Discuss the Ghostbusters movie that was released in 2016.
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4873484
Lee FW wrote:I think as much as I love the movie that's my one main criticism about ATC, it fails to capture New York as well as the first two. I genuinely adore that city and spend as much time there as I can and I just felt something was slightly missing at times that I can't quite place my finger on.
Part of it is NYC doesn't have the same gritty character that it used to (and that's not entirely a bad thing, lol). But yeah it did feel like they were living in Metropolis or Gotham rather than a real city.
Sav C liked this
By Scum
#4873485
Lee FW wrote:I think as much as I love the movie that's my one main criticism about ATC, it fails to capture New York as well as the first two. I genuinely adore that city and spend as much time there as I can and I just felt something was slightly missing at times that I can't quite place my finger on.
As someone who works construction in NYC, I'm happy someone adores that city, because I sure don't ! To quote Ray "it's messy, it's crowded, it's polluted, and there are people who would just as soon step on your face as look at you."

Other than working there, the only time I go to NY taking the train directly into MSG for a Rangers or Knicks game.

I think the thing missing from capturing the "city" could just be a simple as the movie in and of itself is just a bit too... bright, maybe?
JurorNo.2, Lee FW, Sav C liked this
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4873489
Scum wrote:
As someone who works construction in NYC, I'm happy someone adores that city, because I sure don't !
The phone lines are over there! What did I say?! How many times?!
Scum, Sav C, Kingpin liked this
By Lee FW
#4873490
Scum wrote: As someone who works construction in NYC, I'm happy someone adores that city, because I sure don't ! To quote Ray "it's messy, it's crowded, it's polluted, and there are people who would just as soon step on your face as look at you."

Other than working there, the only time I go to NY taking the train directly into MSG for a Rangers or Knicks game.

I think the thing missing from capturing the "city" could just be a simple as the movie in and of itself is just a bit too... bright, maybe?
I live and work in London so I sympathise, I can't really enjoy this city so much anymore for the exact same reasons. Luckily I only work in NY occasionally and the rest is leisure time.

You're probably onto something with the brightness and lack of grit. If that's what they were going for though I thought Secret Life of Pets did a better job of using a similar palette to capture the optimistic qualities of the city.
Scum, Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4873509
To add to the grit in the first two, they were shot on a high ISO film stock, while the new film was shot on digital, a very smooth medium. Considering that the building that characterizes the downtown skyline most to me is a smooth reflective glass skyscraper, the digital medium probably fits very well.

I'm glad everyone here loves GB2 so much. I remember the first time I saw it that when the slime started to dance in the statue it was such a cool feeling.
Last edited by Sav C on July 24th, 2016, 12:10 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
By Ivo Shandor
#4873512
Scum wrote:
As someone who works construction in NYC, I'm happy someone adores that city, because I sure don't ! To quote Ray "it's messy, it's crowded, it's polluted, and there are people who would just as soon step on your face as look at you."

Other than working there, the only time I go to NY taking the train directly into MSG for a Rangers or Knicks game.
That's very interesting. As someone who has been at NY airports a few times, but only visited the actual city once, I have the opposite view. The weather was excellent, I was super excited to walk around midtown and see all the sights (stayed at the Wellington). The subway was fast, air-condtioned, and an awesome way to visit more distant locations (like Hook & Ladder 8 in Tribeca).

I enjoyed walking around Central Park, strolling through Chinatown, and experiencing Columbus Circle imagining a giant marshmallow man was about to appear.

But yes, if you have to work there day in and day out, the magic would soon fade I suppose.
Sav C liked this
By Scum
#4873513
Ivo Shandor wrote:
Scum wrote:
As someone who works construction in NYC, I'm happy someone adores that city, because I sure don't ! To quote Ray "it's messy, it's crowded, it's polluted, and there are people who would just as soon step on your face as look at you."

Other than working there, the only time I go to NY taking the train directly into MSG for a Rangers or Knicks game.
That's very interesting. As someone who has been at NY airports a few times, but only visited the actual city once, I have the opposite view. The weather was excellent, I was super excited to walk around midtown and see all the sights (stayed at the Wellington). The subway was fast, air-condtioned, and an awesome way to visit more distant locations (like Hook & Ladder 8 in Tribeca).

I enjoyed walking around Central Park, strolling through Chinatown, and experiencing Columbus Circle imagining a giant marshmallow man was about to appear.

