Active Member
Check out the Mr. Plinkett Star Wars prequels reviews. They are their most well known & popular videos. It's the guy Mike playing a character & ripping on the films comically. The reviews aren't entirely serious, there's a lot of nitpicking but there is some legitimate critiquing in them. Those reviews I think are the funniest thing they've done.
Active Member
those reviews are epic in scale. impressive stuff. And @neorev , thats how it works with them. I was you once.
Unintelligible Whispering
It's a solid 7/10. I'd call it good, but nowhere near as good as the original, the humor falls flat in a lot of places and it could have used more of a sinister buildup. And the villain sucked. But I enjoyed the cast immensely, I'm glad we went with new faces rather than recasting the original four.
Active Member
it was good, not as good as the original but on a par or better than the second one. should have been scarier (nothing legitimately creepy in the whole film) and would have been nice to align it with the original series continuity, but it was fine on the whole
as for the online war, milos yiannopolous picked a side and that is basically nature's way of telling you that no sane people are involved
God is an American
I think Sony are betting on the long game, here. Old people and impossible-to-please thirtysomething idiots carp and moan about the movie and stay home while younger audiences flock to it. So, yeah, a huge-budget sequel is unlikely in the next year but they'll make bank on other tie-ins and merchandising for decades.Originally Posted by neorev
Was this my favourite movie of the year? No, not even close, but it was enjoyable and funny. Those are pretty much my only criteria for comedies so yeah, success in my book.
Throbbing Member
Guess there's going to be an all-female Oceans 11 reboot coming now too?! What a terrible fucking mess.
Active Member
Fucking hell who gives a fuck, if they really have to reboot shit at least let them twist it a bit and attempt to make it interesting. I don't care if they genderbend it all if they manage to make it good in the process. Its not like the fact that Ghostbusters' cast was male was meaningful in any way.
God is an American
Okay, I was sick of the trolling around this movie before, but Leslie Jones has had to endure the absolute worst. Now they've doxxed her, leaked private photos and personal information on her own website. It's fucking anti-Black terrorism. This world is fucking putrid. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/25/mo...te-hacked.html
Active Member
There is absolutely no reason to do something like this to anyone, especially her. Absolutely evil people in this world.
Active Member
Honest trailer:
http://screenrant.com/ghostbusters-2...FB-P&view=list
Bored
I don't care about the naysayers, I still love it. It's not as bad as haters made it to be.
Active Member
Not at all. It was a decent, fun movie.
Active Member
Unfortunately for me and a lot of movie goers. The promotion of it was severely flawed. It just didn't pique my interest whatsoever. The funny thing is though that's of course not really what makes a good film. For instance, if this film was one of two being shown and the other one was Pixels, based on the trailers alone, I would have gone to see Pixels, and I'd probably wind up kicking myself.
Active Member
My girl and I watched the extended edition the other day, we both hated it. Unfunny and dragged on.
Throbbing Member
I still don't quite understand who at Sony thought this was a good idea? The all female cast is a gimmick at best. Who was this aimed for? Feminists/progressives? That's really niche market to target your 150 million budget movie. Plus women are far less interested in sci-fi/fantasy genre than men, so to pick all female cast in this particular movie is really mind boggling to me.
Active Member
I thought this was really bad, but I love Kate McKinnon. I think she's one of the best actor/comedians out there.
Active Member
It's a shame because I love a lot of other work from everyone involved, but this was just a terrible movie. I'm a huge Freaks & Geeks fan, thought Bridemaids was hysterical, and even enjoyed Spy. Whoever thought Ghostbusters needed to be some big female empowering statement is an even bigger idiot. Sure, women deserve empowerment, I'm all for it. But Ghostbusters? Plus this was the best execution you could muster?
This movie was very anti-male. Every male character was either a blithering idiot or an evil a-hole. And let's not forget how they defeat the final boss. Plus it didn't help that maybe 20-25% of the jokes landed. Mostly just a chuckle here and there. Even a terrible movie has an "oh, look what's on TV, I'll just leave it on" rewatchability, but not this one. This movie just dragged on and on.
I believe the anti-women/sexist/racist hype was drummed up because Sony knew they had another failure on their hands and needed something to help push more ticket sales. Sure, there are racist/sexist trolls out there, but I think the hate for this movie was more like 25% sexists/racists versus 75% normal moviegoers that just didn't like this movie.
If anyone read the Sony e-mails from the hack (that was not done by North Korea), you will see that Sony is a volatile company desperate for a hit franchise. And this movie sure isn't the first bad decision Sony has ever made. Just like how they hyped up the North Korea nonsense to help The Interview. Another movie that would have bombed with its Christmas release date. So drum up some controversy from an interior hack and make some money selling your property to Netflix.
