Discuss all things Ghostbusters here, unless they would be better suited in one of the few forums below.
User avatar
By Sav C
#4901397
If Venkman is a sex predator, he's far from the worst related to Ghostbusters--check out the perv at 1:01:

But seriously, the whole thorazine thing is a metaphor/sarcastic joke. Not only would it have been a lethal dose to Dana, it wouldn't taken like fifteen syringes to administer. He probably found something she kept in her medicine closet, for all we know. Besides his line about it is largely sarcastic. Perhaps it is nothing more than a plot device.

Not to mention, all of Venkman's questionable actions that we see are verbal. Not that it makes him right in saying them (certainly I wouldn't say any of it), but it's likely he's just a goofball with no filter.
Marcus B, JurorNo.2 liked this
#4901398
I wouldn't know what Thorazine was unless I looked it up on the internet because of discussions like this, so maybe they just used it to sound "smarter" or more technical?

I think valium (as in the novelization) may have been a better thing to mention as I think it's given to calm people down or help them sleep.. which Dana may have had if she had seen a doctor after her experiences.

And DJT in a Bobby Brown video. Don't let those guys near a woman..
Sav C liked this
#4901423
What's annoying is how many "fans" go along with crap like this because they think it makes them smarter than a movie. Especially older movies, idiots like to put them down as being "dated" and proclaim themselves so "enlightened." It's complete and utter BS. And another reason I shredded my geek card.
Marcus B wrote:Wonder if this will be as contentious as the movie being about nothing
Was that contentious enough? :-D
Sav C, Marcus B liked this
#4901429
So, lol, apparently I am defending predatory behavior by defending Ghostbusters. This coming from actual "fans." Even though I've been a victim myself. (Note: This didn't happen here. Another fansite, though I use that term loosely.)

I am finally, and officially, done with this fandom.

And I just emailed Cracked that their article trivialized a serious issue and if they can't distinguish between reality and a movie, they are of no help to women at all.

Contentious enough?
Last edited by JurorNo.2 on November 30th, 2017, 6:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Kingpin, Sav C liked this
#4901432
JurorNo.2 wrote:So, lol, apparently I am defending predatory behavior by defending Ghostbusters. This coming from actual "fans." Even though I've been a victim myself.

I am finally, and officially, done with this fandom.

And I just emailed Cracked that their article trivialized a serious issue and if they can't distinguish between reality and a movie, they are of no help to women at all.

Contentious enough?
Maybe I'm missing something but I don't think anyone said you were defending predatory behavior. I was joking about it being contentious. I think we're all in agreement this is not what was intended at all, and yes, times were different and it's just a movie.
#4901433
Marcus B wrote:
JurorNo.2 wrote:So, lol, apparently I am defending predatory behavior by defending Ghostbusters. This coming from actual "fans." Even though I've been a victim myself.

I am finally, and officially, done with this fandom.

And I just emailed Cracked that their article trivialized a serious issue and if they can't distinguish between reality and a movie, they are of no help to women at all.

Contentious enough?
Maybe I'm missing something but I don't think anyone said you were defending predatory behavior. I was joking about it being contentious. I think we're all in agreement this is not what was intended at all, and yes, times were different and it's just a movie.
Oh dear, no no no, I was not at all talking about you. This happened elsewhere, I should have made that clear. I'm just angry at fandoms in general right now.

About the "times were different" thing. Yes, times have changed, but not at all for the better if this article and the "fans" I referenced are any indication.
#4901436
Venkman's a sleaze but he isn't a sexual predator, if he had been he wouldn't have stopped at sedating her in order to get Zuul from throwing her/itself at him - nor would he have bothered going back to the Firehouse just because Egon happened to call. If he were a predator, he would've just jumped right in as soon as Zuul started coming onto him.
JurorNo.2, Sav C liked this
#4901440
Marcus B wrote:I just meant that some things get put into older movies that might not today, or at least be handled a bit differently.
You're correct, I just don't like that that's the reality.
#4901442
timeware wrote:I'm not going to bother. I will add that 2017 will end as the year of hypocrisy. Almost two years of being called a sexist for not voting for HRC when these actors and politicians had problems of their own. :whatever:
I'm going to apologize a bit to you and other reboot skeptics (I still like the movie, don't press your luck. ;) ). Proton Charging is the site currently celebrating this article and it's where those two "fans" said I was defending harassment. And PC is essentially going around saying anyone who doesn't agree with the article isn't taking harassment seriously. How is that any different from "If you hate the movie, you're sexist"? It's not. I am now going to state, that Proton Charging was very wrong to ban reboot detractors last year and I was wrong to defend it. Yes, the reboot hate was extreme, and a lot of those haters deserved to be banned. But PC is confirming the worst stereotypes of reboot fans.
Sav C liked this
#4901450
Do you remember I liked the movie but I cant stand the director? There are some Ron Howard movies I like but I don't necessarily agree with his politics either. Apology accepted but honestly Juror if I were insulted I'd have been vocal about it.

Harassment is a serious issue but without due process it's just an excuse for dirty politics on both sides. I'm not saying don't believe these women that come forward but trust, question, verify. Neither party can take the high horse on this one.

