Kingpin wrote:
Here's a few:
Ok ok, I'm giving in before I get a headache. Although what we got in the end wasn't exactly good.
Kingpin wrote:Why not Ghostbusters? Would you be arguing this strongly on this point if it wasn't a franchise you held closely to your heart?
What I'm asking is why did Sony pick this franchise to bring their agenda forward? Why did it have to be Ghostbusters and not another franchise like a currently popular one Sony has? It's a part rhetorical question, part query. I mean I give Sony a pat on the back for unpredictability, I really wasn't expecting them to bring the film franchise back that way but I have to ask why choose Ghostbusters of all things to give women bigger wages in the industry?
Styrofoam_Guy wrote:Maybe we will next have a director that will only with with height challenged actors and we will have something like the time bandits.
As Cleese would say "jolly good". Ha, ha!
Styrofoam_Guy wrote:It could be held on a different planet and the Ghostbusters can hunt alien ghosts.
Ah that would be interesting.
Commander_Jim wrote:The movie could certainly have been a lot worse than it turned out to be - imagine we got the movie that the trailers were promising? <shudder>
It was different?
Skyknight wrote:Well, Battlestar was different. She was playing the same character only genderbent and let's not forget, Boomer was genderbent too! It's like making a GB reboot with Petra Venkman, Raine Stantz, Wilma Zeddemore and Edda Spengler!
It was a complete joke what they did. The irony of their left wing politics is that in reversing people's characters they made Colonel Tigh a white character when in the original he was black which was great having a black character in a 70s series in a high position. I don't care what people say they totally bungled it. It's Battlestar in name only.
Skyknight wrote:But that's not the reason I think the BSG reboot sucks. It's because the whole "Every character, even the main ones could be an enemy sleeper agent, who doesn't even know he's not human and everyone suspects everyone to be the traitor" scenario that at the time already had been done to death in countless other shows and movies. I think the new BSG is just another clone of Lost, but in space with the whole Battlestar theme shoehorned in! It didn't feel like Battlestar to me, so I stopped watching. I can always watch the old Battlestar again! Same with Ghostbusters and Star Wars(watch it without the prequels)!
Totally agree on this as well. I finally got around to watching
Space: Above and Beyond and it's fair to say the remake Battlestar is a complete rip-off that series except not as good.
Space wasn't perfect but at least it was about World War II, a time in history that while terrible offers amazing and interesting stories. Battlestar is a reaction to 9/11 with the war in Iraq and there's absolutely nothing interesting about all of that.
JurorNo.2 wrote:
We've seen the ugly side of being protective this year.
Strange because I've also seen how bad left wing politics can get.
JurorNo.2 wrote:Well, heh, Eddie Murphy certainly did in much of his sketches, which he wrote himself. About what was expected of him as the one black person on the show, as well as general societal perceptions. Interesting tidbit, he was warned his Mr. Robinson sketch might be "too racist." Thankfully, he didn't listen. Nowadays, it's Leslie Jones that gets the ridiculous racist label.
Not to the extent of now though right? There wasn't a whole "Black Lives Matter" thing going on was there.
JurorNo.2 wrote:Good thing the leads in GB16 just happened to be women and there was no big feminist lecture. Sadly, too many fans had already decided to see an agenda behind every corner, whether it was there or not.
I'm glad you feel that way but...
JurorNo.2 wrote:That statement says more about you than any hypothetical movie.
Ok so all of the constant media attention to it being necessary, all the stuff of Feig promoting women being superior and funny to men was all my imagination. Actually I think it says more about you being in denial if you think there wasn't an agenda.
Alphagaia wrote:Stop trying to depict him like he is some evil mastermind. He only made a movie you happened to dislike.
Yeah I'm guessing Ghostbusters isn't your favourite movie of all time.
timeware wrote:You point out him retweeting, he could have taken the time to say something. He couldn't or didn't care to. I totally find it possible Feig or Sony used bloggers to rile up the actual misogynists. Look at what they did to the video game nerd. You cant tell me that incident didn't scream conspiracy.
Couldn't agree more. I've been exposed quite a bit to Anita Sarkeesian's Feminist Frequency. She's a complete idiot and I can't believe people have been giving her money for the stuff she does. Apparently her boyfriend was writing her scripts and playing the games. The way I see it there are three types of feminists: the good feminist like Christina Hoff Summers who actually knows what they're talking about, Anita Sarkeesian who believes in white males shaming, getting rid of religion (basically reverse Nazism) and Emma Watson who doesn't know what she wants but decides she needs to look for problems where there are none i.e. she's completely lost the plot. Paul Feig is kind of between Sarkeesian and Watson in how he behaves. I hope that helps.
Alphagaia wrote:Now who could I accuse for creating a controversy based on those two remarks? You!
Boy did I think I was stubborn. I understand you like Feig's movies but you can't defend the guy when he did everything apart from print a huge sign in the Hollywood Reporter stating "WOMEN ARE FUNNY, GET OVER IT!" There was controversy to begin with from fans who wanted a proper sequel, Sony and Feig misunderstood this and immediately left on the misogynistic bandwagon putting every fan who didn't want the reboot into that pile. They made a big thing about it, there isn't one interview where Feig or someone else makes a big thing about it. Alpha you can't really call people out on here for creating controversy themselves when Sony and Feig started all that themselves.
RichardLess wrote:Yep. Studios SHOULD listen to fans. Had they listened they may not have ended up with another major box office disaster. Look what happens when studios don't listen, we get movies like Batman & Robin, X-Men 3, X-Men origins Wolverine, Superman Returns, Ghostbusters ATC. When studios do listen? We get movies like Iron Man, The Avengers, Deadpool, Batman Begins, Star Wars Episode 7(which I wasn't big on, but audiences loved it and reinvigorated Star Wars & made a boat load of cash).
Well it works and it doesn't. Listening to fans is why The Force Awakens is so terrible and uninspired.
Answer The Call had the opposite problem which is that no one listened to the fans at all. There needs to be a balance. Both movies I mentioned did it wrong.
80sguy wrote:That's ridiculous. There's no guarantee a real GB3 would've been much better. Just because THIS movie didn't turn out as good as it could have, doesn't mean one something with another director couldn't.
Actually a Ghostbusters movie would have been directed again by Ivan Reitman had Harold Ramis not died and Sony looking for a reason to push Reitman out so yes a third film could have been as good if not a little better than the sequel.