Discuss the Ghostbusters movie that was released in 2016.
#4886843
SSJmole wrote:More people hate it online than saw it. That's all. Like I said if you saw and genuinely don't like it. I can respect that. But look online millions claim "saw it and hated" but the box office numbers don't match.
And people clamored to its defense before it premiered, and lauded a weak opening weekend as if it was a hit.

The box office did match what critics said online. The movie flopped.
#4886855
HunterCC wrote:
SSJmole wrote:More people hate it online than saw it. That's all. Like I said if you saw and genuinely don't like it. I can respect that. But look online millions claim "saw it and hated" but the box office numbers don't match.
And people clamored to its defense before it premiered, and lauded a weak opening weekend as if it was a hit.

The box office did match what critics said online. The movie flopped.
I don't think there is anything wrong with defending a movie before it premieres.
I do remember me and others on this Forum being happy it got good reviews and after watching it liking the movie as well, hoping it would pick up after the good initial response by the people who did see it.
That is a bit different then how you are describing it?
#4886859
There's a difference between defense, and being over zealous. I warned that most of the early reviews were being put out by paid critics, and some with political motivation. People were right to be excited about it but they didn't want to wait in getting reviews from the regular movie going public.

I just thought it was and still is odd that the Rotten Tomatoes rating hadn't reflected the 54%number of people who actually liked the movie.
HunterCC, pferreira1983 liked this
#4886860
timeware wrote:There's a difference between defense, and being over zealous.
Over zealous, as opposed to fearing some evil feminist agenda?
I warned that most of the early reviews were being put out by paid critics
I'm sorry but that's a silly conspiracy theory. Why doesn't WB pay critics to review its comic book movies better?
#4886861
JurorNo.2 wrote: I'm sorry but that's a silly conspiracy theory. Why doesn't WB pay critics to review its comic book movies better?
Because Disney pay more to sabotage.


Joking. Yeah dc movies get waaaay to much hate for not been marvel. Like batman vs Superman was so similar to civil war yet BvS comes out and "nooo poor excuse to fight that a villain tricked them. Wonder woman and more debuting here? That's dumb they need own film first?" Few months later civil war comes out "a villain tricked them that's so refreshing and simple , Black panther and spider-man will get own films after? That's genius and a creative way to do it"

It's so hypocritical and the public eat it up and start acting like every dc made film is now the worst ever. People are even often saying "the dark knight wasn't good either and they all got worse from there" people loved that at release. It's sad as in my opinion BvS was much better than civil war
#4886864
JurorNo.2 wrote:
timeware wrote:There's a difference between defense, and being over zealous.
Over zealous, as opposed to fearing some evil feminist agenda?

I don't fear the evil feminist agenda. There is an evil feminist agenda and I was able to put a name behind it. By the way Feminist Frequency has moved on from 2016 and already have opinions about Amy Schumer being selected to play Barbie in a live movie adaptation.
I warned that most of the early reviews were being put out by paid critics
I'm sorry but that's a silly conspiracy theory. Why doesn't WB pay critics to review its comic book movies better?
Not really. There are such things as media outlets hiring critics to write reviews for them. Most who have no interest in covering the genre they are assigned to. Older critics reviewed Pixels to criticize the Pac-Man generation.

Media outlets like Huffington Post had an interest in latching onto the 2016 controversy to create a lot of click bait articles. Most blog sites copied and pasted from FF because they were lazy to do their own research. I don't find it unbelievable that alot of critics were waiting for the Embargo to be lifted so they could flood Rotten Tomatoes with a high approval rating. I'm not saying all critics were paid but quite a few probably were.
#4886879
Negative news gets much more attention than happy news. I think that is why we got so many negative blogs on GB16 and BvS.

I trust friend's opinion on movies much more than and online review. For GB16 and BvS there seemed to be much more controversy than normal but I was going to judge the movies for myself.

GB16 - terrible trailers but I wanted the franchise to do well so I went to see it and enjoyed it a lot. Definitely did not deserve the bad online reviews.