I am honestly not surprised that Proton Charging is celebrating this article, but to say anyone support's harassment by disagreeing with this article is bull shit.
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4901452
JurorNo.2 wrote:
Marcus B wrote:I just meant that some things get put into older movies that might not today, or at least be handled a bit differently.
You're correct, I just don't like that that's the reality.
Films and art will reflect the kind of society we live in, for better or worse. I think we're heading to an Idiocracy type situation if we don't change things.
JurorNo.2 liked this
User avatar
By Sav C
#4901455
Marcus B wrote:I think valium (as in the novelization) may have been a better thing to mention as I think it's given to calm people down or help them sleep.. which Dana may have had if she had seen a doctor after her experiences.
That makes sense, they used to prescribe Valium a lot more readily, and besides I assume it would be much easier giving a demon a Valium pill instead of a Thorazine injection. I don't imagine trying to inject a demon with anything would go over too well...
JurorNo.2 wrote:So, lol, apparently I am defending predatory behavior by defending Ghostbusters. This coming from actual "fans." Even though I've been a victim myself. (Note: This didn't happen here. Another fansite, though I use that term loosely.)

I am finally, and officially, done with this fandom.
That really, really too bad to hear. I hope you stick around on this forum, you're nice to talk to.
And I just emailed Cracked that their article trivialized a serious issue and if they can't distinguish between reality and a movie, they are of no help to women at all.
Exactly, this article does more harm than good. How are we supposed to take the real cases seriously when we are tearing down characters whose only existence is on the screen or in print.

I'll probably get some flak for saying this, but I think some cases are misunderstandings/overreactions. We need to be able to distinguish between serial abusers or harassers (such as President Donald Trump, Harvey Weinstein, Charlie Rose, and the like) and people who have one off offences and may or may not have done anything seriously wrong, especially not career ending (such as Woody Allen and Garrison Keillor). There are different levels, and by treating the levels the same in media and in the response to them, it makes it harder to take the really bad cases seriously.
*NormalGamer*, timeware, Marcus B and 1 others liked this
#4901456
I'll probably get some flak for saying this, but I think some cases are misunderstandings/overreactions. We need to be able to distinguish between serial abusers or harassers (such as President Donald Trump, Harvey Weinstein, Charlie Rose, and the like) and people who have one off offences and may or may not have done anything seriously wrong, especially not career ending (such as Woody Allen and Garrison Keillor). There are different levels, and by treating the levels the same in media and in the response to them, it makes it harder to take the really bad cases seriously.
What I don't want to see over this is a million Duke Lacrosse cases and Gloria Allred rubbing her hands with glee while chasing ambulances. The media went ape over the false allegations on that one destroying lives in the process and not giving a crap afterwards. I won't get into the graphic details of what Crystal Mangum was eventually arrested for later on.
JurorNo.2, Sav C liked this
#4901457
timeware wrote: What I don't want to see over this is a million Duke Lacrosse cases and Gloria Allred rubbing her hands with glee while chasing ambulances.
I think you might have Allred confused with Nancy Grace.
#4901459
Marcus B wrote:
timeware wrote: What I don't want to see over this is a million Duke Lacrosse cases and Gloria Allred rubbing her hands with glee while chasing ambulances.
I think you might have Allred confused with Nancy Grace.
It's both of them, lol.
Last edited by JurorNo.2 on November 30th, 2017, 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#4901460
Sav C wrote: That really, really too bad to hear. I hope you stick around on this forum, you're nice to talk to.
Well I'm going to unfollow PC for awhile. But you guys are cool. :)
Exactly, this article does more harm than good. How are we supposed to take the real cases seriously when we are tearing down characters whose only existence is on the screen or in print.
It's always strange when this happens. I mean, do we not have enough real crimes that we have time to focus on fake ones?
There are different levels, and by treating the levels the same in media and in the response to them, it makes it harder to take the really bad cases seriously.
I have to agree. I mean yes some of the people getting in trouble do deserve it. But eventually someone is going to get unfairly railroaded by all this.
Sav C, SpaceBallz liked this
#4901462
timeware wrote: What I don't want to see over this is a million Duke Lacrosse cases and Gloria Allred rubbing her hands with glee while chasing ambulances. The media went ape over the false allegations on that one destroying lives in the process and not giving a crap afterwards. I won't get into the graphic details of what Crystal Mangum was eventually arrested for later on.
I do hope the media remembers the Duke case. That was extremely embarrassing. The boys' own teachers turned on them, and they were wrong!

Honestly though, I'm thinking this recent wave of accusations is possibly setting up precedent for going after Trump. Not that the accusations are fake, but I do feel like the timing is...interesting.
Sav C, SpaceBallz liked this
#4901683
That article is dumb. It reminds me of another article which was was titled top 11 villains who were totally screwed. In said article the writer insists Walter Peck was completely right and lists a bunch of other movie villains who he thought were right in what they did. The list includes Teasle from First Blood, HAL from 2001 a Space Odyssy, Gaston in Beauty and the Beast, and The Wicked Witch in the Wizard of Oz. I wouldn't be surprised if this article about Venkman being a sexual predator was written by the same person.
#4901694
The thing about Peck was as much as he's an a-hole the man was doing his job. All Peter had to do was show him how the containment unit worked instead of messing with him. After all he did ask nicely for a man without a certain body part.
The GB's could have chosen to work with the EPA but the personal hatred Peck was determined to have. I wouldn't say he was totally screwed, he was a villain that made himself.

    Hey and welcome

    My Little Pony/Ghostbusters crossover done by my d[…]

    Great work identifying the RS Temperature Control […]

    I read Back in Town #1. Spoilers : Hate to b[…]