Discuss the new Ghostbusters movie to be released in 2016, directed by Paul Feig.
By 80sguy
#4897847
Even if this was a sequel, people would still most likely complain about it. Let's say Feig was still directing. His style of humour would have likely remained the same, and that was a major complaint from fans. So instead of getting a reboot with humour unlike the original, we get a sequel with humour unlike the original (think Blues Brothers 2000). We'd pretty much be back to where we started.

I don't mind origins movies. I am glad we didn't really get an origin in Spider-man Homecoming though since we already had to sit through the Maguire and Garfield version. Frankly, Ghostbusters never had much of an origin story, so for me it was nice to get some explanation on things.
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By DarkSpectre
#4897863
Honestly you cut out dialog and situations that make the characters incompetent, cut down the unneeded "line-o-rama", crank the tension and cut the cringe, you have a much more watchable film. it's not perfect, but much more watchable
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4897864
TK5759 wrote:
JurorNo.2 wrote:Think I might still have that tape somewhere in all of its glorious edited-for-television greatness...


Yeah I know some fans don't like that, but as a fan of classic TV, I personally find all the different edits fascinating! Plus it's nostalgia, I remember how TV used to look and sound and it's cool to experience that again, even if it's not as "advanced" as it is today.

And you know speaking of editing, I was just watching one of my old Nick at Nite VHS recordings (Yay Welcome Back, Kotter!). So weird, you can see where I randomly decided to go through the different channels, or stopped the recording for a commercial break. It's kind of spooky in a way, the closest thing to going back in time and seeing yourself!
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4897868
TK5759 wrote:
JurorNo.2 wrote:It's kind of spooky in a way, the closest thing to going back in time and seeing yourself!

Other than, y'know....pictures. :cool:


For me, it's not the same. Pictures are how other people see me. Whereas with a recording, it was my own thoughts and actions. It's like being back inside my own head, which no one else could ever experience.
Sav C liked this
By necrosapien87
#4897991
I haven't thought too much on how I would fix it. I think scrapping it for something else would be my personal fix. Identifying my issues with the film is all I've done for the film. The characters in the film are not well developed. The only one who stands out and has thus been the only liked character is Holtzmann. Patty is the only other one who has any distinct character. Abby and Erin were the same awkward delivered comedic characters.

The other issue I have, and I'm not trying to start a anti-feminist whatever argument. When I was preparing to see the film, I was hearing things like "this is feminist propaganda." and I thought to myself "it can't be that bad." Then I saw it and about 2/3rds through the movie I could definitely see why people thought this. In the film, there isn't a single positive male character. Every male character is either evil, a complete idiot, or an asshole. Ernie Hudson's character is the closest thing to a positive male character in the film and he's more neutral than anything. Kevin is an idiot, the Mayor is an idiot while his assistant (female) seems to be the brains, Bill Murray's character was condescending, Dan Aykroyd's character was kind of a dick (but he was a taxi driver), the delivery boy was kind of an ass, the villain was a creepy evil man, the tour guide at the beginning of the film was kind of dumb and wimpy. So it's easy to see how this is clearly targeting female movie goers.

My Final, and maybe biggest issue is Paul Feig. It wasn't how he handle the film, or the base material. It was how he handled himself in addressing the fan-base and prospective ticket buyers. He was met with a lot of criticism, and hate for the film. He then turned on the very fan base he should have been trying to win over. He insulted them, and threw fits about them. That's shitty. I don't care how much hate you might receive for your work, especially when working with an established franchise you have been honored with an invitation to work in, you don't insult fans of any level. Take Michael Bay as an example. Bay has had more hate than any director I can think of all because of his work with the Transformers franchise. Whether or not the hate is justified can be argued all day, but what you have to give credit to Bay for is he never turned on the fan base. He never came out and called them childish and ignorant. I hope Feig's career is permanently damaged because of this film.

