[JurorNo.2]

https://www.instagram.com/p/BFKVrbPOlhn/

[HauntedWallflower]

The caption says it all. I too want to be Dan Aykroyd when I....oh crap, I'm in my twenties.

[JurorNo.2]

I'm in my 30s, what are you worried about? Lol

[HauntedWallflower]

Ahaha, I see your point LOL

[SpaceBallz]

Well I'm glad they had fun

[pferreira1983]

Every time I read her surname I keep thinking of these guys:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplodos

Seriously to become like Dan do I have to sell Crystal Skull vodka?

[JurorNo.2]

Every time I read her surname I keep thinking of these guys:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplodos

Seriously to become like Dan do I have to sell Crystal Skull vodka?

Either that or a Bass-o-matic.

[montclaire]

I still don't understand why Sony agreed to this in the first place. One of the greatest "guy movies" of all time gets rebooted, and who pens the script? A woman and a homosexual man. And before everyone jumps down my throat, things like storytelling, humor, and tone most certainly do change depending on the writer; women and men frequently disagree on whats's funny, and feig's over-the-top style is at odds with the dry and subtle humor of the original. In fact, the tone of the humor in conjunction with a wild setting is what made the film great, and is exactly what we won't get from the new film. Chick humor and dance numbers, not what Harold Ramis had in mind.

[Alphagaia]

I still don't understand why Sony agreed to this in the first place. One of the greatest "guy movies" of all time gets rebooted, and who pens the script? A woman and a homosexual man. And before everyone jumps down my throat, things like storytelling, humor, and tone most certainly do change depending on the writer; women and men frequently disagree on whats's funny, and feig's over-the-top style is at odds with the dry and subtle humor of the original. In fact, the tone of the humor in conjunction with a wild setting is what made the film great, and is exactly what we won't get from the new film. Chick humor and dance numbers, not what Harold Ramis had in mind.

The phrasing of this whole post is why people are each other throats.
It's so Ill informed it seems intentional to sow and harvest hate.

[groschopf]

I still don't understand why Sony agreed to this in the first place. One of the greatest "guy movies" of all time gets rebooted, and who pens the script? A woman and a homosexual man. And before everyone jumps down my throat, things like storytelling, humor, and tone most certainly do change depending on the writer; women and men frequently disagree on whats's funny, and feig's over-the-top style is at odds with the dry and subtle humor of the original. In fact, the tone of the humor in conjunction with a wild setting is what made the film great, and is exactly what we won't get from the new film. Chick humor and dance numbers, not what Harold Ramis had in mind.

And this, in a nutshell, is why I don't waste my time on GBFans any more.

Thanks for the screencapture ammunition, Montclaire! The next time I find a troll elsewhere proclaiming "this isn't about sexism!", I'll roll out your insipid diatribe to counter that bad faith argument.

[Alphagaia]

To defend him a little: I get what he is trying to say, he has just chosen his words poorly: changing writers and director can change the way the core-story is perceived or presented. Which is of course a legit fear if you hold the original so dear.

Gender and sexual preference however, should not matter one bit.

What does matter if they can catch the same spirit, with the help of the original creators.
The strictness of this spirit, the core parts which you cannot temper with to still call it ghostbusters, is perceived differently by a lot of fans, of course.

[Funktion]

One of the greatest "guy movies" of all time gets rebooted, and who pens the script? A woman and a homosexual man.

What a ridiculously ignorant post.
Are you saying a woman and a homosexual man can't make "guy" content?
What nonsense.

Just check, for example, the TV series Call me Fitz. The main character is pretty much booze, blackjack, and hookers. His view on women, as pretty much sexual objects, with plenty of colourful language, are sure to piss off many. And guess what: it was written and created by... a woman.
Neil Patrick Harris is homosexual, and the character he played on How I Met Your Mother was a serial womanizer, and is quoted by men all around the world.
And I could go on and on about several other examples.

And since when Ghostbusters is a "guy movie"? Rambo, and other "manly" action movies, are "guy movies", who appeal mostly to a male audience. Ghostbusters is a movie that appeals to many people: kids like it, old people like it, women like it.

It saddens me to read some of the crap some fellow Ghostbusters fans are spewing out these days.