Sony's biggest signing was a multiple movie deal with Adam Sandler lol. They failed at Spiderman (twice) and had to sell the rights over to Marvel for a piece of the pie because they were desperate for cash. Let's not forget how they ruined the Millennium series by releasing the very un-Christmas-y Girl With A Dragon Tattoo around Christmas time. Thus skipping the other two stories and going with a prequel story instead because those involved with the first movie are now too expensive for them to take another chance. Oh, releasing a Steve Jobs movie after we already got a Steve Jobs movie. Even better, they were so desperate that they were trying to crossover two of their popular properties: 21 Jump Street and Men In Black. Yup, that his not a lie.
You should read some of the e-mails talking shit about Angelina Jolie and how executives were trying to blame and throw each other under the bus because of their failures. Once you get the bigger picture, you see why the anti-women hype machine rolled in.
Last edited by neorev; 10-19-2016 at 02:14 PM.
she/her/hers
flip that around and now you know how women feel 90% of the time they watch something where every woman is portrayed as either a) a sex object or b) evil (or both). it's rampant in film & TV and has been for years because of the misogyny embedded in our society.
Active Member
Yes, true, but original Ghostbusters wasn't any of these. Actually many of the female characters in Ghostbusters were quite strong and didn't fall into the usual misogynistic crap. Which goes back to my statement that this was the wrong property to try and make a feminist statement with.
Stubby Member
Yeah, it certainly wasn't. There wasn't anything particularly feminist or "anti-male" about this movie at all -- and no, having an all female cast wouldn't make it so. I understand some of the media's knee-jerk reaction to label all of the film's detractors as sexist was ridiculous, but swinging to the opposite end of the pendulum and declaring this film "anti-male" borders on MGTOW whimpering.
Unintelligible Whispering
I'd only postulate that the secretary character who's name I'm forgetting is as much of a blithering idiot as Derek Zoolander.
And we should never use Derek Zoolander as a lens to gauge our perception of men.
(He's too unrealistically perfect)
Only By Night
This Cannot Continue
...why? I mean i know 'why' Sony wants a big blockbuster that isn't tied to anyone else (like Spidey) even though they now have the very good Spidy-verse and the better then it had any right to be Junmnji!
I don't think Ghostbusters is a big enough 'brand' anymore, hell there's only been one really good one, the first. They tried to recapture the magic with the 2nd and the reboot but neither really worked despite great comedic casts!
I'd have more fair in the 'animated' film they are also making (if they can capture what made Spidey-verse so great they'd be onto a winner!) but a 3rd...i think that ship sailed a LONG time ago.
Active Member
Zero faith in this.
Only By Night
I'm all for it if the writers are somewhat decent. I happen like the second film as well and feel it doesn't deserve the hate it really gets. I'll take anything somewhat true to the original universe than what we got 3 years ago. The animated I'm all for, but if they can somewhat get this right, I don't mind.
Administrator
I tend to like Jason Reitman's films so that's a plus for me. Do we need another Ghostbusters? I dunno. As long as it looks good. I guess my main concern is that they avoid trying to make a Stranger Things knock-off since the word is that the new Ghostbusters will be teenagers.
I really would prefer that Sony avoids comparing this to the 2016 film in any way. We've had those conversations and beat a lot of dead horses there. I would also prefer that the new Ghostbusters reflect today's demographics and avoid casting a majority of white dudes.
Only By Night
Active Member
Already looks better than the 2016 film, even with nothing in it.
Not that I feel we really need this at all, but so far I suppose I can’t really say they’re starting off on the wrong foot.
This Cannot Continue
Well at least they didn't mess up the first teaser like they did with the reboot (someone in charge is actually paying attention to what they are doing) I'm still not sure we really need this, but it's happening regardless of what i think so hopefully they make a good film.
With regard to casting, maybe they'll go the Extreme Ghostbusters route, or maybe they'll do that for the animated offering....anyone even remember Extreme Ghostbusters?!?! Casting will be vital for this, they can't just go for funny people and except them to just do their thing to carry the movie.
24.24.2.2866
I'll wait to see more before i get too excited, why exactly are the original actors (minus Ramis RIP) not interested in returning anyways? Is it a case of been there, done that, too old? I remember when GB3 was originally trying to get off the ground i could recall Bill Murray always being a hold out, then of course Ramis sadly passed away. At least we have that video game they did where they all reprised their roles.
Not sure I'm all that interested in Tweenbusters if that's how it's going to go down but we'll see what they do with it.
I don't think I'll ever bother with that 2016 film though, from the trailers it came across like a movie from the latter half of Eddie Murphy's film career.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote