Discuss the Ghostbusters movie that was released in 2016.
#4894116
While it's unfair to say GB2016 is universally panned, I think it is fair to say the response on the Internet has been..unkind. To put it mildly.
I think an unintended consequence of the reboot was showing how genius Ivan Reitman & company really were when approaching the original films. The difference between them is jarring. While I wont go into listing all the differences between the originals and the reboot, it's pretty clear the biggest difference is tone. I've said it before but the reboot is comedy for comedy sake. The characters know they are in a comedy film. The original is much more subtle--for the most part.

It could be just me & a bias but I've noticed more and more articles popping up over the last couple years about how underrated GB2 really is. There are a few things that could account for this: the audience that grew up with GB2 is getting older and are in a position to write articles about it, Expectations were sky high in '89 and the amount of time that has passed has made the film less about the first film and more about the sequel on it's own terms. Also, GB2 was viewed as one of the all time disappointing sequels, so viewers coming to the film for the first time have lowered expectations. The other major factor is that the reboot has caused some people to re examine the first and second films.
We all can agree(I think) that GB1 is an all time classic. So my question is, has the reboot made you appreciate/ re-examine the original films in ways you perhaps didn't expect? Have you noticed others doing the same thing?
#4894123
I think GB2016 just came out at the wrong time and was negatively hammered to a pulp.

Having rewatched the original movies recently I can say that my opinions of them have not changed. I am still a disappointed with GB2.

What it has made me realize is that how hard it is to make a blockbuster movie. There are so many things that have to fall into place for a movie to do well.

What if there was a different editor or one different actor or a different composer and GB84 could have been a one off.

GB2 has the same actors, directors and writers. These are key positions and you would think that would mean GB2 would be just as good as GB but it is not. I think it is a catch 22. Have the same story as GB84 and fans will hate it. Have a radically different story than GB84 and fans will hate it. There is a fine line between keeping some of the old and having new stuff. I liked the message of GB2 but there is something just not right. The movie has it's moments but overall it didn't work for me.

I would like to see a review by someone who saw GB2016 and was interested enough to watch GB84 and GB89 and get their opinion.
Alphagaia, JurorNo.2, Sav C and 3 others liked this
#4894125
I think GB2016 just came out at the wrong time and was negatively hammered to a pulp.

Having rewatched the original movies recently I can say that my opinions of them have not changed. I am still a disappointed with GB2.

What it has made me realize is that how hard it is to make a blockbuster movie. There are so many things that have to fall into place for a movie to do well.

What if there was a different editor or one different actor or a different composer and GB84 could have been a one off.

GB2 has the same actors, directors and writers. These are key positions and you would think that would mean GB2 would be just as good as GB but it is not. I think it is a catch 22. Have the same story as GB84 and fans will hate it. Have a radically different story than GB84 and fans will hate it. There is a fine line between keeping some of the old and having new stuff. I liked the message of GB2 but there is something just not right. The movie has it's moments but overall it didn't work for me.

I would like to see a review by someone who saw GB2016 and was interested enough to watch GB84 and GB89 and get their opinion.
I would also be interested in seeing a review like that. If anyone comes across something like that, link to it please.
#4894128
Having rewatched the original movies recently I can say that my opinions of them have not changed. I am still a disappointed with GB2.

What it has made me realize is that how hard it is to make a blockbuster movie. There are so many things that have to fall into place for a movie to do well.

What if there was a different editor or one different actor or a different composer and GB84 could have been a one off.

GB2 has the same actors, directors and writers. These are key positions and you would think that would mean GB2 would be just as good as GB but it is not. I think it is a catch 22. Have the same story as GB84 and fans will hate it. Have a radically different story than GB84 and fans will hate it. There is a fine line between keeping some of the old and having new stuff. I liked the message of GB2 but there is something just not right. The movie has it's moments but overall it didn't work for me.
I think audiences expect too much from sequels (not you specifically). Characters exist within the context of one story and can't necessarily be made to fit anywhere else. Plus you just can't recreate that perfect moment again. If you could, well, then it wouldn't be a perfect moment. But there are so many downright cringe worthy sequels out there, we are fortunate GB2 comes as close as it does to recapturing that moment. :)

Did the reboot change the public's perception of the original? Well I can only speak for myself, but for awhile there, I couldn't bring myself to watch GB84 without being reminded of the constant bleats of "Reboot SUCKS! I want Muh Ghostbusters!!! ::cue vomit emoji::" So I can't say I welcomed that change in perception. ;) But ironically, because GB2 is so often ignored by fans, it felt largely removed from all the nonsense. And its message on the dangers of negativity suddenly became ten times more relevant. Now that is a change in perception I can get behind. :)
Chris Brewin, Sav C, SpaceBallz and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4894130
I don't think the reboot itself changed people's perception of the originals, however the reaction to the reboot probably did for some people.