[SpaceBallz]

I still don't understand why Sony agreed to this in the first place. One of the greatest "guy movies" of all time gets rebooted, and who pens the script? A woman and a homosexual man. And before everyone jumps down my throat, things like storytelling, humor, and tone most certainly do change depending on the writer; women and men frequently disagree on whats's funny, and feig's over-the-top style is at odds with the dry and subtle humor of the original. In fact, the tone of the humor in conjunction with a wild setting is what made the film great, and is exactly what we won't get from the new film. Chick humor and dance numbers, not what Harold Ramis had in mind.

And this, in a nutshell, is why I don't waste my time on GBFans any more.

Thanks for the screencapture ammunition, Montclaire! The next time I find a troll elsewhere proclaiming "this isn't about sexism!", I'll roll out your insipid diatribe to counter that bad faith argument.

That's one dude, bro. The last person I saw ranting about something like that was Cassidy and he's long gone. GBFans is tame compared to the social media and news article comment sections. At least here we're all discussing it and talking it out. My perception for the reboot went from *insert curse word* "Noway, they're remaking/rebooting and pretending the others didn't exist. I'm out. And I'll be very vocal about it!" *insert 4 more curse words*" to "Well, it doesn't look TOO bad now. I'll see it at a matinee."

[JurorNo.2]

GBFans is tame compared to the social media and news article comment sections. At least here we're all discussing it and talking it out.

Oh I agree. I don't think much of the Internet. If NYC created a river of slime, the Internet concocted an entire tidal wave. And not jut one tidal wave, but one that's on a repeating loop like at Typhoon Lagoon or Six Flags. But absolutely, GBFans by far has been the most civil, the discussions actually productive. Other sites and social media groups have pretty much destroyed themselves at this point, and even after this movie is over, I'd probably never go back. But I never have a problem coming to GBFans.

[Phasmatum Fractor]

Gender and sexual preference however, should not matter one bit.

The life experience of a writer matters, and things like sex and sexual preference have profound impacts on one's life experiences. That should not really be controversial. How much it matters in this particular instance cannot really be known until the film can be properly dissected.

[JurorNo.2]

Gender and sexual preference however, should not matter one bit.

The life experience of a writer matters, and things like sex and sexual preference have profound impacts on one's life experiences. That should not really be controversial. How much it matters in this particular instance cannot really be known until the film can be properly dissected.

It matters, but not in such rigid ways as "Men think this, Women think that, and Gay Men think like women."

[montclaire]

I'm not ranting or hating on anyone. We all come from different places. Sometimes those places give us the tools we need to write a great story for a specific audience, and sometimes they don't.

[Funktion]

I'm not ranting or hating on anyone. We all come from different places. Sometimes those places give us the tools we need to write a great story, and sometimes they don't.

Sure. But your statement was so broad.

Woman, and homosexual males, sure can write and work on "manly" material.

And I'll give you a couple more examples: David DeCoteau is a "b-movie", homosexual, film director. Most of his output in the 80's and 90's was t&a, exploitation, horror pieces, full of naked women. You would never guess, from the content of those movies, the director's sexual preferences.

And on the women front, Roberta Findlay is a film director who mostly directed sexploitation movies, some horror, and even porn. Again, unless you read the credits, you would probably expect a man to have directed those works.

What I'm basically saying is the final results don't always reflect the creator's sexual preferences, beliefs, or gender.

[Alphagaia]

I'm not ranting or hating on anyone. We all come from different places. Sometimes those places give us the tools we need to write a great story for a specific audience, and sometimes they don't.

This sounds a whole lot different compared to stating 'a female and a homosexual cannot write a guy movie like ghostbusters'.

I have written a few short stories in my youth and am currently working on a long fantasystory for years now that probably never gets publiced, but the best advice a writer can get is:
'write about what you know'.
This is also why writers do a LOT of research.

Feig loves science, in his youth he even build a working robot, and his parents are scientists. This is also why he focused on (the evolution of) gadgets in this movie. He is also great at directing women, which is why he choose 4 female leads. This helps him focus on the parts he is less familiar with, which Dan and Ivan were more then happy to help him with. Don't forget Ghostbusters is (part of) their bread and butter as well.
I don't know much about Kate, apart from penning some well received comedies by BOTH genders, but if you can get your input from Dan and Ivan I tend to think they have a good chance of making it all work.

