[timeware]

Sorry man. I don't mind a bit of raunchy humor but ive been to a concentration camp. I find it insulting that anyone would dress up as Hitler much less joke about it.

[Alphagaia]

So, one more time: what do you mean by Feig and that girl from FF are friends? Do they see each other in real life, do they follow each other on Twitter or did Feig just retweet a thing he happened to agree with? How far does this so called friendship go?

[timeware]

Feig is good friends with Judd Appatow. Through Judd he knows of her, i do not know if he has met her in real life but they travel with the same crowd so it is probably likely they've met. I don't know how to check twitter to see if he follows Feminist Frequency or Anita's twitter page itself.

I wouldn't necessarily call this a retweet. https://twitter.com/paulfeig/status/713 ... 64?lang=en when he's asking for support. There are some choice comments under the tweet.

[Sav C]

Sorry man. I don't mind a bit of raunchy humor but ive been to a concentration camp. I find it insulting that anyone would dress up as Hitler much less joke about it.

I'm sorry. But imagine how Hitler would've felt about a Jewish woman dressing up and mocking him. I think that is just Sarah Silverman's way of expressing how much she disapproves of that awful man. I don't think she meant any disrespect to the victims.

When something so terrible, so unfathomable happens it is hard to know how to respond. I think intention behind the response is just as important as the response itself.

But I feel this discussion is probably best suited for another time and place.

[Alphagaia]

Feig is good friends with Judd Appatow. Through Judd he knows of her, i do not know if he has met her in real life but they travel with the same crowd so it is probably likely they've met. I don't know how to check twitter to see if he follows Feminist Frequency or Anita's twitter page itself.

I wouldn't necessarily call this a retweet. https://twitter.com/paulfeig/status/713 ... 64?lang=en when he's asking for support. There are some choice comments under the tweet.

You see, my problem with your evidence is this: you use the word friends, but when asked you double back and admit Feig and Anita might only know of each other through a mutual friend.

You say Feig endorses FF campaigns, but it was just one tweet about one campaign.

This makes me want to question any conclusion you make as you falsify facts to say stuff like Anita and Feigs are friends, when in truth you don't even know if they follow each other on Twitter.

If you want to make claims do some good research, and don't warp the facts. That's twice I've seen you do that now.

It makes want to question all the other stuff you mention as well. How good a friend is Judd Apow to Feig? I know Feig and Judd did Freaks and Geeks but is that it? Is their friendship just based on a working relationship? Is there more to it? How does Judd know Anita?

What does travel within the same crowd mean? We are all GBfans but I have not seen anyone of you in real life. Do I travel within the same crowd? Do I agree with everythingh the other GBfans say?

There is probably some truth in some bits of your claims, but your warping and bold claims make it very hard to take you seriously.

Go investigate: give me more then a few guys on his tweet demonised Anita for a thing. Look if it's actually true. Present substantial proof. Build your case and don't exaggerate your facts...

[HunterCC]

Well, a lot of fans were indeed acting like babies.

I'm reminded of the time I worked at a summer camp and a kid had misbehaved, so he wasn't allowed to go to the playground. The kid starting crying about his punishment. The counselors tried to explain, "Well it was because you were being mean to the other kids." But the kid just kept bawling, "I didn't get to go to the playground!!!" He wasn't able to make the connection between his actions and the result. Now, he had only been a human being for a mere 6 years, so his behavior was somewhat understandable, lol. But yeah, adults don't have that excuse.

Please prove the people making misogynist comments were representative of ghostbusters fans, and not the usual internet trolls. On the anti-GB16 side , videos and articles were made with people going out of their way to excuse even praise the actresses while roasting the movie, to avoid saying anything that could plausibly be called misogynist. On the pro-side people put their names behind bullying SJW misandrist crap, and thus sunk to the level of the internet trolls they were arguing against. (Links still above)

Your example above fits the controversy perfectly. "Male geeks are such misogynist childish man babies!!!!!!!!! Wait, wait a minute guys, why don't you want to see our movie???? Whyyyyyyyyy?????? Gosh they are such man-babies!!!!!!!!!!"

Because they weren't funny.

And you know because you've seen the movie?

Lol, fair point. But refutable. I don't think you need to have seen Gigli, Catwoman, or Gods Of Egypt to know they are bad movies. Reviews and peoples comments and box office are just too consistently bad to not be believed.

Seems like GB16 has been talked about more than any other movie in 2016. And it appears to be not good, but closer to the middle than aforementioned movies. Throwing out the probably biased reviews, especially the really insulting ones both ways, it still looks like this movie feedback is divided between people saying it's bad not terrible, and people saying it's not good but not worth getting worked up over as far as its quality. In other words, a genuine flop.

The box office and audience polls agree.

Don't substitute that for your own opinion. Keep it in perspective. Really, we do just keep going back and forth on the same points here.

.

I'm not substituting my own opinion with that, I'm trying to be as objective as possible in this situaton. Subjectively there a few movies: Star trek II, Generations,GB89, Groundhog day, would be ranked a lot higher by the general public, and the SW prequels, every Jurassic Park movie after the original, etc. ranked lower if I had my way. But I can definitively only say what I like, not what the public thinks. And when enough of the public says something about a movie, to be honest I gotta question whether my feelings on a movie have to do with something other than quality (fandom, nostalgia, my particular taste, etc). It doesn't invalidate my feelings, it just means I like some bad movies (Happy Gilmore, Army Of Darkness), and simarily dislike others.

If you're going to keep proper perspective on this Juror, you gotta admit than its OK to like a bad movie or dislike a good one, and if enough people disagree with you about a movie, maybe they're not wrong about the movie quality itself, maybe it's you to some degree.

Anyways, that's one thing I like about box office, even though its not the end all be all judge of a movie. It's cold hard numbers, not just opinion statements that can be nuanced various ways, and it's a good anonymous poll on what people REALLY think. Like the recent US presidential election. Polls can say one thing but the actual voting, like box office, can show how people actually feel about things.

You know, the geeks that liked all those female-led movies in recent years

Not that simple. There are a lot of Star wars fans who are just as hostile toward Rey and Jyn because they think women are taking over their franchise. It's just that the trailers for those movies were able to hype the general public up, so the movies did well (plus, again, Star Wars is too big to fail). That's really the only crime ATC committed was having an underwhelming trailer.

It really feels like we're just making the same exact points back and forth, over and over. If you want to talk about something else, I'm game!

Strongly disagree. If trailers mattered that much, Prometheus and Godzilla 1998 would have been hits. And the SW prequels would have been critical as well as financial champions. And again, kinda hard for others to include actual misogyny on geeks part, as one of the ressons GB16 failed, when other female-led movies got plenty of geek support.

The crimes of GB16 include: It wasn't good. The film makers ran an incendiary divisive misandrist market campaign. I think there may also be some karmic justice that a movie that literally shoots the franchise symbol in the crotch ultimately fails, lol.

I've tried to present different evidence and aspects in our threads. Drop or bring up what you want, hope we still keep talking whether GB16 or whatever.

[JurorNo.2]

Oh...there will be karmic justice for this movie. You can count on that.

(Yes we can keep talking. We disagree but you're not rude to me about it.)

[Kingpin]

Friends entail there is a direct link between Feig, Anita, and Appatow which gives my theory legs that Paul used her group to go after fans. He gets to play the phony civil rights leader while having other people do his dirty work.

You're still drawing imaginary lines across the map. They may be friends/acquaintances but it isn't definitive proof for your theory that there's this grand orchestration going on behind the scenes.

She got banned? Somehow I missed that.

We don't make a habit of announcing when folks were banned, however "Kylie" was banned because they were a previously-banned member who'd returned under a second account.

Was Richardless also banned? I noticed he hasn't been posting lately.

Far as I can tell his account is still active, but for whatever reason he hasn't logged in since around the 10th of December.

[Sav C]

She got banned? Somehow I missed that.

We don't make a habit of announcing when folks were banned, however "Kylie" was banned because they were a previously-banned member who'd returned under a second account.

Happy New Year Kingpin! That's nice you keep it quiet. My family has a second account on here, I believe it was Slimer2011, and I'd be using it if I had the password.

[timeware]

You're still drawing imaginary lines across the map. They may be friends/acquaintances but it isn't definitive proof for your theory that there's this grand orchestration going on behind the scenes.

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/201 ... al-history

If Judd first met Paul in the mid 80's I'd say that's a long time friendship. They are both now self proclaimed feminists. Judd went after the angry video game nerd and Paul is tweeting Anita's kick starter campaign. I cant be the only one seeing a correlation here? Feminist Frequency had gone after James as well.

[Kingpin]

If Judd first met Paul in the mid 80's I'd say that's a long time friendship. They are both now self proclaimed feminists.

That they are, and that they may be, it doesn't mean anything more than them sharing a similar view in politics, not that anything was orchestrated with Feminist Frequency. It's similar to suggesting Stallone and Schwarzenegger have conspired to perpetuate the male masculine figure because the two of them are friends and have made multiple action films together.

The biggest issue I probably have with your theory is your unwillingness to consider the possibility it might actually be wrong.

[Alphagaia]

We don't make a habit of announcing when folks were banned, however "Kylie" was banned because they were a previously-banned member who'd returned under a second account.

I'm used to Fora having a seperate thread where they mention the people banned and why, where only mods can post in. I did not know you guys did not do that, is there a reason why not? Imo, it helps understanding why some people vanish out if the blue. Sorry if I brought it up, if it's preferable to just ignore!

[timeware]

That they are, and that they may be, it doesn't mean anything more than them sharing a similar view in politics, not that anything was orchestrated with Feminist Frequency. It's similar to suggesting Stallone and Schwarzenegger have conspired to perpetuate the male masculine figure because the two of them are friends and have made multiple action films together.

The biggest issue I probably have with your theory is your unwillingness to consider the possibility it might actually be wrong.

I did mention way back I was willing to admit I was wrong and I have before. I was willing to put the theory to bed. FF is not a group we want representing this franchise even if they are acting alone.

I was able to bring up info on how deep Feig's and Judd's friendship as Alpha had requested.

I'm now trying to find more evidence of Anita's association with Judd but it is getting harder because so many of the original articles are now gone. I cant just look at a timeline and bring them up. If Judd or FF hadn't gone after AVGN I probably would have dropped this.

[JurorNo.2]

FF is not a group we want representing this franchise

Who thinks that they do?

Right now, this franchise is more closely associated with fanboy whining (not referring to you). Even more unflattering!

I'm now trying to find more evidence of Anita's association with Judd

Not that it's any of my business, but I'm not sure why this is preoccupying your attention.

[timeware]

Not that it's any of my business, but I'm not sure why this is preoccupying your attention.

It's interesting. There is alot of sketchy information about the owner of FF. They even went as far as attacking a person who had accused them of stealing her fan art for use in one of her videos. There's a lot of accusations of her being a fraud due to not completing kick starter campaigns.

A lot of this money that was donated to their cause could have been used to fund something like breast cancer research. Which, if Paul had tweeted something to that extent instead of Anita i would have considered him a class act.

Paul should have vetted before he asked people to donate to this woman. FF amped up their attacks almost on an indirect cue when Judd had made the saliva joke about AVGN. Like I mentioned I would like to be able to establish a timeline to see if FF amped up their blogs before or after Paul had tweeted for people to support them.

His silence on the issue of Feminist Frequency doesn't sit right with me.

[JurorNo.2]

It's interesting. There is alot of sketchy information about the owner of FF. They even went as far as attacking a person who had accused them of stealing her fan art for use in one of her videos. There's a lot of accusations of her being a fraud due to not completing kick starter campaigns.

OK well I won't be a hypocrite, I too have found some of those videos critiquing FF interesting to watch. I don't like any group blaming video games or movies or music or any kind of media for violence or sexism in society. As for the fraud thing, well, who knows. Maybe they got tired of the backlash, I can't blame them for that. Or they could have just been incompetent, like maybe poorly delegated the money they received, or maybe didn't realize they needed more than they received. That kind of thing can happen with kick starters. Let the buyer beware. If adults want to give them money, that's their choice and right. And while any donation is welcome, it's not like breast cancer won't be cured tomorrow because some people sent money to FF instead. It's just not that big a deal to me. I guess I'm just not all that sympathetic to the bitter gamers. Gamergate was more frightening to me than inspiring. I'd say the same thing to both Anita and gamers: There are more important things in life.