BvS - Not bad trailers. I enjoyed the movie but it could have been much better. I understood what the director was trying to do but I think a lot of people didn't get the message as it was not very clear. The extended version helps a bit but still could have been better.
The movie sure got a lot of negative reviews online which I do not think it deserved. Although it got a lot of hate not as severe as GB16

As for Marvel vs DC it does seem that Marvel is doing quite well while DC has been faltering.

Deadpool - Hilarious

Antman - My first thoughts were "Why would you make a movie out of a minor character", "This character has an uninteresting superpower", "This movie is not going to do well". The trailers were actually good and made me interested in going to see it. I did go to see and and was quite surprised at how good it is.

Dr Strange - I am not a Dr Strange fan and the trailers were ok. My friends wanted to go see it so I went along. I was quite surprised at how much I enjoyed it.

Suicide Squad - Loved the trailers. Rumours of having to do reshoots after the popularity of Deadpool got me a bit worried. I did enjoy the movie while others thought it was too formulaic.

So it seems that whatever Marvel is doing they are doing it right. They must have done a deal with the devil as they can't seem to do no wrong. Although I do wish they can do a decent Fantastic Four movie.

DC needs some slight tweaking and they can have some very good movies. DC screwed up when they decided to reject Joss Whedon's Wonder Woman script.

DC does seem to be doing well with Arrow, Flash and Supergirl.
Alphagaia, HunterCC liked this
#4886906
timeware wrote:There's a difference between defense, and being over zealous. I warned that most of the early reviews were being put out by paid critics, and some with political motivation. People were right to be excited about it but they didn't want to wait in getting reviews from the regular movie going public.

I just thought it was and still is odd that the Rotten Tomatoes rating hadn't reflected the 54%number of people who actually liked the movie.
Yeah, there was a pretty big gap between critic and audience ratings on rotten tomatoes, and IMDB users panned it. Even though many positive critic ratings wee only lukewarm, still unusual. Normally when I see that big a gap, it's the audience that likes the movie more than the critics, lol. (RT critic rating still 73%, audience rating 54%.) Critic rating also didn't match the box office, though that's more common, still worth noting since that is further evidence the critics were out of touch on GB16.
#4886907
SSJmole wrote:
JurorNo.2 wrote: I'm sorry but that's a silly conspiracy theory. Why doesn't WB pay critics to review its comic book movies better?
Because Disney pay more to sabotage.


Joking. Yeah dc movies get waaaay to much hate for not been marvel. Like batman vs Superman was so similar to civil war yet BvS comes out and "nooo poor excuse to fight that a villain tricked them. Wonder woman and more debuting here? That's dumb they need own film first?" Few months later civil war comes out "a villain tricked them that's so refreshing and simple , Black panther and spider-man will get own films after? That's genius and a creative way to do it"

It's so hypocritical and the public eat it up and start acting like every dc made film is now the worst ever. People are even often saying "the dark knight wasn't good either and they all got worse from there" people loved that at release. It's sad as in my opinion BvS was much better than civil war
Check out Honest Trailers on BvS. It's hilarious and addresses some of what you said. Some of it may agree with you, some not.

It's amusing to look at how some storylines are similar, BvS vs. Civil War, Luke skywalker vs Harry potter, ghostbusters 2016 vs pixels, etc.
#4886909
HunterCC wrote:
timeware wrote:There's a difference between defense, and being over zealous. I warned that most of the early reviews were being put out by paid critics, and some with political motivation. People were right to be excited about it but they didn't want to wait in getting reviews from the regular movie going public.

I just thought it was and still is odd that the Rotten Tomatoes rating hadn't reflected the 54%number of people who actually liked the movie.
Yeah, there was a pretty big gap between critic and audience ratings on rotten tomatoes, and IMDB users panned it. Even though many positive critic ratings wee only lukewarm, still unusual. Normally when I see that big a gap, it's the audience that likes the movie more than the critics, lol. (RT critic rating still 73%, audience rating 54%.) Critic rating also didn't match the box office, though that's more common, still worth noting since that is further evidence the critics were out of touch on GB16.
There was also a very big gap between the user reviews: with most people either voting a 10 or a 1, which is why the outcome became 54% in the first place. I'm not sure who is more out of touch here.
#4886913
Styrofoam_Guy wrote:Negative news gets much more attention than happy news. I think that is why we got so many negative blogs on GB16 and BvS.