While I liked the reboot a lot, it has given me a deeper appreciation and understanding of the first two films. By doing something different it has made me question just what I love so much about the techniques and styles employed in the originals, and therefore it could be viewed in a sense as a learning tool. I knew what I preferred, now I know why. And that's not an unkind cut to the reboot as I enjoyed it very much.
User avatar
By Kingpin
Moderator
#4894132
I don't believe the reboot has changed how I approach or view the original films. I still love the original, and enjoy it's sequel, but I still view the latter as being a flawed offering.

It's interesting though, as there are circumstances where a sequel I previously thought disappointing has gone up in my estimation in hindsight, Predator 2 seems so much better after watching Aliens Vs Predator, and Die Hard 2 is much more enjoyable than A Good Day to Die Hard. Maybe I would be of a different mind if I hadn't enjoyed the reboot, but I did... and I have to admit I kinda enjoy it more than Ghostbusters II, even though there are things I enjoy and love about it (the river of Slime, the Titanic, Vigo, the montage etc.)
JurorNo.2, Sav C, Alphagaia and 1 others liked this
#4894139
Possibly, although Ghostbusters II had been getting more positive word of mouth for a while prior to the remake coming out. Even Bill Murray (during an interview for his film St. Vincent on David Letterman) said that GB 2 is good follow up to the first movie despite its flaws(comments echoed by both Dan Aykroyd and Ivan Reitman during their interview on the Blu Ray). Also with the original movie getting tons of praise from organizations like the American Film Institute, and making many top ten lists in the entertainment media Ghostbusters has cemented its self as one of the most popular comedy movies. From my perspective, it would really hard for a remake to be as successful as the original given its continued popularity with people.
pferreira1983 liked this
#4894141
I don't believe the reboot has changed how I approach or view the original films. I still love the original, and enjoy it's sequel, but I still view the latter as being a flawed offering.

It's interesting though, as there are circumstances where a sequel I previously thought disappointing has gone up in my estimation in hindsight, Predator 2 seems so much better after watching Aliens Vs Predator, and Die Hard 2 is much more enjoyable than A Good Day to Die Hard. Maybe I would be of a different mind if I hadn't enjoyed the reboot, but I did... and I have to admit I kinda enjoy it more than Ghostbusters II, even though there are things I enjoy and love about it (the river of Slime, the Titanic, Vigo, the montage etc.)
Totally agree on Predator 2 and Die Hard 2. I never thought I would own those movies on blu ray after first seeing them. But hindsight makes you see things differently. John McLain isn't the John McLain we know and love in A Good Day to Die Hard, but in Die Hard 2? He's still that same arrogant bad ass. Plus Jai Courtney as John's son? Holy heck that is awful casting. The guy has no personality. Chris Pratt would've make an excellent son. Ah well...
#4894168
I don't think the reboot itself changed people's perception of the originals, however the reaction to the reboot probably did for some people.
Yeah, my perception of the fanbase changed more then my perception of the movie.

While there are plenty of legitimate complaints to have on the latest movie, and most people left here are reasonable about this, the over the top emotional way it was worded/warped by some of the more tenacious fans for months on end were downright embarrassing. It was very black and white for a long while.
Kingpin, Sav C, GBPaulRivera liked this
#4894172
A lot of pro-reboot fans will complain how the 'haters' feel the reboot ruined or destroyed the original films. That's not the case at all. What the reboot did was taint an otherwise clean slate for the Ghostbusters franchise. We now have one blemish on an otherwise spotless record which was totally unnecessary and could have been avoided.
Totally agree on Predator 2 and Die Hard 2. I never thought I would own those movies on blu ray after first seeing them. But hindsight makes you see things differently. John McLain isn't the John McLain we know and love in A Good Day to Die Hard, but in Die Hard 2? He's still that same arrogant bad ass. Plus Jai Courtney as John's son? Holy heck that is awful casting. The guy has no personality. Chris Pratt would've make an excellent son. Ah well...
To be honest A Good Day to Die Hard makes the fourth movie look quite good in comparison. :-D
Did the reboot change the public's perception of the original? Well I can only speak for myself, but for awhile there, I couldn't bring myself to watch GB84 without being reminded of the constant bleats of "Reboot SUCKS! I want Muh Ghostbusters!!! ::cue vomit emoji::" So I can't say I welcomed that change in perception. ;) But ironically, because GB2 is so often ignored by fans, it felt largely removed from all the nonsense. And its message on the dangers of negativity suddenly became ten times more relevant. Now that is a change in perception I can get behind. :)
So you're saying that if a film got a lot of negativity back when it was first released, that is seen as the underdog it's easier to appreciate it now compared to something that got praise at the time? I agree negativity and cynicism isn't the best way to take in a new film but at times it's called for when Hollywood is acting selfish and mistreating it's fans. If anything it should be a wake up call to Hollywood.
One thing it caused me to appreciate is the effects in the first movies. They looked much better to me than the CGI in the new iteration. Even though you can see that the ghosts are puppets, it just fits better in the universe.
Oh yeah the effects in the first two movies far surpass the awful effects of the reboot.
555-2368 liked this
#4894176
Well it kind of made me think about the specifics of why I loved those first films so much on analyse what made them so special, almost like a movie critic with a new movie, rather than just seeing them as movies Ive just always loved for basically my whole life, and in doing so it really gave me a whole new appreciation for the films and the people who made them.

I didnt hate the new movie by any means, I thought it was an entertaining comedy that has held up under two more viewings. Nothing special or overly memorable, but fun with an enjoyable cast. But the differences between it and the original film really managed to highlight exactly what it was that made the original such a timeless classic. Theres just so much more to the original film, the darker, off-beat tone, the fact that it could almost just as easily have been a horror movie had it not just happened to have been filled with funny people, the fact that the characters take it all completely seriously and as though they were real people in a movie set in the real world, unlike the reboot which had tongue firmly in cheek and where all the characters are in on the joke, the score, the great and endlessly quotable dialog etc. etc.
pferreira1983, Sav C liked this
#4894178
What the reboot did was taint an otherwise clean slate for the Ghostbusters franchise. We now have one blemish on an otherwise spotless record which was totally unnecessary and could have been avoided.
Well we've talked about this. IMO, that's a bit of an overreaction on your part. ;) And ATC is far from a blemish anyway.

And hey, I take responsibility too, I didn't let the haters prevent from enjoying GB84 in the long term, I got over it.
So you're saying that if a film got a lot of negativity back when it was first released, that is seen as the underdog it's easier to appreciate it now compared to something that got praise at the time?
...You'll have to explain that because I don't see where I said that at all. Not even sure what that means.
Hollywood is acting selfish and mistreating it's fans.
Again, you are creating mountains out of molehills, IMO.
User avatar
By Kingpin
Moderator
#4894179
A lot of pro-reboot fans will complain how the 'haters' feel the reboot ruined or destroyed the original films. That's not the case at all.
I've seen fans state in no uncertain terms here and on Facebook that they willingly washed their hands of the whole franchise and community, citing the reboot as the reason. Some were just that absurd in their reaction. It's not really a "complaint" if it's a statement of something that happened.

Speaking of complaints:
That's not the case at all. What the reboot did was taint an otherwise clean slate for the Ghostbusters franchise. We now have one blemish on an otherwise spotless record which was totally unnecessary and could have been avoided.
(Emphasis mine)

The record arguably has more spots than just the reboot. Some would argue that Ghostbusters II, Extreme Ghostbusters, Slimer!, the Junior Ghostbusters (and by extension the later seasons of The Real Ghostbusters) and Sanctum of Slime could easily be proposed as other blemishes in the history of the franchise. Some feelings have changed and matured on those subjects over the years, but the 2016 wasn't the only duff note in the Ghostbusters symphony - there've been more than a few ups and downs since 1984.
JurorNo.2, Alphagaia, Sav C and 2 others liked this
#4894184
But the differences between it and the original film really managed to highlight exactly what it was that made the original such a timeless classic. Theres just so much more to the original film, the darker, off-beat tone, the fact that it could almost just as easily have been a horror movie had it not just happened to have been filled with funny people, the fact that the characters take it all completely seriously and as though they were real people in a movie set in the real world, unlike the reboot which had tongue firmly in cheek and where all the characters are in on the joke, the score, the great and endlessly quotable dialog etc. etc.
I think the humour really let it down.
Well we've talked about this. IMO, that's a bit of an overreaction on your part. ;) And ATC is far from a blemish anyway.
I don't know, I just think it would be easier to accept the movie had it not been such a radical departure, not in terms of the whole gender thing (that's a whole other issue the studio and Feig are guilty of) but the overall design of it. It looks like anything other mediocre movie when I'm sure we could have got something much better.
...You'll have to explain that because I don't see where I said that at all. Not even sure what that means.
You said that you can't watch the original any more without thinking of the controversy of the new movie yet you can easily watch the sequel because it's the underdog. Does that mean you find it easier to like a film that's an underdog than one that is successful?
Again, you are creating mountains out of molehills, IMO.
Without going into long debates about this we'll have to agree to disagree on this. :)
I've seen fans state in no uncertain terms here and on Facebook that they willingly washed their hands of the whole franchise and community, citing the reboot as the reason. Some were just that absurd in their reaction. It's not really a "complaint" if it's a statement of something that happened.
Observation, compliant, you can make it what you want but that's what people say about people who don't like the movie.
The record arguably has more spots than just the reboot. Some would argue that Ghostbusters II, Extreme Ghostbusters, Slimer!, the Junior Ghostbusters (and by extension the later seasons of The Real Ghostbusters) and Sanctum of Slime could easily be proposed as other blemishes in the history of the franchise. Some feelings have changed and matured on those subjects over the years, but the 2016 wasn't the only duff note in the Ghostbusters symphony - there've been more than a few ups and downs since 1984.
I don't see it that way. Those things you speak of weren't enough to leave a stain on the franchise. Sorry but regardless of how you feel about Sanctum of Slime it isn't a big enough issue emphasis big enough issue to taint the franchise the way Answer The Call has done. GBII certainly not.
JurorNo.2, Sav C liked this
#4894185
You said that you can't watch the original any more without thinking of the controversy of the new movie yet you can easily watch the sequel because it's the underdog. Does that mean you find it easier to like a film that's an underdog than one that is successful?
Ohhhh ok, I get you now. That is a good question. Well it's like that unflattering Red Letter Media review on GB2 that was posted awhile back. They were so nasty and over the top in their critiques of GB2. And then they'd be so worshiping of GB84, to the point where you were tired of hearing about GB84, lol. But like I said, you get over that eventually and just enjoy a movie on your own terms.
#4894197
it's pretty clear the biggest difference is tone. I've said it before but the reboot is comedy for comedy sake. The characters know they are in a comedy film.
That is one of my biggest gripes with the movie. It's even worse in the deleted scenes.

As far as the question of "Did the reboot change public perception of the original films?"

I think it really hasn't. While outside of GB Fandom the first is beloved and the second less so, from what I noticed the reboot hasn't changed anyone's opinions on them.
User avatar
By Sav C
#4894199
One thing it caused me to appreciate is the effects in the first movies. They looked much better to me than the CGI in the new iteration. Even though you can see that the ghosts are puppets, it just fits better in the universe.
Oh yeah the effects in the first two movies far surpass the awful effects of the reboot.
As someone who prefers the effects in the originals, I'm starting to think that it has just as much to do with how they were used as it does with their aesthetic.
GBPaulRivera liked this
#4894233
A lot of pro-reboot fans will complain how the 'haters' feel the reboot ruined or destroyed the original films. That's not the case at all.
I've seen fans state in no uncertain terms here and on Facebook that they willingly washed their hands of the whole franchise and community, citing the reboot as the reason. Some were just that absurd in their reaction. It's not really a "complaint" if it's a statement of something that happened.

Speaking of complaints:
That's not the case at all. What the reboot did was taint an otherwise clean slate for the Ghostbusters franchise. We now have one blemish on an otherwise spotless record which was totally unnecessary and could have been avoided.
(Emphasis mine)