But that's just my pov.
User avatar
By Sav C
#4897994
necrosapien87 wrote:Ernie Hudson's character is the closest thing to a positive male character in the film and he's more neutral than anything. Kevin is an idiot, the Mayor is an idiot while his assistant (female) seems to be the brains, Bill Murray's character was condescending, Dan Aykroyd's character was kind of a dick (but he was a taxi driver), the delivery boy was kind of an ass, the villain was a creepy evil man, the tour guide at the beginning of the film was kind of dumb and wimpy. So it's easy to see how this is clearly targeting female movie goers.

Assuming that it's true, and men are intentionally portrayed in a negative light compared to the women in ATC, wouldn't it really be targeting sexists, and not female movie goers? I know what you meant, it's just that your phrasing makes it seem as if all women think men are lesser.
By necrosapien87
#4897996
Sav C wrote:
necrosapien87 wrote:Ernie Hudson's character is the closest thing to a positive male character in the film and he's more neutral than anything. Kevin is an idiot, the Mayor is an idiot while his assistant (female) seems to be the brains, Bill Murray's character was condescending, Dan Aykroyd's character was kind of a dick (but he was a taxi driver), the delivery boy was kind of an ass, the villain was a creepy evil man, the tour guide at the beginning of the film was kind of dumb and wimpy. So it's easy to see how this is clearly targeting female movie goers.

Assuming that it's true, and men are intentionally portrayed in a negative light compared to the women in ATC, wouldn't it really be targeting sexists, and not female movie goers? I know what you meant, it's just that your phrasing makes it seem as if all women think men are lesser.


Yeah I see what you're saying about my phrasing. But what I meant is the writing and the comedy. Most comedy and drama shows where the target audience is women tend to write men in negative lights. That's what I meant. Hell even shows that don't particularly target women show men in some type of negative light. Animated shows tend to show dads as idiots (Simpson, Family Guy, Flintstones, etc.), and that leaks into sitcoms too. King of Queens, Everybody Loves Raymond, etc. I think that's a reason I like shows like That's 70's show. Red was one of the few positive father figures shown in television during that time (and he often reminded me of my own father.)
User avatar
By Sav C
#4897997
Well Everybody Loves Raymond was Ray Romano's show, so I'm not sure if that counts--but I do see what you're saying.
By philmorgan81
#4897998
necrosapien87 wrote:I haven't thought too much on how I would fix it. I think scrapping it for something else would be my personal fix. Identifying my issues with the film is all I've done for the film. The characters in the film are not well developed. The only one who stands out and has thus been the only liked character is Holtzmann. Patty is the only other one who has any distinct character. Abby and Erin were the same awkward delivered comedic characters.

The other issue I have, and I'm not trying to start a anti-feminist whatever argument. When I was preparing to see the film, I was hearing things like "this is feminist propaganda." and I thought to myself "it can't be that bad." Then I saw it and about 2/3rds through the movie I could definitely see why people thought this. In the film, there isn't a single positive male character. Every male character is either evil, a complete idiot, or an asshole. Ernie Hudson's character is the closest thing to a positive male character in the film and he's more neutral than anything. Kevin is an idiot, the Mayor is an idiot while his assistant (female) seems to be the brains, Bill Murray's character was condescending, Dan Aykroyd's character was kind of a dick (but he was a taxi driver), the delivery boy was kind of an ass, the villain was a creepy evil man, the tour guide at the beginning of the film was kind of dumb and wimpy. So it's easy to see how this is clearly targeting female movie goers.

My Final, and maybe biggest issue is Paul Feig. It wasn't how he handle the film, or the base material. It was how he handled himself in addressing the fan-base and prospective ticket buyers. He was met with a lot of criticism, and hate for the film. He then turned on the very fan base he should have been trying to win over. He insulted them, and threw fits about them. That's shitty. I don't care how much hate you might receive for your work, especially when working with an established franchise you have been honored with an invitation to work in, you don't insult fans of any level. Take Michael Bay as an example. Bay has had more hate than any director I can think of all because of his work with the Transformers franchise. Whether or not the hate is justified can be argued all day, but what you have to give credit to Bay for is he never turned on the fan base. He never came out and called them childish and ignorant. I hope Feig's career is permanently damaged because of this film.