I trust friend's opinion on movies much more than and online review. For GB16 and BvS there seemed to be much more controversy than normal but I was going to judge the movies for myself.

GB16 - terrible trailers but I wanted the franchise to do well so I went to see it and enjoyed it a lot. Definitely did not deserve the bad online reviews.

BvS - Not bad trailers. I enjoyed the movie but it could have been much better. I understood what the director was trying to do but I think a lot of people didn't get the message as it was not very clear. The extended version helps a bit but still could have been better.
The movie sure got a lot of negative reviews online which I do not think it deserved. Although it got a lot of hate not as severe as GB16

As for Marvel vs DC it does seem that Marvel is doing quite well while DC has been faltering.

Deadpool - Hilarious

Antman - My first thoughts were "Why would you make a movie out of a minor character", "This character has an uninteresting superpower", "This movie is not going to do well". The trailers were actually good and made me interested in going to see it. I did go to see and and was quite surprised at how good it is.

Dr Strange - I am not a Dr Strange fan and the trailers were ok. My friends wanted to go see it so I went along. I was quite surprised at how much I enjoyed it.

Suicide Squad - Loved the trailers. Rumours of having to do reshoots after the popularity of Deadpool got me a bit worried. I did enjoy the movie while others thought it was too formulaic.

So it seems that whatever Marvel is doing they are doing it right. They must have done a deal with the devil as they can't seem to do no wrong. Although I do wish they can do a decent Fantastic Four movie.

DC needs some slight tweaking and they can have some very good movies. DC screwed up when they decided to reject Joss Whedon's Wonder Woman script.

DC does seem to be doing well with Arrow, Flash and Supergirl.
I can't trust anyone's opinion that says Suicide Squad was anything but an unmitigated disaster. I'm still trying to figure out if GB16 or Suicide Squad is the worst movie of the year. Before calling me anti DC-- I LOVED Batman V Superman. Suicide Squad was soo choppy and poorly edited. I found out later the cut released in theatres was done by a movie trailer company. Yikes!
Batman V Superman is just misunderstood. It's the most beautiful looking comic book movie ever made. Just gorgeous cinematography.

Have you read Joss Whedon's Wonder Woman script? The WW being released looks amazing. I love that it's a period piece! Even though I've only disliked one DCEU movie thus far, I still wish Warner's would just hire Paul Dini/Bruce Timm to steer the all the franchise's properly. I could die happy!
#4886919
HunterCC wrote: Yeah, there was a pretty big gap between critic and audience ratings on rotten tomatoes, and IMDB users panned it. Even though many positive critic ratings wee only lukewarm, still unusual. Normally when I see that big a gap, it's the audience that likes the movie more than the critics, lol. (RT critic rating still 73%, audience rating 54%.) Critic rating also didn't match the box office, though that's more common, still worth noting since that is further evidence the critics were out of touch on GB16.
I'm glad critics were out of touch with the over the top hate campaign. Again, there is no normalizing the beating this one particular movie took.

And IMDB users don't exist for any other reason than to pan things. Especially things they've never actually seen.
#4886931
JurorNo.2 wrote:
HunterCC wrote: Yeah, there was a pretty big gap between critic and audience ratings on rotten tomatoes, and IMDB users panned it. Even though many positive critic ratings wee only lukewarm, still unusual. Normally when I see that big a gap, it's the audience that likes the movie more than the critics, lol. (RT critic rating still 73%, audience rating 54%.) Critic rating also didn't match the box office, though that's more common, still worth noting since that is further evidence the critics were out of touch on GB16.
I'm glad critics were out of touch with the over the top hate campaign. Again, there is no normalizing the beating this one particular movie took.