Anyway, a great many directors and actors support things you probably don't like. There was no reason for ATC to be singled out.

[Kingpin]

I did not know you guys did not do that, is there a reason why not?

I think we used to announce it once upon a time (that or I'm getting confused with when I was a mod on Ghostbusters HQ). If we did do it once, but stopped, it might've been to give the banned member's supporters less ammunition. Alternately, not to give them any more attention than they deserved.

[HunterCC]

Oh...there will be karmic justice for this movie. You can count on that.

(Yes we can keep talking. We disagree but you're not rude to me about it.)

I think karmic justice was the movie flopping. But another possibility is that next gender-swapped or nearly wholely female led movie , the movie makers aren't inflammatory, and the movie is good and sells. With the lesson being : don't be like GB16.

On another note, just briefly talking about other movies has been fun lately: Collateral Beauty is a bad movie, but a good tear-jerker and excuse to see Will Smith if you're a fan. It's worth seeing if those reasons work for you.

[JurorNo.2]

I think karmic justice was the movie flopping.

So what did Shawshank Redemption do to deserve to flop?

With the lesson being : don't be like GB16.

Well we'll see what the Razzies have to say first. The lesson of the year might be: don't be like BvS or ID4.

Collateral Beauty is a bad movie, but a good tear-jerker and excuse to see Will Smith if you're a fan. It's worth seeing if those reasons work for you.

Yeah this one's gotten quite a weird reaction. How is it both bad and yet emotionally successful?

[pferreira1983]

This makes me want to question any conclusion you make as you falsify facts to say stuff like Anita and Feigs are friends, when in truth you don't even know if they follow each other on Twitter.

If they speak to each other on Twitter I think we can assume they're friends right?

If you want to make claims do some good research, and don't warp the facts. That's twice I've seen you do that now. Go investigate: give me more then a few guys on his tweet demonised Anita for a thing. Look if it's actually true. Present substantial proof. Build your case and don't exaggerate your facts...

He hasn't exaggerated anything. He's seen the evidence presented on the Internet and taken it as you have. I think his case against Feig isn't any more shaky than your case for him.

You're still drawing imaginary lines across the map. They may be friends/acquaintances but it isn't definitive proof for your theory that there's this grand orchestration going on behind the scenes.

I have my doubts as well although there is some truth they are working together, let me explain. Both Feig and Sarkeesian are feminists, we know that as fact. I want to be proven wrong but I doubt Sarkeesian had any involvement in Answer The Call however I'm pretty certain she's been suing the film as a platform to promote her politics. Here's what I think happened: Feig decided to take the Ghostbusters film as long as the four leads were females. In the wake of the controversial announcement he got support from feminists everything including Sarkeesian who wanted the film to succeed for their own ends. Feig and Sarkeesian become aware of each other at this point and follow each other on Twitter. Sarkeesian shows special interest in the movie further than wanting a good Ghostbusters film. Feig a feminist supports that because while his feminist values may be different he isn't going to say no to any feminist. In the meantime Sarkeesian promotes the film and launches her hate followers against normal fans. Film comes out, things start to die down but Sarkeesian congratulates Feig on the movie, consoling him for any criticises he's been getting just like she did with Joss Whedon. This is my understanding of what happened.

Right now, this franchise is more closely associated with fanboy whining (not referring to you).

I have to disagree judging by evidence I've seen on mainstream media sites. You think FF wouldn't promote the hell out of the new movie?

I suggest you read Christopher Hitchens article literally entitled "Why Women Aren't Funny" which this is a beat by beat parody of, which you'd know if you read the intro to Feigs article. You totally misunderstood what the satire here was.

Feig's article wasn't satire, he genuinely believes that he says because he;s a feminist. It seems I understand the man more than you do and unlike you I'm not a fan.

How are the pro rebooters on this site egging the other side on, though?

It's probably their inability to see evidence right in front of them or read between the lines.

This is about me investigating a hollywood director who either created, or latched onto this controversy to play the role of a civil rights leader. The closer I get to the truth about Paul people start freaking out. You just accused me of being a hater for doing so.

You do realise Alpha is a fan of Paul Feig? Nothing you say will change his mind.

Had I been in his shoes however, I would've just reviewed it like any other film he had done, rather than make a big thing about not reviewing it.