But yes, if you have to work there day in and day out, the magic would soon fade I suppose.
My wife and I do a lot of traveling. I've been to Paris, Nice, Avignon, Rome, Dubrovnik, Turkey, Greece, Kieserslaughten, to name a few. Inside the U.S. I've been to a fair majority of the major cities. I want to love NYC so much, but when you compare it to some of these other cities, it's smelly and dirty. Boston blows it out of the water.

If you think the subway was fast and easy to navigate, I highly suggest a trip to Paris or Germany. Comparatively NYC's subway is total garbage!

I'm about 35 minutes out from NYC (I live right on the coast of NJ, I can see the freedom tower from my roof on a clear day) . It's funny how we neglect the places that are so close to us.

EDIT: Sorry for going way off topic! To bring it back to Ghostbusters... Maybe the lack of feel for NYC could have something to do with a majority of filming taking place is Boston? Which, as stated above, is a much cleaner and brighter city?
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4873548
Scum wrote:I'm about 35 minutes out from NYC (I live right on the coast of NJ, I can see the freedom tower from my roof on a clear day) . It's funny how we neglect the places that are so close to us.
Can you see Two World Trade Center yet or is it not far enough under construction for that?
User avatar
By Kingpin
#4873559
MagicPrime wrote:The fact that people are applauding, appreciating and enjoying what I have witnessed is baffling on a magnitude that I can hardly comprehend rationally...
At this point in time I don't think I can help explain it any more than I or others have the previous five times someone has basically said the same thing as above.

Some people liked/loved the film, that's just a part of the great diversity of life.
Lee FW wrote:I live and work in London so I sympathise, I can't really enjoy this city so much anymore for the exact same reasons.
I was in London today to see the Ghostbusters display at Waterloo (and by unrelated coincidence, saw the replica 2016 Ecto-1 driving past Trafalgar Square - that was awesome!), and usually I enjoy popping into the city... but the heat and humidity make it pretty unbearable at points.
Alphagaia, Sav C, Lee FW liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4873561
Kingpin wrote:I was in London today to see the Ghostbusters display at Waterloo (and by unrelated coincidence, saw the replica 2016 Ecto-1 driving past Trafalgar Square - that was awesome!), and usually I enjoy popping into the city... but the heat and humidity make it pretty unbearable at points.
I was watching the NY Yankee game on the telly today and they said it was 100 degrees (37 Celsius) there! When I was there in 2011 it reached 113 (45 Celsius,) so we had to cancel our trip to the Statue of Liberty...
By Lee FW
#4873563
Kingpin wrote:
Lee FW wrote:I live and work in London so I sympathise, I can't really enjoy this city so much anymore for the exact same reasons.
I was in London today to see the Ghostbusters display at Waterloo (and by unrelated coincidence, saw the replica 2016 Ecto-1 driving past Trafalgar Square - that was awesome!), and usually I enjoy popping into the city... but the heat and humidity make it pretty unbearable at points.
Gotta admit Waterloo is awesome at the mo although I must be the only person in town to have completely missed the Ecto on all its drive-abouts! Seems to be everywhere I am either 5 minutes before or 5 minutes after lol
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Kingpin
#4873564
Lee FW wrote:Seems to be everywhere I am either 5 minutes before or 5 minutes after lol
Spooky, I told the fellow ghosthead I was with that "if we'd been five minutes before or after, we'd have missed it!"
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Zharthaddeus
#4873565
Okay, I finally saw Ghostbusters a couple of hours ago.

Personally, scale: 5.5/10
Godson (11yrs), scale: 9/10

I made no comparisons with the first two movies. That would skew the results.
I went in with an open mind and viewed the movie on its own merit as I view any film.

Did not witness the closeness that binds the 'busters together as a team. Words were spoken,
as per script, but something was missing between the four. Just can't put my finger on it. It
appeared to me that at least two of them were miss cast. As if they were over-acting their parts.
Trying to convince the public that they were worthy of the task. When Patty was "pimp-slapping"
Abby, I found that humorous because Patty seem to really enjoy it and wasn't holding back.

At times, the dialog was going nowhere. Paul Feig was one of the writer's and I must assume he
wanted to pay homage to GB-I and GB-II by making subtle references to the paranormal world from
verbiage spoken by our previous 'buster's. Somehow it came across flat in this film. Even though the
gadgets might have been high tech, I expected a little more sha'bang for the buck. In the end, the
special effects (f/x) were extraordinary but not enough to carry the entire movie.