And IMDB users don't exist for any other reason than to pan things. Especially things they've never actually seen.
There was internet trolling, as common with most major movies, and there was a hate campaign against geeks in general, especially male geeks, whipped up to try to garner support for the movie.

"The critics" are out of touch on GB16. They are one one side, multiple audience review sources and the box office are on the other. To those critics: When everyone else disagrees with you. It's at least worth considering the wrong person might be you.

Yeah. There is no normalizing the beating GB16 took. Unlike the makers of Hunger Games, Fury Road. Force Awakens, and now Rogue One, the makers (including director and cast) chose to handle criticism differently. Their movies aren't mired in the toxicity GB16 immersed itself in. They addressed valid criticism, and against the trolls they said, at most, "hey give the movie a chance we think you will actually like it". GB16 makers response was ignore valid criticism, highlight the trolls, call whole swathes of critics assholes, basement dwelling virgins, and misogynists. And then express horror at the flame wars they started and kept going LOL. Again, Force Awakens before GB16 and Rogue One after GB16 didn't have this problem. GB16 makers chose to feed the trolls, and get nasty instead. And GB16 paid for it dearly.

Again, IMDB users were proven right about GB16.
#4886932
HunterCC wrote:They addressed valid criticism
As did Feig when he said he understood some people just don't like reboots. Reitman said much the same thing. The rest of the criticism was "women aren't funny" or "Waaa, my continuity was erased!" There is no way to address utter nonsense.
Force Awakens before GB16 and Rogue One after GB16 didn't have this problem.
Because they're following typical tropes fanboys by and large approve of.
And GB16 paid for it dearly.
As did all the fans who were repeatedly called "shills" for not following the hive mind. As did the fans who had to watch their GB Reddit and Facebook pages turn into cesspools of bullying and negativity.
Again, IMDB users were proven right about GB16.
Lol, that's like saying if the geek in high school has no friends, there must really be something wrong with him/her. And IMDB has never been right about anything.

Not to mention, you're still discussing a movie you haven't even seen. Fine if you don't, but never rely on evil like IMDB to make up your mind for you. ;)
Last edited by JurorNo.2 on December 9th, 2016, 8:49 am, edited 4 times in total.
80sguy, Alphagaia liked this
#4886976
pferreira1983 wrote: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.
COULD is the key word here...

Having Reitman directing it doesn't guarantee we'll get a good film. Looking at the Rocky movies, I enjoyed all of them, but 5 was bad (even Stallone doesn't like it), and that was directed by John G. Avildsen, who directed the first film.
Sav C liked this
#4886993
JurorNo.2 wrote:
HunterCC wrote:They addressed valid criticism
As did Feig when he said he understood some people just don't like reboots. Reitman said much the same thing. The rest of the criticism was "women aren't funny" or "Waaa, my continuity was erased!" There is no way to address utter nonsense.
Unlike Reitman, Feig couldn't keep himself consistent. Feig made the "asshole" comment, then said he didn't know any such ppl from the geek community,then went right back to lumping critics with the trolls and ignoring valid criticism, to the point he responded with "good point.. zzz...*craps pants*". Pro tip, when you insult ppl, then apologize, then go right back to insults, it's not an apology. Feig demonstrably did NOT do what Reitman, and the makers of Force Awakens did. BTW - what was Feig's "men aren't funny" comments about anyways?
JurorNo.2 wrote:
HunterCC wrote:Force Awakens before GB16 and Rogue One after GB16 didn't have this problem.
Because they're following typical tropes fanboys by and large approve of.
Just so there's no misunderstanding here, Juror, what do you mean by "fanboys", and what tropes are you referring to?
JurorNo.2 wrote:
HunterCC wrote:And GB16 paid for it dearly.
As did all the fans who were repeatedly called "shills" for not following the hive mind. As did the fans who had to watch their GB Reddit and Facebook pages turn into cesspools of bullying and negativity.
James Rolfe and Richard Roeper say "hi", and the bullying came from GB16 supporters. And google "ghostbusters man-babies" for the most bullying and hive mind on the internet, and it's from the pro-GB16 crowd.
JurorNo.2 wrote:
HunterCC wrote:Again, IMDB users were proven right about GB16.
Lol, that's like saying if the geek in high school has no friends, there must really be something wrong with him/her. And IMDB has never been right about anything.
Naw, I'm just saying that box office is pretty important. As well as noting even many positive reviews of GB16 were lukewarm at best. We can question how biased iMDB users are of anything, I'm just saying their viewpoint on GB16 is supported by the box office. So yeah, they were right about at least one thing, GB16.
JurorNo.2 wrote:
HunterCC wrote:Not to mention, you're still discussing a movie you haven't even seen. Fine if you don't, but never rely on evil like IMDB to make up your mind for you. ;)
I'm discussing a movie that divided this fanbase, and whose makers fueled flamewars for marketing and possibly misandrist reasons. I don't have to see the movie to know about the public ****storm generated by them, or talk about what the general public's reaction was.