But that's just my pov.



LOL! Yeah it is hard to discuss any criticism with this film at times. The more I have read though it seems that any genuine criticism that people had with the movie are pretty unified. The issues that you mentioned above are the same ones that I have read with many other fans. It is exactly the same with the people that address what they loved about the movie. I know so many people that are not fond of the movie, but really love the part where Holtzman whips out the Duel Proton Pistols and wrangles her way through that hord of spirits with that variation on the theme is playing. It is hard to not feel pumped during that part.

I think you put it quite well. Sometimes when I watch the movie I am sitting there thinking, "Wow I can't believe someone read the outline to this story and said Yeah this is perfect." ;). There are moments where I think this should have been scrapped in favor of something else.

Again I am glad that this film wasn't universally panned. I believe that the fact that audiences were so split on it is the reason that future projects are even being considered. This movie could have easily killed the franchise. I mean if it bombed like John Carter or Mars Needs Moms (To name a few infamous bombs.) Sony probably would have pulled the plug on Ghost Corps. Thankfully that didn't happen. :) :) :)
Sav C liked this
By necrosapien87
#4898000
philmorgan81 wrote:
necrosapien87 wrote:I haven't thought too much on how I would fix it. I think scrapping it for something else would be my personal fix. Identifying my issues with the film is all I've done for the film. The characters in the film are not well developed. The only one who stands out and has thus been the only liked character is Holtzmann. Patty is the only other one who has any distinct character. Abby and Erin were the same awkward delivered comedic characters.

The other issue I have, and I'm not trying to start a anti-feminist whatever argument. When I was preparing to see the film, I was hearing things like "this is feminist propaganda." and I thought to myself "it can't be that bad." Then I saw it and about 2/3rds through the movie I could definitely see why people thought this. In the film, there isn't a single positive male character. Every male character is either evil, a complete idiot, or an asshole. Ernie Hudson's character is the closest thing to a positive male character in the film and he's more neutral than anything. Kevin is an idiot, the Mayor is an idiot while his assistant (female) seems to be the brains, Bill Murray's character was condescending, Dan Aykroyd's character was kind of a dick (but he was a taxi driver), the delivery boy was kind of an ass, the villain was a creepy evil man, the tour guide at the beginning of the film was kind of dumb and wimpy. So it's easy to see how this is clearly targeting female movie goers.

My Final, and maybe biggest issue is Paul Feig. It wasn't how he handle the film, or the base material. It was how he handled himself in addressing the fan-base and prospective ticket buyers. He was met with a lot of criticism, and hate for the film. He then turned on the very fan base he should have been trying to win over. He insulted them, and threw fits about them. That's shitty. I don't care how much hate you might receive for your work, especially when working with an established franchise you have been honored with an invitation to work in, you don't insult fans of any level. Take Michael Bay as an example. Bay has had more hate than any director I can think of all because of his work with the Transformers franchise. Whether or not the hate is justified can be argued all day, but what you have to give credit to Bay for is he never turned on the fan base. He never came out and called them childish and ignorant. I hope Feig's career is permanently damaged because of this film.

But that's just my pov.



LOL! Yeah it is hard to discuss any criticism with this film at times. The more I have read though it seems that any genuine criticism that people had with the movie are pretty unified. The issues that you mentioned above are the same ones that I have read with many other fans. It is exactly the same with the people that address what they loved about the movie. I know so many people that are not fond of the movie, but really love the part where Holtzman whips out the Duel Proton Pistols and wrangles her way through that hord of spirits with that variation on the theme is playing. It is hard to not feel pumped during that part.

I think you put it quite well. Sometimes when I watch the movie I am sitting there thinking, "Wow I can't believe someone read the outline to this story and said Yeah this is perfect." ;). There are moments where I think this should have been scrapped in favor of something else.