[montclaire]

It speaks for itself. They DIDN'T write a guy movie. They wrote a script for four women, because that is what their experience allowed. And you can argue all you want, but men and women deal with success, failure, friendship, and adversity in different ways. Most will write about those emotions as they experience them. I can't imagine dippold capturing the nuanced original characters - the socially backward Egon, the child-like Ray, or Peter, the insecure and unsuccessful blowhard; little bits of life that practically every man has experienced at different times. Feig had a shot but he's drinking the kool aid.

We will find out soon if that script is merely pro-women or if it actually crosses into the anti-men territory. Personally I think feig may have seen it as a good opportunity to give a big thumb in the eye to the fans.

[Alphagaia]

It speaks for itself. They DIDN'T write a guy movie. They wrote a script for four women, because that is what their experience allowed.

What you don't seem to get is they are not writing a guy movie, nor a chickflick.

They are writing for both genders, which is what Feig is known for.

I've posted this before and I'll post it again:

Paul Feig on chickflicks:

That's why I hate chick flicks and I hate the term 'chick flicks.' People go 'Oh, it's a chick flick because there's two women in the movie.' No, it's not: There's two people who are funny. There are those movies that guys aren't as interested in, which is fine because there's movies that guys love that women don't want to see.

[JurorNo.2]

It speaks for itself. They DIDN'T write a guy movie. They wrote a script for four women, because that is what their experience allowed.

But you've already seen examples where people are perfectly able to write (and enjoy) stories outside of their own experiences.

[montclaire]

It speaks for itself. They DIDN'T write a guy movie. They wrote a script for four women, because that is what their experience allowed.

But you've already seen examples where people are perfectly able to write (and enjoy) stories outside of their own experiences.

Yes, talented writers and directors can sometimes bring it all together. They have to want to do so, though.

[pferreira1983]

Feig loves science, in his youth he even build a working robot, and his parents are scientists. This is also why he focused on (the evolution of) gadgets in this movie. He is also great at directing women, which is why he choose 4 female leads.

He doesn't seem like a very good director if he has trouble directing men.

[montclaire]

I didn't write that, you must have edited your quote incorrectly.

[pferreira1983]

I didn't write that, you must have edited your quote incorrectly.

Yep, my mistake apologies although my computer's been going nuts recently. Anyway my point still stands.

[Alphagaia]

I didn't write that, you must have edited your quote incorrectly.

Yep, my mistake apologies although my computer's been going nuts recently. Anyway my point still stands.

His bank account disagrees with you.

[montclaire]

Feigs own quote makes no sense. Basically he's saying that its not a chick flick just because it primarily stars women. Its just a movie that men can enjoy if they like films about women, or they may not enjoy if they like films geared towards men. This guy is a flake.

[Alphagaia]

Feigs own quote makes no sense. Basically he's saying that its not a chick flick just because it primarily stars women. Its just a movie that men can enjoy if they like films about women, or they may not enjoy if they like films geared towards men. This guy is a flake.

And this is the problem right here. Some people see 4 females and automatically think it's a chick flick. Because in your mind 'a movie featuring 4 women cannot possible be aimed at both genders'. Feig wants to prove movies that have women in the major leads actually can be aimed at both genders, which GB is another example of.

[montclaire]

But people don't think that way. If I open a restaurant, and all I serve is salad, do you think I will get more women or men as customers? Sure, men can certainly come in and I will serve them a salad, but most of my customers will be women. Now, if I wanted to appeal to both men AND women (gasp), I would have a bigger menu and serve all sorts of food. I honestly think that GB1 was one of the few movies of its time that did a good job of including strong female characters (Dana, Gozer), which makes this reboot all the more frustrating. Its like feig is angry but he's taking it out on the wrong franchise. I typically don't watch movies that are primarily cast with women because I'm not a woman. The same way that I'm sure some men watch Gilmore Girls, while I usually leave the room and find something else to occupy myself when its on.

Replacing four men with four women is not equality. Its divisive and exclusionary. But feig thinks he can do it and hide behind the cloak of righteousness. True equality would have been a mix. The Kevin character, who is basically an adult child (and is put down in the book, BTW), is just insult to injury. Make no mistake, this film is a hit piece to men, wrapped in a nice bow of nostalgia.