Again, Star wars movies starring a female protagonist haven't embedded themselves in controversy, before and after GB16. Why not?
#4886996
HunterCC wrote: Again, Star wars movies starring a female protagonist haven't embedded themselves in controversy, before and after GB16. Why not?
To be fair a) attractive model like female not regular. B) she wasn't only hero there was Han and fin ect.... C) they hid her in some markets and toys like http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/star-wa ... ly-hasbro/ Hell in China they shrank the black guy http://variety.com/2015/film/news/star- ... 201653494/


They played it smart and gave the racists and sexists reason to think it won't be what they think. Sony was proud to have women and got hated for it.

Yes some people on other side had it but come on stuff like http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/3 ... er-website was much worse. She starred in a film that's her job yet racist attacks and sexist attacks too. It was stupid.


The point people made is ghostbusters does not deserve its hate when films like "stare at aprils ass" I mean the new ninja turtles got a free pass. Probably cause it was an excuse to stare at hot woman so we can excuse that reboot.

That's point it doesn't deserve this "worst film ever" reputation when its not even in top 10 worst films of last 5 years. Hell fantastic four = reboot, goes against everything fantastic four and was just dull as hell.
#4886997
HunterCC wrote:
JurorNo.2 wrote:
As did Feig when he said he understood some people just don't like reboots. Reitman said much the same thing. The rest of the criticism was "women aren't funny" or "Waaa, my continuity was erased!" There is no way to address utter nonsense.
Unlike Reitman, Feig couldn't keep himself consistent. Feig made the "asshole" comment, then said he didn't know any such ppl from the geek community,
Wrong, he said he did not know any such assholes in real life, as the fans he had met were wonderful and the assholes were found online.
HunterCC wrote: then went right back to lumping critics with the trolls and ignoring valid criticism,
wrong again, he said in multiple occasions there are people who are against the reboot and he completely understands that. There are however, trolls in that group, but not the entire group.
HunterCC wrote: to the point he responded with "good point.. zzz...*craps pants*"
.
*Paul Feig thx a fan for liking the Holtzmann character.
Annoyed critic: Terrible, bland character. Zany wacky scientist is not what we need.
Paul Feig: Okay, thanks. I truly value your opinio... Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz (Feig falls into coma, shits pants)

Yeah, how dare he say such immensely shocking words to a guy going on a negative tirade for weeks and shitting on a honest response between a fan and Paul Feig with such well thought out criticism.
HunterCC wrote: Pro tip, when you insult ppl, then apologize, then go right back to insults, it's not an apology.
He said geek culture contains some of he biggest assholes, and explained he meant the trolls online, not all the people against the reboot. It's not an apology, it's a clarification as people seem really quick to take any of his responses as wrong as possible to demonize the man.

You are wrong on so many levels here, while warping the facts, it's truly mind boggling people think Sony is responsible for creating controversy: the fans seem perfectly capable on their own thx to extreme bias.

