Why do some of the effects from 2016 goes over the border?
[QUOTE=Devil Traitor;52553156]Why do some of the effects from 2016 goes over the border?[/QUOTE]
It's in THREEEE DEEEEE
because they had to jump on all the bandwagons
This is actually one of the better reviews on Ghostbusters. Most people wouldn't go beyond saying "garbage cast, garbage writing, garbage plot" but Plinkett actually admitted that there was nothing wrong with the cast, just that the writing and direction relied solely on their improv unlike the first ghostbusters where the jokes were actually crafted and funny.
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;52553171]This is actually one of the better reviews on Ghostbusters. Most people wouldn't go beyond saying "garbage cast, garbage writing, garbage plot" but Plinkett actually admitted that there was nothing wrong with the cast, just that the writing and direction relied solely on their improv unlike the first ghostbusters where the jokes were actually crafted and funny.[/QUOTE]
Unless I misunderstood that part he straight up said that the actors actively made the film worse because their domain of predilection (improv comedy) barely intersects with the actual type of comedy presented in Ghostbusters.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52553180]Unless I misunderstood that part he straight up said that the actors actively made the film worse because their domain of predilection (improv comedy) barely intersects with the actual type of comedy presented in Ghostbusters.[/QUOTE]
Bad improv in a movie is never the actor's fault. Crazy as that may sound, the director's job is to direct. If the actors are talking too much then the director needs to tell them to cut down on the chatter and stick to the script.
In the commentary track that plinkett showed, the actors said that they did [B]5 HOURS OF IMPROV[/B] and that the director would do these 40 minute one shot improv sessions for scenes that would last for less than 5 minutes.
I find his criticisms over Bill Murray and praise for Paul Feig near the end to be really unfair tbh - he's certainly much, much more tolerable as a person than Feig who was ego incarnate and [URL="http://www.pajiba.com/web_culture/director-paul-feig-goes-off-on-the-ghostbusters-haters-on-twitter.php"]seriously did some childish shit[/URL] before the film was even released.
Wasn't he also threatened with legal action like the rest of the old cast so they wouldn't say bad things about the film? I wouldn't really blame Bill's actions in this whole thing if that were the case.
I think the Bill Murray part at the end was just a joke.
Murray's done an excellent job throughout his life of being as disconnected from Hollywood as humanly possible for an actor of his fame which goes to show the kind of legal bullshit they had to pull to get him onboard on that abortion of a project.
plinkett reviews with behind the scenes footage are always the best
New Mr. Plinkett and Danial from SL. Truly a wonderful day!
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;52553198]Bad improv in a movie is never the actor's fault. Crazy as that may sound, the director's job is to direct. If the actors are talking too much then the director needs to tell them to cut down on the chatter and stick to the script.
In the commentary track that plinkett showed, the actors said that they did [B]5 HOURS OF IMPROV[/B] and that the director would do these 40 minute one shot improv sessions for scenes that would last for less than 5 minutes.[/QUOTE]
5 hours of nothing but shit improv, with actors that aren't that bad at being improv comedians, and none of it was good.
Feig is a sad, sad man
[QUOTE=J!NX;52553458]5 hours of nothing but shit improv, with actors that aren't that bad at being improv comedians, and none of it was good.
Feig is a sad, sad man[/QUOTE]
To be entirely fair, Paul Feig has a pretty good reputation as Plinkett mentioned.
[url]https://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/paul_feig/[/url]
Spy was a suprisingly good movie.
Freaks and Geeks is one of the best comedies ever.
I don't understand how this movie ended up so garbage.
[QUOTE=Devil Traitor;52553156]Why do some of the effects from 2016 goes over the border?[/QUOTE]
It's worse than that. In some shots you can see someone's necklace cross the letterboxing too. It wasn't bad comp, they went out of their way to roto really complicated bullshit like a necklace for an effect that does nothing but detract from the film.
Also i'm suprised they didn't touch on sony straight up blackmailing/extorting bill murray into being in the film, and the twitter spiels the director and a few of the cast went on. Because this wasn't just a colossal exercise in incompetence, just like the director is more than a limp wristed moron who can't say "no". There's an undertone of active malevolence hanging around the whole production which really would've added a whole other dimension to the review.
The thing about product placement needing to be cleared with the company isn't exactly true. The use of the Cornetto in Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz was never cleared with the company until World's End, when the movies were literally named and released as "the Cornetto trilogy".
[QUOTE=Scot;52554468]The thing about product placement needing to be cleared with the company isn't exactly true. The use of the Cornetto in Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz was never cleared with the company until World's End, when the movies were literally named and released as "the Cornetto trilogy".[/QUOTE]
Mind you, those are British movies, and a British-Dutch icecream brand. Folks here in Europe tend to be a liiittle less crazy about that sort of stuff.
[QUOTE=Scot;52554468]The thing about product placement needing to be cleared with the company isn't exactly true. The use of the Cornetto in Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz was never cleared with the company until World's End, when the movies were literally named and released as "the Cornetto trilogy".[/QUOTE]
You are at least doing something right when you made me root for whenever the Cornetto would actually appear on screen
[QUOTE=Devil Traitor;52553156]Why do some of the effects from 2016 goes over the border?[/QUOTE]
I hate this trend in films. I first noticed it watching Life of Pi; there's exactly [i]one[/i] scene where a fish goes out from the letterboxing and it just left me confused more than anything. It just distracts and detracts from the movie.
I like how the old-ass special effects for the demon dogs from 1984 look way better than all of the 2016 CGI.
[QUOTE=Hatley;52555305]I like how the old-ass special effects for the demon dogs from 1984 look way better than all of the 2016 CGI.[/QUOTE]
eh, yes and no. the dogs look great but the compositing of it running about in the apartments and all looks really bad now. like i dont dislike it but if youre gonna compare it to modern tech then it does look really off. but with the technology at the time in mind it looks great.
[QUOTE=LeonS;52555309]eh, yes and no. the dogs look great but the compositing of it running about in the apartments and all looks really bad now. like i dont dislike it but if youre gonna compare it to modern tech then it does look really off. but with the technology at the time in mind it looks great.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, there is some really not great comping in the original. Though, I think Ghostbusters 2's effects still hold up.
its like, Alien 3 is a great movie and the alien itself looks great. but the compositing when its running around and all? just terrible. awful.
6 minutes in made me giggle. "Remember crowdsurfing?"
Yes, all the time. In fact, the last gig I was at just 2 weeks ago, there were so many that they had to put someone from security in the crowd to try and stop them.
So is Mike the voice of Plinkett but Rich is playing him in videos?
[QUOTE=General;52555683]So is Mike the voice of Plinkett but Rich is playing him in videos?[/QUOTE]
No? Mr Plinkett plays himself in both.
Rich was the original Plinkett, but Mike has played him since the prequel reviews, if not earlier.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