He refused to review the movie because like us the franchise means a lot to him. Why should he review something he doesn't care for or something that's really inadequate towards the franchise? He did the right thing, he warned people he wasn't going to review the movie and gave valid reasons why. Some of his fans then leaped at him because they wanted him to go AVGN on the reboot film while feminists went after him to review the movie as though they felt they had control of him, entitlement. They don't own him but they didn't get what they wanted so they shamed him by calling him a misogynist.

You are so preoccupied with how Sony handled the trolling, you're barely acknowledging the trolling at all. In fact you're kinda using fans as a shield for the trolls, saying "Oh hey they attacked ALL of us." No. They attacked trolls, period.

You highlight the actual problem here: Sony didn't exactly go out of their way to differentiate between the good geeks and the bad geeks did they? I mean maybe they couldn't have cared less but whatever their intention they more or less lumped all people who disliked the new movie in all together. The mainstream media regurgitated all that and soon you get news sites having a go at every fan, not the Internet trolls specifically. A lot of those sites also seem to have a feminist slant as well. This leads me onto my next point.

You guys wonder why we continue to complain about the reboot movie after it's been and gone. The same criticism could be levelled at pro-reboot media sites as well. So far since the film came out on blu-ray we've had various articles with titles along the lines of "The Trolls Lose, the New Ghostbusters Movie is Better Than You Think" or "Why the New Ghostbusters Movie is Important". It's real clickbait articles and I've seen links posted in the news page on the main page of this site. If it's only people like me that are angry why are pro-reboot supporters still writing articles with childish titles like the above when they've apparently won? It isn't one sided at all Juror.

What Leslie Jones does on her twitter, isn't that really her own business? She did not go solely on twitter to promote a new GB movie, if she wants to live tweet during political debates, sport events or whatever she can do so without tying it to the movie she is currently in, right?

Alpha but Jones dug a hole for herself. She's a actress involved with a movie and she ran to Twitter every time someone said they didn't like the movie. She swore and complained many times. What the Internet trolls did was bad but she didn't help things. She certainly didn't by taking nude pics of herself. Common sense she shouldn't have done that.

Not that simple. There are a lot of Star wars fans who are just as hostile toward Rey and Jyn because they think women are taking over their franchise.

I haven't heard anyone complain about Jyn. Why? Well because she's a well written and well acted character. My only concern is Disney pushing so hard for 'strong female characters' they end up relying on that to get people interested in their politics rather than their movies. It doesn't help when people like Emma Watson decide to use their feminist control over a movie either.

I have no idea who Sarah Silverman is and what she did. Wiki does not help? What is the problem there?

Sarah Silverman acts like a complete idiot. She does this to be funny but mainly to get attention. Want to get attention? Be as loud and as rude as possible!

Unrelated: The dick shooting was already happening in GB2 , guys! Witness 5 minutes of it right here! (BTW I had this game when I was a kid and it was AWESOME!)

Dude seriously are you spending your free time googling people being shot in the dick in movies and video games? I know you want to prove a point but...

Parents Groups would freak if they knew I had seen her stand up, but oh well, most teens my age have seen worse.

I guess it depends on your type of humour. Personally Parent Groups would be right about her not just because she makes racist jokes but because she's committed a worse crime...she's not funny!

And this video right here is why I no longer watch Conan.

Oh Sarah...why...why...

[Kingpin]

He refused to review the movie because like us the franchise means a lot to him. Why should he review something he doesn't care for or something that's really inadequate towards the franchise?

1) Because a big part of his whole shtick, or his internet celebrity is that he reviews geeky things.

2) It would've set a more positive example that someone who wasn't keen on it would still take time to sit down and watch it, giving it a fairer chance than just outright saying "nope, not gonna see it". Not to mention it would provide an informed insight.

while feminists went after him to review the movie as though they felt they had control of him, entitlement. They don't own him but they didn't get what they wanted so they shamed him by calling him a misogynist.

We don't own the Ghostbusters franchise or property, and when some didn't get what they wanted they shamed some of the production, actors and even actors from the classic films by calling them sell-outs.

You guys wonder why we continue to complain about the reboot movie after it's been and gone.

