[video=youtube;E0Tu8uQWK0Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0Tu8uQWK0Q[/video]
OC: Been wanting to make a video on this since day one.
Criticism is welcome.
I think the biggest problem with the movie is that they made it a full blown comedy. Unlike the original that was funny only when it needed to be. The trailer even shows heavily used tropes that seem to be in every single comedy.
The actor choices could have been WAY better as well.
[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;49896678]I think the biggest problem with the movie is that they made it a full blown comedy. Unlike the original that was funny only when it needed to be. The trailer even shows heavily used tropes that seem to be in every single comedy.[/QUOTE]
And the original actors actually had some wit naturally.
Leslie Jones isn't even funny, all she does is scream and act retarded.
I'm still baffled on how this got green lit
They only made the cast female because they wanted one of the girls to lick the gun. Why aren't feminists pissed at that kind of portrayal? Instead they're mad at the "baby men" for disliking something that's obviously going to be a huge flop because it was made for the lawls and not as an actual reboot or sequel.
oh fuck, I accidentally uploaded this on international womens day :v:
[QUOTE=psychofox67;49896745]I'm still baffled on how this got green lit[/QUOTE]
With the recent uproar by tumbler feminists about seismic in comics and video games Hollywood thinks it has an untapped market to exploit. Which us why marvel made Thor a woman, they don't know that these are people who don't care about the material.
[QUOTE=psychofox67;49896745]I'm still baffled on how this got green lit[/QUOTE]
Board members are easy to persuade to make reboots because of the $$$$
Honestly, TMNT reboot wasn't anywhere near as bad as transformers. If I were a kid who didn't know TMNT and I saw the reboot I'd be pretty fucking happy.
The issue with this is it's trying to pass off as being in-line with the original and just completely fucking it up royally. The jokes are bad, the characters are unbelievable and any criticism is passed off as sexist.
Crackpot "feminists" need to understand what good writing is.
Personally, even though I'm still waiting for a bit more info before condemming the film, my biggest issue is that it seems like they just took the original film, replaced the time period, and gender swapped the cast; no attempt to actually make original characters (which would be great), other than just turn the comedy to the max.
And I ESPECIALLY hate it when it is then touted as a big win for feminism and equality, when all Hollywood really does is just to remove the dong on a male protagonist and call it a day. No, it isin't. We want more varied and original protagonist, characters that can bring a unique perspective to a story... we don't get that when all writers do is change the sex of an already established character and I can't for the life of me understand why that is seen as a good thing, since it's bascily the writers going "Yeah, we can't actually write a GOOD original female/black/other minority group character, so we are just gonna swap the color and sex(ual orientation) of this popular established character, and nothing else.". I see that shit as incredibly insulting to the particular minority group being targetted, and in this case, that would be women... well, I would be insulted atleast.
I just want to say your arguments come across really well and I totally agree with them, this film has all the hallmarks of the worst of modern Hollywood film making and in an age where there is an absolute mass of quality TV and an equal mass of quality films I can watch this doesn't exactly restore my faith in cinema.
Call me sexist if you want, but I hate the new movie because of how they're all women.
It's the exact same thing as the new Fantastic Four. They're recasting the team into something very different from the original, and that just doesn't sit right with me.
[editline]9th March 2016[/editline]
Wait, this is not a reboot? Wtf, I thought it was.
[QUOTE=psychofox67;49896745]I'm still baffled on how this got green lit[/QUOTE]
You don't know Hollywood well.
All it takes is a mention of Ghostbusters and the producers greenlight the project because it will sell regardless of quality.
[QUOTE=ClauAmericano;49897819]Call me sexist if you want, but I hate the new movie because of how they're all women.
It's the exact same thing as the new Fantastic Four. They're recasting the team into something very different from the original, and that just doesn't sit right with me.
[editline]9th March 2016[/editline]
Wait, this is not a reboot? Wtf, I thought it was.[/QUOTE]
It is a reboot, just another thing wrong with the terrible trailer.
What do you mean you guys don't like this new ghostbusters film? It has a black sassy woman humor in it and woman jokes! hahaha! the ghosts even does that projectile vomiting
[editline]9th March 2016[/editline]
Like the projectile vomiting I was doing on my garbage can 10 minutes ago after seeing this trailer
i would be fully down for the gender swap thing if they got actually really good new talent for it and gave them creative control like with the original, cos in fairness i feel like when woman comedians do show up in bigger studio films it's often in some terrible PG-12 Fuck You It's January movie, where they've hired the most broadly-humored comedienne possible to make tired jokes about being fat and ugly or something inoffensive and easily-marketed like that
so it's actually more insulting to me as someone who was interested in the basic premise that they not only wasted this opportunity to cash-in solely on the Ghostbusters name, but might have even discouraged similar opportunities in the future from the backlash
Wait why didn't they call the car Ecto-2? That makes no sense to have a second ecto-1.
I think Kirsten Wiig and Kate McKinnon look alright and the non-ghostbuster cast seem pretty decent. I can't stand Melissa McCarthy and, while I haven't seen her in anything before, Leslie Jones seems pretty terrible from the trailer. This whole thing would probably be a lot better off if Paul Feig weren't involved at all.
[QUOTE=Ardosos;49897950]Wait why didn't they call the car Ecto-2? That makes no sense to have a second ecto-1.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah. Things don't make any sense when you don't even bother to put a single, solitary ounce of thought into designing a movie.
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;49898200]Well yeah. Things don't make any sense when you don't even bother to put a single, solitary ounce of thought into designing a movie.[/QUOTE]
I don't think that's fair, other than the car being called the Ecto-1, the props and sets look perfectly fine.
[QUOTE=Ardosos;49897950]Wait why didn't they call the car Ecto-2? That makes no sense to have a second ecto-1.[/QUOTE]
Because it's a reboot, not a sequel.
Is there a single feminist who thinks this looks funnier than the original, or even funny at all? Or are they just defending it because the 'bad guys' aren't?
One massive massive problem is she slaps her again after ghost left her body, who in their right mind thinks that's funny (laugh at formulaic joke or you're sexist, joke is funny, because joke done many times before, comedy formula always funny, because money ). I think these studio execs are wealthy cavemen in suits, they aren't happy unless all the jokes are the same old shit people have been rehashing for 50 years, well I'm sorry Mr. and Ms. 'Born in 1946', people tripping over a banana peel isn't fucking funny any more. You can't just take a movie that was interesting and funny and throw half assed ancient sitcom jokes at it. How would those execs feel if someone remade pixels but made it good?
"Oh, we need to make this show equality in women"
'We need a black chick, of course! She'll be smart, sophisticated, and witty'
"Nah fuck that its just a black chick"
And then they make her an uneducated southern baptist type of new yorker who don know much bout dem sciences but daaaam she kno new york like it was her own dam house. oh and her uncle might have a car they can borrow.
Fucking awful, who thought this was a good idea.
your video isn't half-bad made me laugh a couple times.
don't foreget women that this movie is directed by a man!~
[QUOTE=TheCactusman;49898397]Because it's a reboot, not a sequel.[/QUOTE]
the way they presented it with the 30 years ago and the shot of the firehouse made it seem like more of a sequel than a reboot
[QUOTE=TheCactusman;49898397]Because it's a reboot, not a sequel.[/QUOTE]
Which is confusing because the trailer starts off with "30 years ago, Ghostbusters happened"
While I agree that it's completely confusing, they're just pandering to fans of the franchise with that bit at the start.
The CGI is fine..get the feeling you take a shot at it merely because its CGI
Ghosts look pretty damn good
Agree with everything else though..they are pretty much the only good thing in the whole film
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