Again I am glad that this film wasn't universally panned. I believe that the fact that audiences were so split on it is the reason that future projects are even being considered. This movie could have easily killed the franchise. I mean if it bombed like John Carter or Mars Needs Moms (To name a few infamous bombs.) Sony probably would have pulled the plug on Ghost Corps. Thankfully that didn't happen. :) :) :)


It's funny you mention the dual proton pistols because the tech is something small that bugged me that I didn't mention. Don't get me wrong, I loved the gadgets in the film (minus the chipper), but what bugged me is we go from her having a barely functioning proton pack on a large cart, to her figuring out how to condense into something easily carried which was expected. But then suddenly she has all these other gadgets ready to go. I feel like most of the other gadgets could have been left for a sequel. I also had the trap design.
philmorgan81 liked this
By philmorgan81
#4898004
necrosapien87 wrote:
philmorgan81 wrote:

LOL! Yeah it is hard to discuss any criticism with this film at times. The more I have read though it seems that any genuine criticism that people had with the movie are pretty unified. The issues that you mentioned above are the same ones that I have read with many other fans. It is exactly the same with the people that address what they loved about the movie. I know so many people that are not fond of the movie, but really love the part where Holtzman whips out the Duel Proton Pistols and wrangles her way through that hord of spirits with that variation on the theme is playing. It is hard to not feel pumped during that part.

I think you put it quite well. Sometimes when I watch the movie I am sitting there thinking, "Wow I can't believe someone read the outline to this story and said Yeah this is perfect." ;). There are moments where I think this should have been scrapped in favor of something else.

Again I am glad that this film wasn't universally panned. I believe that the fact that audiences were so split on it is the reason that future projects are even being considered. This movie could have easily killed the franchise. I mean if it bombed like John Carter or Mars Needs Moms (To name a few infamous bombs.) Sony probably would have pulled the plug on Ghost Corps. Thankfully that didn't happen. :) :) :)


It's funny you mention the dual proton pistols because the tech is something small that bugged me that I didn't mention. Don't get me wrong, I loved the gadgets in the film (minus the chipper), but what bugged me is we go from her having a barely functioning proton pack on a large cart, to her figuring out how to condense into something easily carried which was expected. But then suddenly she has all these other gadgets ready to go. I feel like most of the other gadgets could have been left for a sequel. I also had the trap design.


That's understandable. Yeah I thought it was weird the way that she cooked up that extra equipment so fast. I hated the new design of the Proton Pack, Ghost Trap and PKE Meter. I liked the look of the Pistols, the Chipper, Gauntlet and Ghost Grenade. Those worked for me because they were new equipment. I like the look of the Chipper, but it's use is questionable with the rules established, but hey at least that was covered in the comic. I think the new equipment was put in this film because fans had waited so long to see another Ghostbusters movie, but since Feig decided to reinvent the wheel we get a detailed story about how the basic equipment is designed and how it works and a few scenes later we are introduced to new tools of the trade without any explanation as to how or why she got the idea to develop it. I am speaking of course about the theatrical cut of the film and not the Extended Cut. It is a good thing that they didn't wait for a sequel to introduce the new equipment because a sequel with this team feels unlikely. They may proceed with Leslie Jones and Kate Mckinnen, but I don't think Mcarthy and Wigg would return if a sequel to ATC was green lit.

I say this because Kate seems to be the favorite flavor of the year. She was in Ghostbusters, Christmas Office Party, Rough Night and she is voicing 3 characters in that foreign cartoon Leap! So since she is everywhere they would probably have her return.

It will be interesting to see what happens in Future live action films. Either a sequel to ATC or a sequel to the original series. I believe either of those would be better than ATC because they don't have to spend time reminding us who the Ghostbusters are.

