Ghostbusters 30th Anniversary

[Nightbat]

It has men in the lead roles, so it must be awesome!!!

[sh9000]

[Nightbat]

[areaseven]

Who ya gonna call? Not them, definitely.

Also...

Edited July 12, 2016 by areaseven

[Hikuro]

that was bad, all of it, was bad.

[505thAirborne]

that was bad, all of it, was bad.

That was a very polite way of putting it.

[Roy Focker]

Those clips were painful to watch.

[UN Spacy]

that was bad, all of it, was bad.

.

[Nightbat]

You guys do realise you're all misogynists now?

[areaseven]

You guys do realise you're all misogynists now?

Why do you think we have a Worst Science Fiction Film of All Time thread? It's to test our pain threshold on movies such as this.

[vlenhoff]

Incredible...

[Hikuro]

You guys do realise you're all misogynists now?

oh, cause according to the director I'm a trump supporter. Oh wait, guess that's the same thing isn't it? I dunno.

[Dio]

Despite the politics around this movie and how much those turned me off to it, I actually found those clips pretty entertaining. Now I wonder if I might really enjoy the film despite the early hesitation, similar to the new live-action(ish) TMNT movies.

[areaseven]

Now for some more bad news...

Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 78% - "Ghostbusters does an impressive job of standing on its own as a freewheeling, marvelously cast supernatural comedy -- even if it can't help but pale somewhat in comparison with the classic original."

Metacritic Score: 59 out of 100

Edited July 13, 2016 by areaseven

[areaseven]

May cause ear cancer.

[Roy Focker]

But a spilt 50% rating from the top critics.

[Dobber]

Despite the politics around this movie and how much those turned me off to it, I actually found those clips pretty entertaining. Now I wonder if I might really enjoy the film despite the early hesitation, similar to the new live-action(ish) TMNT movies.

You know that was what I was always trying to figure out how to say...the politics. I don't care about whether women are leads or not...doesn't bother me, it's just that this movie, from practically day 1, has been a political statement movie. THAT is what bothers me about it. So if the movie is great, then the SJW types will say "see you mysoginistic a-holes" when the vast majority of people that had a problem with the movie had nothing no problem with women but rather that it just didn't look good, or because a classic was being remade. (Which people around here, at least, always have a problem with) If it does bad then it will be because "everyone had a problem with the casting, and the movie wasn't given a fair chance"

There have been and continue to be plenty of movies with female leads, yet, this movie is being treated like the future of female centered movies is on it's shoulders. That's the rub, when it comes to "statement-like" movies, and for me it is off putting. All that said, I will probably still see it in the theatre, if the reviews are good. I just wish the politics around this movie would go away.

Chris

Edited July 11, 2016 by Dobber

[technoblue]

[Nightbat]

Now for some more bad news...

Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 79% - "Ghostbusters does an impressive job of standing on its own as a freewheeling, marvelously cast supernatural comedy -- even if it can't help but pale somewhat in comparison with the classic original."

Metacritic Score: 63 out of 100

The wonderful thing, if this were a hit, and all the fans will be clamouring "I told you so" and rubbing it in my face...

..It'll only be more confirmation of my low opinion about modern day society

[peter]

Too much politics behind this film, watched the clips and thinking about the agenda just annoyed me.

Won't be paying to see this film. Frieg's a bit of a fruitcake.

Edited July 11, 2016 by peter

[Negotiator]

oh, cause according to the director I'm a trump supporter. Oh wait, guess that's the same thing isn't it? I dunno.

Judd Apatow said that, not the director

[Phobos]

Now for some more bad news...

Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 79% - "Ghostbusters does an impressive job of standing on its own as a freewheeling, marvelously cast supernatural comedy -- even if it can't help but pale somewhat in comparison with the classic original."

Metacritic Score: 63 out of 100

Interesting. I wonder how many of the critics that s#!t all over BvS gave this movie a positive review.

Edited July 11, 2016 by Phobos

[Big s]

The good reviews on this film make it sound like it's just good enough and nothing special, but still worth the cash.

[renegadeleader1]

RT also gave 10 Cloverfield Lane 90%. To be honest that really wasn't much better than a two hour long episode of the Outer Limits and not something I really feel like ever watching again.

[Big s]

The rotten tomatoes ratings aren't for how good a movie is, but if the movie is good enough to recomend spending the cash to buy a ticket.

[Dobber]

Several reviews I'm seeing are generally positive, but seem to start with a statement like..."it's not the train wreck or Horrible like we were afraid of but....." Chemistry between the leads seem to be the highlight and that's about it. It seems like the best this thing has going for it is that it is not as bad as people were thinking it would be.

Interestingly, John Scnepp, while not loving this movie, still spoke well enough about it while still giving it the same score as BvS which he HATED with such passion, and couldn't stop hating on for months. I think it's going to Open well because people will want to see it for one reason or another. After that will be the real test.

Chris

Edited July 12, 2016 by Dobber

[Nightbat]

Critics will be very careful with their, well,.. criticism

None of them want to commit career suicide, just look at what will happen when you wear the wrong shirt on TV these days

[danth]

All the angry youtube comments using slurs was not evidence of misogyny.

The generally favorable reviews for this movie are however evidence of a vast feminazi SJW conspiracy.

Keep drinking the koolaid guys.

[areaseven]

"C"

"Would probably be a better time if it had better pacing and you were drunk (Yeah now it's a party!)."

"2.5 and 3.0 out of 5 Schmoes"

Edited July 17, 2016 by areaseven

[technoblue]

You see, now I'm left wondering if any of these on-line critics/personalities watched Ghostbusters 2. For me, that's the true elephant in the room and as long as this movie does better than that stinker, I don't care who they hired on to play the new Ghostbusters.

[Big s]

The new bench mark, since it's not as good as the original will be "is it better than Ghostbusters 2?"

[peter]

All the angry youtube comments using slurs was not evidence of misogyny.

The generally favorable reviews for this movie are however evidence of a vast feminazi SJW conspiracy.

Keep drinking the koolaid guys.

Lol, feminazi.

[technoblue]

The new bench mark, since it's not as good as the original will be "is it better than Ghostbusters 2?"

But it has already passed that benchmark (with the critics, anyway).

I was speaking more to my own expectations. I was really disappointed by Ghostbusters 2. Not as much as Bill Murray, mind you. I would have still seen a Ghostbusters 3 if the original cast had been able to get over their reservations and spin some of that old magic again while Ramis was still alive. At least there was enough momentum from the original film to give us that cool Ghostbusters video game in 2009, and some nice LEGO sets.

Anyway, I know this new movie will be different, but that doesn't mean that it will be bad. The controversy/politics around it is just noise that I ignore.

Edited July 13, 2016 by technoblue

[Nightbat]

All the angry youtube comments using slurs was not evidence of misogyny.

Nope, insults are not evidence of misogyny

Unless you can show all those people hate their mothers as well

Again, you fail to understand insults, and apparently, aren't well experienced in the internet

If this movie got made with guys and received the same internet trolling and denigrating comments,.. we wouldn't be seeing this demonization of its opponents by the moral crusaders

You sure wouldn't be clamoring "Misandry! Misandry!"

The generally favorable reviews for this movie are however evidence of a vast feminazi SJW conspiracy.

Keep drinking the koolaid guys.

You are the proof, just because people don't like a reboot of a certain movie, and/or because it's agenda-driven, you accuse them of being womenhaters

This happened to everyone being critical of GB (regardless if they used insults to signify their contempt)

People have no desire being branded misogynist and become social (or professional, if being a moviecritic is their living) outcasts, and will amend their opinion

Perhaps you are unaware that we are living in a world where 2 guys at a convention jokingly among themselves with an innuendo about a 'dongle' get overheard by a woman and gets them fired

We had a guy putting a probe on a bloody comet who's life was made living hell because he wore a shirt during the broadcast defined as "sexist" (added irony that the shirt was given to him by a female friend)

While the hosts of "The View" laughed out loud on national television about a man gotten his genitals amputated by his vindictive wife without any repercussions whatsoever

Tell me, did you drink enough feminist kool aid to think you can claim women are above criticism?

[Mr March]

I suppose it's a shame that this movie didn't turn out good, but honestly it never sounded or looked good to me from concept all the way to trailer. Sure, all the entitled male hate that this film attracted online (beyond any hate most male-cast films would ever recieve) continues to be disgusting, but this film appears to have big problems far beyond it's target demographic. Like the Slashfilm podcast recently said, not even the original cast could make their own sequel a success back in the 80's, so any remake - female-lead or otherwise - was always going to be an uphill battle. Like they said, I think the worst part of the failure of this film is that it's fed ammunition to the really hateful and vocal misogynsts who hated the film because of the female cast rather than because it's a bad movie. It's enough to start believing in Trump

Most of these kinds of 80s re-imagined films are problematic at best and this one sounds like it didn't do nearly enough to blaze it's own trail. Another victim of remake culture. I don't think I'll bother watching this one.