Pauls statement:
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulfeig/sta ... 48/photo/1
Last edited by Alphagaia on December 11th, 2016, 10:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sav C liked this
#4887026
Kingpin wrote:All due respect meant, you didn't make it clear you were being rhetorical.
No probs, I did:

"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."

But thanks for going to the trouble of answering my question anyway. :)
Kingpin wrote:But as I and others have elaborated on, it isn't that random a pick. And if not Ghostbusters, then what other franchises in the Sony collection would've been a better choice?
Ok but how about creating something new? You could gender flip any film Sony owned and make a franchise out of it. The decision to use Ghostbusters begs belief, it's not even a new brand.
Kingpin wrote:I didn't say he didn't say that, just that I think people might've been unintentionally exaggerating how frequently he actually said it.
You have to admit like Joss Whedon he has kind of put himself out there about his views towards men and women.
Kingpin wrote:Hah! How about you try get Bill Murray to stay on track with anything. :)
Yeah yeah I know but I'm sure he would have been up for a cameo role.
RichardLess wrote:The pro reboot crowd should put their selves in our shoes. We waited so long, read every new article. First the '90s and the Will Smith/Ben Stiller/ Chris Farley rumours, Then the mid 2000s & beyond. I've been a GB fan since I could walk and I hated a new Ghostbusters movie?!? How is that even possible? Then it bombs at the box office which means it could be another God knows how long until another GB movie comes along. Plus it reboots all we've come to love about the franchise and starts all over? It's hard man. It really is. I hate that I hate GB16. I can't stress that enough.
I feel your pain. Reminds me of what happened with The Force Awakens. :cry:
JurorNo.2 wrote:
And IMDB users don't exist for any other reason than to pan things. Especially things they've never actually seen.
I'm an IMDB user and I only go on the site if I've seen what I'm discussing.
timeware wrote:You need to look at the owner of FF. Anita Sarkeesian has a you tube channel and kick starter page. She has been accused of stealing fan art and not fulfilling campaign promises. The founding members. They have no men working for them. They all share the same political believes and all like to plug their bosses kick starter campaign. I could post more twitter pages but it really is kind of redundant and repetitive.
Well it looks like she's up to her old tricks again:


Commander_Jim wrote:And to add insult to injury we, people who've been fans for years, even decades, and have invested time into discussing the films get to be lectured to by people who arent even fans of GB that we have no right to express an opinion on GB now because we are woman hating, misogynist basement dwelling fanboys. That is what really got to me, after being a fan of GB for 30 years and investing time and money into that fandom, some feminist-come-lately is going to lecture me about GB??
I think you made a really good point here. We should all be grown up enough to be able to handle this well but because Ghostbusters is our all time favourite film to see us fans shunned away by mainstream media and feminists who most of which probably never saw the original is damning to those that supported the franchise through thick and thin. We know the franchise more than those people yet we're talked to on what is good for us. We should consider this: the feminists who attacked the Ghostbusters fans and held up the new movie as how movies should be done weren't solely attacking GB fans they were attacking fandom in general. They wanted to show how feminism can deal with fandom. They were waiting for the right franchise to pop up to make their point that hardcore fans of anything are white males nerds who live in their parents basement. The Force Awakens was well received by the hardcore fans so feminists didn't complain so they moved onto the next hot topic which was Ghostbusters.
#4887040
pferreira1983 wrote:Ok but how about creating something new?
Hollywood create something actually new and original? Surely you jest. :P
pferreira1983 wrote:it's not even a new brand.
No, but it gave them the opportunity to make a new chapter/offshoot of the existing brand.
pferreira1983 wrote:You have to admit like Joss Whedon he has kind of put himself out there about his views towards men and women.
Maybe, but I haven't seen Whedon getting that same level of roasting and public ridicule.
Kingpin wrote:Hah! How about you try get Bill Murray to stay on track with anything. :)
Yeah yeah I know but I'm sure he would have been up for a cameo role.
pferreira1983 wrote:We should all be grown up enough to be able to handle this well but because Ghostbusters is our all time favourite film to see us fans shunned away by mainstream media and feminists who most of which probably never saw the original is damning to those that supported the franchise through thick and thin.
I agree to the point that we as a community (being roughly 32 years old) should've been old enough to have been able to handle what was happening and if need be, just ignore it.
#4887041
To be fair on something new its not Hollywood's fault its ours. Look at what films sell now day. It's all sequels and reboots. A new film comes along and no one gives it a fair try. Example more people saw heath ledger as joker in a big named sequel yet when he wad in "Brokeback Mountain" (great movie btw) the internet went "lol gay cowboys". The transformers sequels make more money than orginal Oscar worthy stuff.