Heck who know maybe it will be a coexisting thing. Animated movie to represent the original world. If it is a hit maybe they can pump some of those out every three years and ATC can do the live action films. Then there is whatever world Ecto Force will take place. That is of course if that idea isn't scrapped altogether. The best case scenerio of course is if Ivan Reitman can find a way to plausibly make ATC and the Original world ONE. I love how it worked in the comic, but what works in a comic may not work on film. Here I go rambling again. My apologies. :) :) :)
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4898012
necrosapien87 wrote:
Sav C wrote:Assuming that it's true, and men are intentionally portrayed in a negative light compared to the women in ATC, wouldn't it really be targeting sexists, and not female movie goers? I know what you meant, it's just that your phrasing makes it seem as if all women think men are lesser.


Yeah I see what you're saying about my phrasing. But what I meant is the writing and the comedy. Most comedy and drama shows where the target audience is women tend to write men in negative lights. That's what I meant. Hell even shows that don't particularly target women show men in some type of negative light. Animated shows tend to show dads as idiots (Simpson, Family Guy, Flintstones, etc.), and that leaks into sitcoms too. King of Queens, Everybody Loves Raymond, etc. I think that's a reason I like shows like That's 70's show. Red was one of the few positive father figures shown in television during that time (and he often reminded me of my own father.)


I hear this argument a lot, but I feel it's a disservice to the cops, Erin Dean, the mayor, the caretakers (especially the older one) the reporters, Patties uncle and Danni( though Danni is just lazy), while Erin and Holtzmann are prime cases for mental disorders.

The other women aren't exactly glorious either: The mayors flunky is a bitch, lady Eldridge a mass murderer, the hotel clerk a jerk, the professor a stuck up know it all, etc.

It's not just one gender that shows some faults.
Sav C liked this
By 80sguy
#4898020
People will always find things, even if they aren't there. I didn't notice anything favoring women, it was pretty much even really. Erin herself was socially awkward with men, which isn't exactly a favorable trait. Even if you argued that one no one trusted there profession, the exact same thing can be said about the originals too.
JurorNo.2, Sav C, Alphagaia liked this
User avatar
By Mercifull
#4898069
Don't break out of the letterbox. Feig completely ruined all the FX shots. It's already a far fetched concept but when the magic is ruined like this (it might look ok in 3D but certainly doesn't without) you can't concentrate on the movie and lose all immersion.

Image
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4898085
It didn't ruin anything for me but I do think it would've been an improvement if they didn't break the letterbox.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4898190
80sguy wrote:People will always find things, even if they aren't there. I didn't notice anything favoring women, it was pretty much even really. Erin herself was socially awkward with men, which isn't exactly a favorable trait. Even if you argued that one no one trusted there profession, the exact same thing can be said about the originals too.


Yeah, it really feels like some people are just out to put this movie down, and that's just sad.

Sav C wrote:It didn't ruin anything for me but I do think it would've been an improvement if they didn't break the letterbox.


I don't mind it. I actually found it a nice trick in the cinemas, and on my tv (which is quite big admittedly (hidden boast)) it's a unique quirk. I can understand other people don't think it's that great, but for me (because it gives the movie it's own style) it adds to the experience.
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4898198
It's really only a minor critique of mine. I've been pretty particular about aspect ratios in the past--I'm not big on 1.33, and really don't enjoy most aspect ratios smaller than 1.85. Anamorphic is my favourite hands down. One time I saw a video where the aspect ratio changed within the shots, basically cropping each shot of the film like you would a photograph. I find stuff like that distracting, that's all.
Alphagaia liked this
User avatar
By DarkSpectre
#4898205
In 3d it was pretty cool. But odd that they didn't just throw a letterbox overlay over the streams to contain them within the frame. The aspect ratio is correct in the extended cut as the streams stay in the frame
Alphagaia, Sav C liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4898208
Weird, I don't remember the FX staying within the frame in the extended cut.
User avatar
By Sav C
#4898213
Hmm, interesting. I believe you though.
By necrosapien87
#4898217
Alphagaia wrote:
80sguy wrote:Yeah, it really feels like some people are just out to put this movie down, and that's just sad..