I've kinda given up wondering really, but it has to be pointed out - the more some folks keep complaining about things that now cannot be charged, the more you keep providing ammunition for the people you don't like writing the articles you don't like. It's an unending cycle as long as you keep venting the same old spleens (Also, most of us reboot fans here don't have any control over or even know the article writers, by the way, so there's little we can do to stop them).

It doesn't help when people like Emma Watson decide to use their feminist control over a movie either.

Change the record please, the "feminist conspiracy" stuff is getting boring.

[HunterCC]

I think karmic justice was the movie flopping.

So what did Shawshank Redemption do to deserve to flop?

I don't know. Why did Shawshank Redemption flop? Did it's makers and supporters run a hate campaign against geeks or any other group? And other than flopping, does GB16 have anything in common with Shawshank Redemption? Lol.

IWith the lesson being : don't be like GB16.

Well we'll see what the Razzies have to say first. The lesson of the year might be: don't be like BvS or ID4.

Went to the Razzies forum. GB16 will have plenty of competition there. The Awards are February 25. But I was talking about the standard of having a marketing strategy of insulting the movie's own built-in fanbase.

Collateral Beauty is a bad movie, but a good tear-jerker and excuse to see Will Smith if you're a fan. It's worth seeing if those reasons work for you.

Yeah this one's gotten quite a weird reaction. How is it both bad and yet emotionally successful?

IMO, it's emotionally successful because of the subject matter, and the great job the cast did. It's still bad because the plot and characters are stupid. It's kinda like a "popcorn movie".

[JurorNo.2]

But I was talking about the standard of having a marketing strategy of insulting the movie's own built-in fanbase.

Thankfully the Razzies don't vote on marketing strategies, imagined or otherwise.

IMO, it's emotionally successful because of the subject matter, and the great job the cast did. It's still bad because the plot and characters are stupid. It's kinda like a "popcorn movie".

So a bit light weight but relatable?

[Sav C]

Parents Groups would freak if they knew I had seen her stand up, but oh well, most teens my age have seen worse.

I guess it depends on your type of humour. Personally Parent Groups would be right about her not just because she makes racist jokes but because she's committed a worse crime...she's not funny!

Eh, her stand up has me rolling on the floor with laughter (not literally, that would be weird (even for me)).

[timeware]

Change the record please, the "feminist conspiracy" stuff is getting boring.

I do have to walk back some comments on Judd Apatow's saliva swallowing reference to James Rolf. those were actually originally posted on twitter from Patton Oswalt.

https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status ... 88?lang=en

In regards to the feminist conspiracy a few questions come into mind now that it was revealed Anita and Paul actually know eachother:

Did he tweet the campaign as a payback for FF defending his project, and or his wife? Pauls wife's comments about the Russso bros. project was taken down almost day one. It didn't stop them from pushing out a lot of click bait articles with no information to go on. Lord knows I tried to find any credible info.

Why would a director making millions turn people to a kick starter campaign being run by a woman of questionable practices? Does anyone not remember a man named Bernie Madoff?

Yes buyers beware as always but whether we like it or not Paul is a man of influence and didn't seem to care. He remained silent on his twitter feed after people were pointing this out. Choice words yes, but he could have again made a recommendation to a worthy charity.

His silence is almost similar to Jim Carrey only wanting to comment on positive comments, and butt smooching when he went on his gun control tirade.

Why would Paul not put out a statement saying "I didn't realize this woman's inability to complete projects. Abuse of women is never a good thing my apologies if you gave her money?"

Again Paul's silence on Anita, and his not standing up for women who were hurt by their articles brings his character into question.

[JurorNo.2]

Anita and Paul actually know eachother

Thank you, Senator McCarthy.

And failing to make some online videos is hardly akin to Bernie Madoff.

And anyway, if I were to scrutinize the personal lives of every movie I ever saw, I'd likely never watch another movie again, lol. Movies are not made by saints. I have always known this. Apparently a lot of GB fans learned this for the first time this year and haven't quite gotten over the shock.

[JurorNo.2]

Sony didn't exactly go out of their way to differentiate between the good geeks and the bad geeks did they?

I didn't need that spoon fed to me for it to be obvious.