THAT is why they always use brands now to help create equal heroes for others. Ghostbusters ATC did it with women. In comics we have had female Thor , black captain America, black spider-man , Asian hulk

Sometimes it is an issue like Ultimate spider-man killed peter to make Miles. That didn't sit well with me as you had to watch a character you grew up with die for a new one. It's why I love Ghostbusters ATC as originals' are unchanged. It'd be so much worse if originals were in it as the same characters and died. That might make me dislike it.

But the point was too many blame Hollywood and claim its "running out of ideas" that's because now days people only go to see sequels , reboots or films based on named brands. Some get through but not many. That's our fault. If orginal movies made as much money there would be more.
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4887051
SSJmole wrote:
HunterCC wrote:Again, Star wars movies starring a female protagonist haven't embedded themselves in controversy, before and after GB16. Why not?
To be fair a) attractive model like female not regular. B) she wasn't only hero there was Han and fin ect.... C) they hid her in some markets and toys like http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/star-wa ... ly-hasbro/ Hell in China they shrank the black guy http://variety.com/2015/film/news/star- ... 201653494/
A) Rey looks regular for a teenage girl. Rey is estimated at 19 at most, and the target demographic was probably younger. Two of the GB16 cast look attractive to me (Wiig and McKinnon), tastes of others may vary .
Image
Image

B) That Star Wars went with a mixed cast, as opposed to a straight out gender swap with the male characters dumbed down, is a strong credit to the Star Wars makers and fanbase, and makes the GB16 crowd look PC at best and misandrist at worst. Between those two groups, it's the GB16 not the SW makers and supporters being sexist here, if you want to look at both sides as you describe

C) Now the Chinese poster is bad, lol. Definitely should criticize the marketing campaign there, and why it was thought that would sell in China. The toys...I read the % of toys bought for girls is rising, though whole numbers lacking, so might be a business decision. But still looks bad equality-wise on disney and partners. Personally, given how Frozen merch is still selling, looks like another bone-headed and and sexist move by hollywood.

Hey, neither examples you cite above have nothing to do he online controversy Sony/Feig/etc. ran with!
SSJmole wrote:They played it smart and gave the racists and sexists reason to think it won't be what they think. Sony was proud to have women and got hated for it.
Say what? Are you trying to say a gender mixed cast is what racist and sexists want? And BTW, remember what "color" Finn was? I don't recall him falling into any stereotypes like Jones character did either, even though Jones had other better lines, the racist "loud black woman" lines were still in GB16. If that's not what you're saying, please elaborate, because your statement above makes no sense.

Sony OTOH, wasn't hated because they like women. They got hated because among other things, they were proud to bash men onscreen and in their marketing campaign, they and supporters were proud to bash men (man-babies) when responding to criticism.
SSJmole wrote:Yes some people on other side had it but come on stuff like http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/3 ... er-website was much worse. She starred in a film that's her job yet racist attacks and sexist attacks too. It was stupid.
It was a nasty flamewar both ways, that Sony and Co. kept going for marketing and possible misandrist reasons.

And please don't make Jones look like the innocent victim here. The hacking of her phone was OB, but look at the other side of the flamewar (yes, breitbart, like I've said before they and Jones deserve each other) and tell me Jones isn't racist as well, if you are going to judge both sides fairly.