It isn't that I just want to put the film down. There were small funny moments, but the bad things about the movie can't be ignored. I can't just blindly like a movie because it's a Ghostbuster film that gave us fancy new gadgets. By a movie and writing stand point, it was a bad movie. There's a great review of the film on youtube where the guy explained how it could have been made into a good film.
timeware liked this
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4898232
necrosapien87 wrote: I can't just blindly like a movie


Oh sheesh, no one is demanding you blind yourself, lol. I mean no offence, but what is with the Internet's obsession with proving they aren't doing anything "blindly"? Who is judging you in that exactly?

but the bad things about the movie can't be ignored.


They can be put in perspective though. And the constant bash fest we got last year wasn't it.
Sav C, Kingpin liked this
User avatar
By timeware
#4898240
They probably don't want to get labelled a sexist for not liking ATC. The movie did suffer from bad script writing if it had one at all. While I liked the film, I still say the script was rushed or they threw darts at a board figuring out what to do.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4898241
As I have said many times before, I have no beef with people disliking the movie. The movie is far from perfect, though I still found it enjoyable.

Some however, invent mad reasons to dislike it.
Saying the movie only targets males for instance, is just ignoring it also targets females with negative trades.
By necrosapien87
#4898242
Alphagaia wrote:As I have said many times before, I have no beef with people disliking the movie. The movie is far from perfect, though I still found it enjoyable.

Some however, invent mad reasons to dislike it.
Saying the movie only targets males for instance, is just ignoring it also targets females with negative trades.


The women have very small negative traits. There's no positive male character in this film. Ernie Hudson plays a somewhat neutral character. But every other male is extremely dumb, a coward, a creeper villain or a complete jerk. Yes, the mayor's assistant/mouthpiece was kind of a bitch but she was portrayed as the brains between her and the mayor. He was portrayed as a moron who didn't understand magic tricks. Comparing that to Erin's fear of being outed as a paranormal investigator and losing her credibility is very lopsided.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4898243
necrosapien87 wrote:
Alphagaia wrote:As I have said many times before, I have no beef with people disliking the movie. The movie is far from perfect, though I still found it enjoyable.

Some however, invent mad reasons to dislike it.
Saying the movie only targets males for instance, is just ignoring it also targets females with negative trades.


The women have very small negative traits.


One of them is an actual serial killer, the GB steal stuff, Erin punches people and one of them is insane. Yeah, small negative traits.

If the mayor is stupid for not getting a magic trick, then how stupid is Erin for not understanding how a doors works?

And why is Erins Dean's a jerk for wanting to give her tenor? Because he and the whole world does not believe in ghosts and he fires her because she lies to his face and seems insane?

Why are the caretakers stupid for knowing their stuff about the mansion and finding help against a super natural serial killer? Who failed to kill her latest victim?

Why are the reporters stupid for first doubting ghosts exists, but doubting the mayors explanation trying to hide ghosts exist after the big ghost breakout?

I could go on, but I strongly believe both sexes have faults for comedic values in this comedy, and not to stick it to a single gender.
Sav C liked this
By Davideverona
#4898253
I said it before. The first Feig's rough pitch was far more interesting. The Ghostbusters as a secret MIB-like government agency. THAT would have been a REAL reboot who would have avoided comparison with the originals. Instead they simply choose to rehash the original story beat.

That said, I think that IDW already saved ATC by making them a parallel universe who can continue on its own or can cross the path with our Ghostbusters using a portal. This was a great idea. I liked how they explained the different ways to bust ghosts, I liked how they referenced the "guys similar to Ray, Peter and Winston". Now they're really part of the same family.
JurorNo.2 liked this
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4898254
timeware wrote:The movie did suffer from bad script writing if it had one at all .


I think you know that statement wasn't especially productive. ;)
How would you fix GB2016?

Are you tall? I imagine if you are, kids teased y[…]

Hey doc venkman relax with the dislike button. I […]

Southwest Virginia Franchise

I might be. I was thinking of joining Ghostbuster[…]

Yeah, I don't expect room to be an issue. […]