And finally, this movie was made as a comedy. Either you laughed or felt being in good company with
crickets. Either way, there were chuckles at times where most patrons got the jokes and other times
when jokes could have been placed elsewhere. But for me, I received the most smiles when towards the
end, right before credits were rolling and during. That, will earn a 9/10.
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4873566
Kingpin wrote:Spooky, I told the fellow ghosthead I was with that "if we'd been five minutes before or after, we'd have missed it!"
Nice pun ;)
By MageGrayWolf
#4873572
Okay watched the movie so I could give my own personal review of it.

The movie could have been decent. It does have lots of base lowest common denominator humor in it. Worse yet the movie often just stops to tell these shit jokes. In fact one of them was about shit.
There was a total of three times the movie got a chuckle out of me.

The ghosts could have been decent if they weren't all neon cgi messes. If the toned down the brightness they might have worked.

Didn't like most of the tech and thought it was dumb
This Post Contains Spoilers
They got a lot of the little things wrong, such as what EVP stands for.

The four girls themselves weren't as bad as I thought they would be. Leslie Jones' character, Patti was actually decent most of the time. The whole "I know New York" actually referred to a historical knowledge of the city that she picked up by reading while at her job. I also liked Kate McKinnon's character, Holzmann. When they weren't going too over the top with her that is. The other two were a bit bland.

The other reviews weren't kidding about the man hate in this movie. Every guy was either an asshole or an idiot. I got the impression much of this was the result of Paul Feig's rage dump. It was like the main villain was Paul's own personal dark side.

Wouldn't recommend it. When it's bad, it's really bad. The rest of the time it was, meh.
By Scum
#4873574
Sav C wrote:
Scum wrote:I'm about 35 minutes out from NYC (I live right on the coast of NJ, I can see the freedom tower from my roof on a clear day) . It's funny how we neglect the places that are so close to us.
Can you see Two World Trade Center yet or is it not far enough under construction for that?
Yup, Freedom Tower is the "other" name for the structure. It's absolutely MASSIVE compared to the rest of the skyline.
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4873579
Scum wrote:
Sav C wrote:Can you see Two World Trade Center yet or is it not far enough under construction for that?
Yup, Freedom Tower is the "other" name for the structure. It's absolutely MASSIVE compared to the rest of the skyline.
I think we may be talking about different buildings. Two World Trade is the one I'm talking about, the one that looks like a staircase (if you don't mind the comparison.) I think One World Trade is the Freedom Tower, although maybe they both are, when I was there in 2011 the Freedom Tower was around half way complete if my memory serves me correctly, and it was massive then.
Image
Last edited by Sav C on July 23rd, 2016, 6:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By Scum
#4873598
Sav C wrote:
Scum wrote:
Yup, Freedom Tower is the "other" name for the structure. It's absolutely MASSIVE compared to the rest of the skyline.
I think we may be talking about different buildings. Two World Trade is the one I'm talking about, the one that looks like a staircase (if you don't mind the comparison.) I think One World Trade is the Freedom Tower, although maybe they both are, when I was there in 2011 the Freedom Tower was around half way complete if my memory serves me correctly, and it was still massive.
Image
I live right around the corner and I had absolutely no idea, wow I feel uninformed! Haven't seen that one yet, but wow that's a cool building!
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4873604
Scum wrote:I live right around the corner and I had absolutely no idea, wow I feel uninformed! Haven't seen that one yet, but wow that's a cool building!
I stumbled upon it while researching the Twin Towers, and wouldn't know about it otherwise. I'm not sure if they've started building it yet, but I agree it is super cool!
Scum liked this
By TheDreamMaster
#4873643
You know, after my two viewings of the film, and liking it even more that second time, I kind of find it funny now James Rolfe decided not to see it. I respect his opinion, and maybe putting it out in the open was a stupid move for the attention it drew (though, given his viewerbase I can only imagine how much money he got from everyone watching that video.).

At the end of the day he never had to review, but I figure there was only three ways it could've gone anyway: He liked it, he hated it, or he thought it was "ok". In the worst case, he lost two hours of his life and somewhere between $7 and $12.
JurorNo.2 liked this
User avatar
By Ivo Shandor
#4873661
I've never respected anyone who criticizes a movie without watching it.