The record arguably has more spots than just the reboot. Some would argue that Ghostbusters II, Extreme Ghostbusters, Slimer!, the Junior Ghostbusters (and by extension the later seasons of The Real Ghostbusters) and Sanctum of Slime could easily be proposed as other blemishes in the history of the franchise. Some feelings have changed and matured on those subjects over the years, but the 2016 wasn't the only duff note in the Ghostbusters symphony - there've been more than a few ups and downs since 1984.
Some would also argue the world is flat. They'd be wrong.
Anyone who views Extreme Ghostbusters as a blemish is wrong. I know I know. It's someone's "opinion" so it can't be wrong. Well I'm making a judgment call on that right here, right now. Extreme Ghostbusters is AWESOME. Anyone who thinks it's a blemish is clearly a minion of Gozer and/or Vigo. They clearly have an anti Ghostbusting agenda. Infact anyone who says EGB is a blemish has a first name of Walter and a last name of Peck.
Lefty Throckmorton liked this
#4894270
If anything, ATC made me love the originals even more. When a large number of people here were gushing over every aspect of the reboot and damning those against it, I personally doubled down on what GB means to me and my pack builds increased (I built 7 packs last year) and I took event appearances more seriously. And this may be shocking to folks like Alpha and Juror and maybe even Ben, but I've actually come to terms with the reboot buuuuuuuuuuuuut that was only after I built my classic styled reboot pack and edited the film to follow the tone of the original. I'm sure I'll get flack from some here for editing the film but I've watched my cut more than the original cut of the reboot.
#4894271
When a large number of people here were gushing over every aspect of the reboot and damning those against it, I personally doubled down on what GB means to me
Did it occur to you that I was "doubling down" because the hate was tripling down? ;)
Lefty Throckmorton liked this
#4894272
Which caused escalation and sides to be drawn if that was your intent, I guess. The constant contrary push back from folks like me and folks like you is what tore the rift in the first place, Juror. But hey, forgive, forget, move on, right?
JurorNo.2, Kingpin liked this
#4894273
But hey, forgive, forget, move on, right?
Eh, sure. I mean I'm getting the usual haters yelling at me (not you), I've got reboot fans yelling at me for not completely siding with them. This is all nonsense and I'm far too old for this, lol.
#4894274
I'm ready to move on. I hope all of you guys are too. That;s why I left for a while. I was tired of arguing with you, Alpha and Ben. We're all stubborn lol
JurorNo.2, Alphagaia, Kingpin and 1 others liked this
#4894275
I'm ready to move on. I hope all of you guys are too. That;s why I left for a while. I was tired of arguing with you, Alpha and Ben. We're all stubborn lol
No prob, I would love to see your cut of the movie!
#4894279
Well.....Using the extended cut....

Trimmed down the Ed Bagley scene so he didn't sound like an idiot.
Cut out the queef joke.
Cut out the pringles line, Holtzmann horsing around on camera and the line about Yates not knowing how the pke meter works.
Cut out Kristen Wiig's awkward departure from Columbia.
Cut out the pot shot at the fans (the aint no bitches line)
Cut the meeting with the higgins dean down so it ends with the science with a Y line.
Cut down Hemsworth stupidity (best I could) also cut out most of Wiig's creepiness towards him.
Cut out a lot of the weird Holtzmann stuff.
Trimmed out the coffee part
Cut out the dancing and the equipment test
removed the awkward "Let's go"
Removed Wiig's stupid translation at the theater
Cut out the holtzmann wig gag
cut out the crowd selfie
cut down the scene after murray gets 86'd. The agents show up right after the patrick swayze line
Andy Garcia is a swarmy politician now and not a man child. There are other small cuts in that scene too.
Cut the side arm test scene to where it ends right after the motorcycle gets blown up
Cut down the restaurant scene so wiig and garcia have some dignity
Cut out the power of patty and the stereotype lines as well.
Cut out Dan's cameo
Cut out the dance number
trimmed the times square battle to not have any tension breaks
But out female slimer entirely
In this version they cross the streams and its edited so that alone causes everything to be brought back in to the portal,
no crotch shot
Trimmed the weird sandwich thing with hemsworth
Cut out Sigourney's cameo.

Story wise it feels more like the original film, the action scenes are tighter and the scary parts have more tension and the characters have more of a role especially Rowan.

That's not a complete list I was just thinking from memory. Also Erin's boyfriend is still in the film but briefly
JurorNo.2, timeware, GBPaulRivera and 1 others liked this
[SPOILERS] NEW GB MOVIE SUMMER 2020!

Being a movie about Ghosts it wouldn't surpris[…]

Hello from Washington State!

Thanks Fritz! Are the any other Washingtonians on[…]

Looks to me like the same part. If you're not a […]

Fitzhume - Proton Pack Build

Yes. I think the template shows the motherboard li[…]