction. Hell, it may have been one of the reasons I got a science degree. :)

The movie itself, as I grew up, took on new angles of comedy. I went from 5 years of age loving the slime, the effects and how cool Egon and Ray were, to my current age where I can now appreciate the witty word play, dark and adult humour (that went over my head back then LOL) and comedic lines that the film has. So, yes, I think I can say I am a GB geek and it was part of my childhood. I refuse to apologise for that.

So, you will understand if I feel a little bruised and battered with what has been going on. I have watched the feminists saying if you dislike the reboot you're sexist and a manchild and to "grow up" if you feel it's stolen your childhood. I have watched the official media backing them up and saying any hatred is all about the girls from insecure males and childish geeks. I have watched forum comments of various men and women commenters telling each other to grow up with bile and hatred.

So, what I will say is this:

"I have no interest in seeing this film and it has nothing, NOTHING to do with the girls. It has a little to do with the nostalgia of my childhood and how good the 1st one is. It has EVERYTHING to do with the comedic style of this film, the comments from Sony and the crew around it and the director!"

I have watched the trailers, seen the little documentary films for it, the magazine comments and articles. I gave it every chance the first time it was announced. When it was revealed we had a female crew for this one, I was kinda excited. I was thinking "Tina Fey could be a great Venkman version... Melissa McCarthy could be a great Ray version! Zoe Saldana as Winston. Julia Louise Davis as Egon!" and "We can have the old crew hand off to the new crew! New tech!"

Then it started to fall apart in front of my eyes. Paul Feig (and I liked Bridemaids) was announced as director. This guy, while talented, was SO not the right guy for the job. His humour, even in bridemaids, is primarily physical and slapstick - not GB's humour of primarily witty word play and character dynamics.

Then Chris Helmsworth was introduced as a... humm... well, a moron. My heart sank. I was hoping he was going to be the villain, as Chris can do "chilling" very well and it would have been excellent to see the female crew going up against an - for want of a better word - alpha male/god type and kicking his ass.

Then, upon finding the GB teaser site, I got to see the technology. How crude the stuff looked, how fisherprice it looked compared to the 1980's packs, traps and tech. Nothing looked like it would actually work... it looked like bad cosplay, OKAY? Now this may not seem important, but it was for me. How do you belive in the universe, in the tech, if the stuff they use look like it's made of plywood and ductape rather than metal, electronics, and a shit tonne of improvisation.

Then the script was partially leaked, the Sony hack happened and a LOT of info got released into the public eye that revealed that the Villain is the GB logo (turned out to be true), that there was a dance scene (turned out to be true) and that the entire movie was slapstick and physical humour at the base level - Queefs, slime, farts etc. (turned out to be true). Like they were trying to "out cartoon" the cartoon version and succeeded!!

(Man, the cartoon. Even that was dark in places for a kids show... remember the sandman episode. When he turned dreams into nightmares to go after Winston. Creepy.)

Despite all of this, ALL OF IT, I said to my wife: "If the reviews are good. We'll go see it."

Well, they haven't been, they aren't good at all. Empire, Angry Joe (a fellow balanced fan), and... and.... (sigh). I have now heard and seen enough clips to see where this has headed. And it's bad guys. Bad.

So, no. I cannot bring myself to see it. The fact it exists makes my heart sink as it HAS tarnished memories of the original for me a little. The fact I will have to say "I loved GB, the original!!" to people rather than "I love the GB world!"

More importantly, it has made me sad that our biggest and most positive chance to rebirth GB for both the new and current generation of fans has been squandered and turned into something that is so mediocre, so bog standard in it's humour it's going to be forgotten faster than we can imagine.

We have lost the chance for a witty, smart, comedy movie (a rarity now). We have lost a chance for a TV show (it could have worked so well... franchise, new ghost threats, interplay... man.), we have lost the chance for a decent 2nd GB game like the 2007 one with the new crew (not the game they HAVE released. The reviews... the reviews...)

It makes me sad, it depresses me. It's not the end of the world, no. But it hurts, hurts my heart and my hope for GB's revivial as it should be.

Because if it does get revived due to this movie, it's going to be in this format... and that is even more depressing and love hurting to the point I don't want it to happen.

(sighs) Made myself sad. Going to play the game and maybe watch the original to cheer myself up.

Just came back from watching it and I found it ok. It goes to shows you shouldn't judge a film from it trailer. Obviously the original is superior. The cameos were great except for Bill Murray.

Granted the only bits I hate is Mark character Kevin especially the "interview" scene.

Let me solve the little mystery of why this movie had so much hate associated with it. They took something most would consider A-political that a lot of people liked and used it to make a political statement.

So, came back from seeing it today. And...honestly, it's pretty good.

Not as good as the original mind you, and if I was to sum up the difference, it would be that the original is a comedy movie with some action, while the remake is an action movie with some comedy. Everything is louder, bigger, brighter. On the flipside, there's nothing that's going to be quoted along the lines of cats & dogs for instance. But I enjoyed it. And to add a few more tidbits:

-I loved the cameos of the original cast. Won't spoil anything as to who shows up and when, but I thought they were well done. They're long enough to be memorable, but short enough so that they don't drag down the movie.

-For an all-female cast, there isn't really anything along the lines of "girl power." There's 2-3 moments where their gender is called out, but it's hardly obtrusive. Likewise, it's been stated that every male in the film is a dick, and that the film is anti-men. To which I say...what? Kevin is likable enough, the old guy that comes to Erin at the start is sincere in his intentions (not the Charles Dance professor, the guy with the glasses), and the mayor's assistant is an absolute SOB. Yes, the bad guy is male, but seriously guys, stop it. There's no conspiracy here.

-The villain himself is no Gozer the Gozarian, and his motives basically boil down to "I hate the world," but he does represent a subtle theme in the film that's also mirrored in the characters of Erin and Abbey. Not everyone is 'normal', not everyone is going to believe solely in the rational, and the world is a vicious place that can indeed get you down. The trick is to not let it get you down, and even if soup is the only good thing in the world, things can turn out alright in the end. It's not exactly a deep theme, but still a noticable one.

-Product placement. Dear god the product placement. I know this is New York, but seriously?

-I'll give it credit that unlike ID: Resurgence, there's no sequel bait. It certainly leaves it open for sequels, as the Ghostbusters basically get all the funds they need to continue to operate, but there's no dangling plot threads.

-I have a feeling that a lot of the movie was left on the cutting room floor. Scenes in trailers don't appear in the movie, and I feel some Abby-Erin scenes are missing, as are some Kevin ones. These are the three characters that have pseudo-character arcs, but certain steps of the journey are missing, so to speak.

So, yeah. Quite enjoyable. Probably the #13 film I've seen this year. Might not seem that high, but, well, still good.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here