So far since the film came out on blu-ray we've had various articles with titles along the lines of "The Trolls Lose, the New Ghostbusters Movie is Better Than You Think" or "Why the New Ghostbusters Movie is Important".

Because the hate for this movie was so over the top in the first place. Detractors would have been wiser to just ignore it. Instead they made it into a bizarre, and often mean spirited, crusade.

I haven't heard anyone complain about Jyn. Why? Well because she's a well written and well acted character.

Ehhh...agree to disagree on the writing part. I wouldn't be surprised if the script was literally two pages long.

[Alphagaia]

In regards to the feminist conspiracy a few questions come into mind now that it was revealed Anita and Paul actually know each other

In what way do they know each other? This is still not answered besides one tweet of a project and a 'mutual friend' where you only proved Judd and Feig know each other ? Remember, you used the word friends when describing Feigs and Anita's relationship.

Why would Paul not put out a statement saying "I didn't realize this woman's inability to complete projects. Abuse of women is never a good thing my apologies if you gave her money?"

Inability to complete projects? After looking at some links I see a lot of people referring to the Tropes vs Women in Videogames Kickstarter. So unless I'm missing something else that's project. Not projects.
Imagine my surprise when I looked at her YouTube account to see she did not only finish it, but started a second season?

What's going on here?

[timeware]

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/56 ... s/comments

I really do not like giving Anita any extra clicks or support for her projects. Since you want links here's her kick starter campaign.

It was posted in this forum that Feig and Anita follow each other on twitter. Her inability to complete projects is discussed on her kick starter campaign and multiple sources online.

You need to scroll down the comments page a little.

Chiara Pasquini on March 7, 2014
Hello,
while I love and support this project, it has come to my attention that some of the artwork used in advertising this campaign has been stolen.
The original artist has written to Anita already, but she hasn't responded yet.
First of all, using artwork without permission is wrong and I do not support this in any way.
Secondly, I can already see the FemFreq haters using this has proof of how awful this project is "See, I told you so".
So not only this theft and failure to respone is hurting the original artist, but it is also hurting us supporters as well.
Had I known that this project was using stolen art, I would have not backed it.
Here is a link to the article for those of you who want to see it:
http://victorsopinion.blogspot.be/2014/ ... olery.html
I should point out that the original artist has been extremely polite so far, has tried to contact Anita and has written a very polite open letter - so. please, don't send the artist any hate - she is the offended party, after all, and she is being extremly fair and civil.
You all seem like a bunch of very smart, respectful people, so I'll leave this here for you.
Thank you

http://cowkitty.net/post/78808973663/yo ... r-to-anita

She has remained silent on the issue since 2015. If you post art on Deviantart it is automatically watermarked and copyrighted for the artists protection. Why not simply resolve the issue and move on? All the original artist is asking for is credit for the time they took in producing that image of Princess Daphne.

Most comments accuse her of taking months to complete a video and use her campaign funding so she can fly to conferences and get paid for speeches. She is also using funding she's received to start other projects as well.

[HunterCC]

But I was talking about the standard of having a marketing strategy of insulting the movie's own built-in fanbase.

Thankfully the Razzies don't vote on marketing strategies, imagined or otherwise.

Lol. "Imagined".

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/movie ... -wiig.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-wei ... 91132.html
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/how-gho ... s-hate-it/

And when even the positive critiques are more based on politics, and most of the glowing reviews are from people blogging regularly on gender specific stuff, when other reviews are that it's either mediocre or bad, yeah it's probably Razzie-worthy.

Only thing I see keeping it from getting a Razzie, people there don't want shrill attacks on their character from the movie defenders. Some category like "worst marketing" might be "safe" for them.

IMO, it's emotionally successful because of the subject matter, and the great job the cast did. It's still bad because the plot and characters are stupid. It's kinda like a "popcorn movie".

So a bit light weight but relatable?

Very lightweight in terms of logic and how real people would act in some situations. Just really good emotional performances and subject matter. When watching a movie like Bayformers or Pacific Rim, I think of the phrase "Turn your brain off and enjoy the action." Same kinda applies to this movie, "Turn your brain off and enjoy the...catharsis?" Probably better seeing "Passengers" or taking kids to "Moana" or "Sing" instead, unless tear-jerkers or Will Smith is something you really like.