TK5759 wrote:SonofSamhain wrote:Agreed. People would've lost their sh*t had The Force Awakens been treated like the GB property has--as a social experiment. Though both GB16 & Star Wars TFA feature female protagonists, TFA wasn't a total overhaul of what people had come to expect of a Star Wars movie since its last outing. The new characters are still ushered in by a sure sense of familiarity--whether that be a downed Star Destroyer or appearances by Han Solo, Chewbacca, Princess Laia, etc. With GB16, there's this huge absence of time & then BAM! The only "familiarity" fans get are the namesake, the firehouse (which isn't even being used in the film) & the No Ghost logo. It's essentially a totally different movie with the gender roles reversed--which, I'm sorry, does come across as very gimmicky.
Star Wars' initial trailer was also clear cut in its direction & the story it wanted to tell. It didn't help that the initial GB16 trailer had people confused as to whether the movie was a reboot or remake. Hell, Sony themselves didn't even know what it was (i.e. "four scientists")--and the constant scrambling afterward to clean it up only compounded the issues. It shows there was an obvious disconnect between the studio, marketing, & the crew developing the film. Again, first impressions speaks volumes.
Actually, there's a possibility that Star Wars may be turned into a social experiment of its own with the rumors that Poe may be gay and in love with Finn. This wouldn't be anything near the level that GB is trying to do though.
These are totally unsubstantiated rumors at this point but I've heard rumblings that it may happen. Take this for what its worth. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2016/0 ... ke-him-ga/
To me, it feels like this movie is pushing current social issues only for the sake of pushing them. What will it accomplish in the end? That women are as good as men? I've already thought that for a long time. Leslie Jones' line during the concert about it being a woman or black thing about why she hit the floor? What does that have to do with Ghostbusters? It almost feels like they're using the franchise to simply push social issues and they're using Ghostbusters because of its popularity.
*I personally couldn't care less about Poe's sexual orientation...as long as we get another Star Wars movie.
Right, TK. I've heard this rumor about Finn & Poe and even if it turns out to be true, I'm okay with it. Why? Because there's backstory & a gradual building of these characters over the course of time in these films that would eventually lead up to that point. (You know, the way people traditionally told a story)
Star Wars wasn't absent for 25+ years and then the first images you see is of Poe & Finn kissing. That would scream "forced agenda." It's fraudulent, people see right through it & they'd probably be more upset at the SUDDEN nature of it as oppose to the relationship itself. [sound familiar?] Of course you'd naturally have people that would be resistant to a gay relationship anyway, but again, where GB16 fails is at its initial mixed signals. It didn't know what kind of movie it wanted to be. Also, because Ghostbusters operates on a real world-like passage of time, what's missing is the lead-in.
As an audience, we need that explanation for why things are the way they are. The synopsis of
The Force Awakens clearly stated long before we even got the first visuals of the movie is that it takes place thirty years after the events of
Return of the Jedi. So, despite the fantastical elements of the film, they're still properly acknowledging the passage of time. GB16, with its "four scientists" tagline, already improperly addresses an idea it supposedly has no intention of addressing in the film. Confusion sets in.."Is it a remake or reboot?" & with no clear direction, it already starts off on the wrong foot.
Had GB16 possibly been the second or third film AFTER it was clearly explained what happened to the original crew we've associated with the name "Ghostbusters" for two cinematic outings & an animated series, I think the transition may have been a bit smoother. Extreme Ghostbusters understood this, that's why you have Egon as the college professor, Janine & Slimer are reintroduced, the equipment is given an upgrade, etc. Those nuggets of familiarity (when properly explained) are important especially when you're dealing with something that's already established & universally known. They didn't just say, "Here's the new ghostbusters cast, get used to it!"--But that's precisely what GB16 did among its other faults upon the trailer's release.
Forget the fact that they're all female. With none of the main cast from the original films front-and-center, visually & figuratively "passing the torch" to the all-new cast, GB16 is essentially playing the role of the Junior Ghostbusters. No real rhyme or reason as to why they're there..they just are--and taking up screen time when everyone wants to see the Real Ghostbusters. It also didn't help that none of the jokes or gags used in the trailer were actually funny. The Ghostbusters brand defined itself as the working man-meets-high brow comedy. It's approach & well-executed delivery by its cast rewrote the rules for comedic films up until that point. --But what GB16 puts on full display is the kind of comedy that might work for any other comedic film besides Ghostbusters. The physical humor was never something that was used to drive the narrative of a GB flick; yet we get that with the "ghost vomit" and most notably, the "Patty slap" & concert scenes.