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/07/2 ... r-history/

And yes, she and Feig egged it on. The Breitbart quotes of her point to this, so does Feig's own words about Jones being a "brawler".

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/06/26/mo ... rolls.html

Pro-tip, don't complain about a flamewar when you are a party to keeping it alive.

SSJmole wrote:The point people made is ghostbusters does not deserve its hate when films like "stare at aprils ass" I mean the new ninja turtles got a free pass. Probably cause it was an excuse to stare at hot woman so we can excuse that reboot.

That's point it doesn't deserve this "worst film ever" reputation when its not even in top 10 worst films of last 5 years. Hell fantastic four = reboot, goes against everything fantastic four and was just dull as hell.
The trailer was the most hated ever. Call it a combination of a trailer even people who liked the movie said wasn't good, and the flame baiting campaign referenced above. The film is mostly rated mediocre to bad, and a flop for its investment. BTW, I don't recall fans especially geeks giving TMNT2014 any pass, including how the character of April O'Neal was treated. But then again those film makers didn't go out of their way to start flamewars like Sony did.
Last edited by HunterCC on December 11th, 2016, 1:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
pferreira1983 liked this
#4887053
HunterCC wrote: I don't recall him falling into any stereotypes like Jones character did either, even though Jones had other better lines, the racist "loud black woman" lines were still in GB16.
Dude, you're accusing an African American of racism against her own race, in order to bash a movie you haven't even seen, lol.

And if I saw an Italian American character in a movie talking with their hands, I'm not going to call that racism. Every culture has their own behavioral signatures and quirks. That's not the same thing as racist stereotypes. Characters have to have some kind of ethnicity, or we're all just going to end up bland as toast. When you guys complain that Jones is too loud or too sassy, to me it just sounds like you want her to be more generically white. You might as well go back to GB84 and make Winston an atheist, because a black guy who "loves Jesus' style" is just so stereotypical, right? :roll:

Not to mention, it's hard for me to believe you guys care about racism, when you throw Leslie Jones to the wolves, in favor of the alt right. And if you're going to call Jones' comments racism, you'll have to throw Eddie Murphy, Richard Pryor, etc etc etc into that camp as well. It's not the same thing. That's not a double standard, that's being aware of context.
#4887054
wrong again, he said in multiple occasions there are people who are against the reboot and he completely understands that. There are however, trolls in that group, but not the entire group.
And on multiple occasions he's had the opportunity to point out the trolls from groups like Feminist Frequency and only wanted to defend the pro reboot crowd. He still has not said anything about and refuses to make comments regarding his fellow liberal minded feminist groupies. I'm not saying all feminists are liberal, I'm just saying he tends to hang out with very like minded people.

Claiming to be a feminist and only standing up for the women that agree with you is bull shit.
pferreira1983 liked this
#4887056
HunterCC

1 regular teenager where did you go to school? Was it in the 90210 area? She's more model looking.

2 No my point was by showing "Chewie we're home" and other such clips people thought originals would be treated bigger and be the stars too. Instead they just ruined all the good from episode VI's ending (weird ghostbusters fans would rather have that) but in doing so any fans sexist or racist will watch for Han.

3 Jones is a comedian most of her "racist" stuff was in good fun and it was not targeting anyone. Same reason I don't think South park is racist as that is in good fun too. Sorry right now your victim blaming to justify it and it was wrong.

4 Most hated think about that. TMNT got some hate but it died out fast as people ignored it. It made money (which as I said gee I wonder why the film objectifying a woman made money) but people are still hating on ghostbusters including people who have not even seen it

So no I stand by what I said 2016 is the year trolls won (not just Ghostbusters either)
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 23
Positron Props GB1 Pack Build

Awesome!! Good luck on your build! Tom's shell i[…]

Trailer posted for release for the Frozen Empire u[…]

Trivia, callbacks etc I noticed so far *Cover A *[…]

Matty Trap - Replace Pedal?

Has anyone successfully transferred the pedal elec[…]