I've never respected anyone who walks out of a movie.

I had to sit through "Batman & Robin", the worst movie I ever paid to see. They should have to sit through whatever they are reviewing.
pferreira1983 liked this
User avatar
By HauntedWallflower
#4873664
I watched the movie two days ago, with my mum and little brother. Suprisingly, it was hard to get three seats, the theatre was packed so we had to sit seperately from each other. As for the movie itself.... All views expressed are mine.
PROS:
*Obviously, Jillian Holtzmann is THE highlight of not just the reboot, but also the year. Kate McKinnon breathes life and fun into EVERYTHING she does, she's one of America's treasures. And I am besotted with both her and Jillian. She's....they're....perfect!!
*When I watched the movie, the character that got the most laughs out of the audience was Kevin. And I was really in awe of Chris Hemsworth's acting. He can be a total blond one minute and a puppet possessed by the bad ghost next. Kudos to you, Hemsworth, you really are an audience pleaser, even when it's a character that Reddit hates.
*I was a little bit pissed that the GB16's car was called "Ecto-1," then the movie did me a great favour by destroying that car in the climactic part. There is only one Ecto-1 and that's the original. It may be a reboot and it may win me over, but NO, don't ever call the new car "Ecto-1."
*The interactions between the four women brings more life into the movie than even the best CGI and SFX ever can. This is similar to the original, where the interactions between the GBs we all love is what gives the original its spark. Mostly.
*That bust of Harold Ramis near Erin Gilbert's office near the beginning of the movie. I squealed "Egon!" When I saw it. And of course, Annie Potts' turn as Vanessa the receptionist. Love her. And Siggy Weaver near the end. She totally exuded independence and looked young as ever. And why did I just call her Siggy?! Dan Aykroyd was great too in his cameo, enjoying himself as ever in everything he does. It's always good to see Ernie Hudson as well. Bill Murray though? I wish I was the ghost that sent him flying out of the window, that's how much I dislike him for being a general ass. In fact, GB has had the potential in recent years to be famous with or without Bill Murray.
*Patty is not only their first "client," she also becomes their fourth GB. I've always liked the idea of a client becoming a GB. Plus, I love Patty.
*They actually tested their Proton toys before using them properly!!!! Yes, I called them Proton toys, sue me.
*This movie gave me a pleasant surprise with the elements of everyday reality that were injected into it. Situations like Erin's fear of being laughed at, Abby Yates' hurt at Erin, acute awareness of their monetary constraints (When finding their own HQ), the burden of keeping a huge open secret while being humiliated by authority figures in public and, most of all, being artistically inspired by others to take up the logo and group name. These are things that made me aware of my own imperfections as a creative and complicated human being. It's very unlike the original, where the GBs just immediately took on the name and logo like *snaps fingers* Now that I think about it, the original GBs had it much, much easier, even if they got thrown in jail.
*Abby getting sucked into the portal and Erin bringing her back. That was heartwarming and something I haven't seen in both GB 1, 2 and the video game. Maybe it's in the comics? All the same, lovely scene, well-executed.
*The original theme in the opening credits!!!! Yes!!!!
*The Times Square fight with all the proton toys. WOOOOW.
*It was so beautiful seeing the city lit up with "I love GB" lights.
CONS:
*Duh, the fact that it's a reboot. They didn't even think to add a Marvel-style post-credits scene where it's revealed that it was all a movie pitch that either Venkman or Stantz was making to Ivan Reitman (playing as himself).
*The fact that Jillian Holtzmann and/or Erin Gilbert didn't turn out to be the daughter/s of Egon Spengler and Janine Melnitz. I REEEEEAAAALLY want my OTP together in the comic now.
*The siren of the car. But I guess that's a good thing. You can't just make a movie that transplants women into the original plot line and call it a reboot, after all.
*To me, Abby Yates only existed to either be laughed at or to further Erin's character development, even if she did well on her own as a character in scenes such as the one where she got possessed. Or my brother's favourite, testing the Proton Pack hilariously.
*The shooting Rowan in the crotch part was funny for five seconds and then it wasn't funny at all. They could've gotten similar results by shooting him in the gut or knees, because if they shot his arms off literally, there would be no Erin rescuing Abby scene.
*Zayn Malik singing in the end credits. I don't like that guy's voice.
*Fall Out Boy sang too fast.
*Slimer's ghoul friend. It was WAAAAY too cartoonish and spoiled the effect of the movie's climax. It was still funny to see Slimer driving the car around though.
*The title confused me at the end. It's called "Ghostbusters" at the beginning, but it's called "Ghostbusters: Answer the Call" at the end? Why didn't they just call the movie GB: ATC? It's a badass title, plus calling the movie just "Ghostbusters" never truly made sense in the first place.
What do I think of the movie overall? It stands quite well on its own as a movie, especially a Ghostbusters movie. The story was wonderfully done, the characters were mostly great and the cinematographics were quite nice. But there was no definite tie to the original (or even a scene to indicate that this is an alternate universe) and it saddens me. Well, at least we still have the IDW comic and I would feel sorry for the GB fan who hates the comic's storyline. I give this movie 3.5 out of 5 stars and I definitely hope to watch it again.
Lee FW liked this
User avatar
By Kingpin
#4873676
Sav C wrote:Image
Now that's a shame, this version of 2WTC was much better:

Image

-I suppose that's the nature of compromise though, the abysmal early designs for One World Trade Center were refined into what we have now, and the elegant design of Two World Trade Centre has been replaced by something fairly unremarkable.
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Ivo Shandor
#4873686
HauntedWallflower wrote: I would feel sorry for the GB fan who hates the comic's storyline.
Thanks for feeling sorry for me.
User avatar
By Sav C
#4873717
Kingpin wrote:
Sav C wrote:Image
Now that's a shame, this version of 2WTC was much better:

Image

-I suppose that's the nature of compromise though, the abysmal early designs for One World Trade Center were refined into what we have now, and the elegant design of Two World Trade Centre has been replaced by something fairly unremarkable.
I believe it is so that when viewed from certain angles, it resembles the Twin Towers, that's why it is a straight line (<- my lack of architecture terms on display) on the side next to One World Trade. I'm not sure where I read that, so I'll go digging and get back to you with a link if possible.
User avatar
By Sav C
#4873720
Sav C wrote:
Kingpin wrote:-I suppose that's the nature of compromise though, the abysmal early designs for One World Trade Center were refined into what we have now, and the elegant design of Two World Trade Centre has been replaced by something fairly unremarkable.
I believe it is so that when viewed from certain angles, it resembles the Twin Towers, that's why it is a straight line (<- my lack of architecture terms on display) on the side next to One World Trade. I'm not sure where I read that, so I'll go digging and get back to you with a link if possible.
OK, here's what I think I read about it:
The tower will appear different depending on the angle you are looking at it from, Ingels said. From the north and northeast, will appear as a stack of city blocks expanding towards the sky. From the south, the ridges between the stacks — which double as garden terraces — become imperceptible and the tower appears as if it is "twinning" with One World Trade Center.
Image
It was on this Business Insider: http://www.businessinsider.com/bjarke-i ... wer-2015-6
I personally really like the design, but then again I'm not big on the diamonds at the top of the other building.
By Scum
#4873753
Kingpin wrote:
Sav C wrote:Image
Now that's a shame, this version of 2WTC was much better:

Image

-I suppose that's the nature of compromise though, the abysmal early designs for One World Trade Center were refined into what we have now, and the elegant design of Two World Trade Centre has been replaced by something fairly unremarkable.
Ohhhh I really like that one. It almost brings to mind the original idea that they wanted to build the five towers the resembled the buildings flipping off any new potential terrorists. While I'm pretty sure it was a joke, it's still hilarious.

Image
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4873774
Scum wrote:
Kingpin wrote:
Now that's a shame, this version of 2WTC was much better:

Image

-I suppose that's the nature of compromise though, the abysmal early designs for One World Trade Center were refined into what we have now, and the elegant design of Two World Trade Centre has been replaced by something fairly unremarkable.
Ohhhh I really like that one. It almost brings to mind the original idea that they wanted to build the five towers the resembled the buildings flipping off any new potential terrorists. While I'm pretty sure it was a joke, it's still hilarious.

Image
That's funny. The one with the diamonds is nice, but I prefer the one they've chosen as it fits better with the Freedom Tower.
  • 1
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 33

I missed out on the Haslab packs too. I am conside[…]

Thanks The_Y33TER ! Confirmation there's no elect[…]

A little sneak preview of one of the bedrock parts[…]

Where do the other ends of the red/yellow wire[…]