[Slimered]

I haven't been on this forum for a while because the Ghostbusters fandom has become a toxic place. Ever since the release of Ghostbusters (2016) all I've seen are torrents of sexist and racist abuse hurled towards the Ghostbusters (2016) cast and crew - abuse which created a negative word of mouth around Ghostbusters (2016), and ended with Paul Feig's directorial record tarnished before his blockbuster Summer tentpole movie directing career had even begun.

Paul Feig will probably only be able to direct 15/R-rated comedy films now, and we'll likely never see him direct a big Summer blockbuster again.

What made me come back was today's announcement of Ghostbusters 3, a film that's a direct sequel to the original 1984 continuity. Now I'm very excited about this film, and I can't wait to see it, but the behind-the-scenes issue with this film is that it's letting the sexists win.

This is exactly what those disgusting misogynists wanted. In their minds, it validates their 'point' that women fighting ghosts 'doesn't work' (even though it does), and turns what should really be a harmless supernatural comedy movie into a political victory for people who only spread hate and contempt towards others.

I hope Jason Reitman has a plan to address this before the film's release.

Ghostbusters fandom is not toxic

It is. It's generally more toxic than other fandoms.

[Slimered]

I disagree with all your points.

There's a clear difference between Batman and Ghostbusters. If you're rebooting Batman, you need to see Bruce Wayne. 'Ghostbusters', however, is just the name of the business - so why can't you have different characters to Peter Venkman, Ray Stantz, Egon Spengler and Winston Zeddemore?

Ghostbusters (2016) was expertly made, with stunning comedy direction from Paul Feig. I loved the improv style, it made the jokes feel natural and from the identity of the actors rather than the screenwriter. It's a sound approach, and one of the reasons why - say - repeats of Whose Line Is It Anyway are so entertaining to watch.

Ghostbusters is an action movie as well as a supernatural comedy. Further emphasising the action is just that: further emphasising the action. You'd be complaining if they weren't trying to do something different, so the fact that they were should be commended.

Also: its failure was absolutely due to the sexists. It was rated 75% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, meaning that most critics agreed it was a great movie. If the vile sexists hadn't influenced public opinion of the film, Ghostbusters (2016) would have been a huge success.

No, a reboot and a re-imagining are two different things. A reboot of a franchise takes the characters you know and does a new story with them that is separate from previous iterations. A soft-reboot takes places in the same universe as previous iterations, but changes things in a similar way as a full reboot. A re-imagining is when you take a concept and re-make it in your own image. Batman and Spider-man are reboots. GB2016 is a re-imagining. Also, by your logic anyone can be Batman or Spider-man. In fact, there are plenty of else worlds stories where that is the case.

The problem with the term 'reboot' is that it can mean different things to different people. It can be used to mean a sequel that doesn't feature the characters from a previous movie in a franchise, a film in a franchise set within a different continuity, a remake etc...

To me, Ghostbusters (2016) IS a reboot. It's a retooling of the original film, with four new characters who happen to be women. 'Batman Begins' and 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' are also reboots, because they tell different stories in different continuities (albeit with characters who have been in previous films).

A reimagining in my mind would be taking a pre-existing story and telling it in a completely different genre.

If you think GB1984 was just about the action of busting ghosts and not the characters then I don't think we saw the same movie.

I never said that, I said the action genre was a part of it. The 2016 just exaggerated that side of things more.

Ghostbusters is NOT an action movie!

Again, it's a part of the film.

What action is there?

What do you think they are doing whenever they are busting a ghost with the Neutron Wands from their Proton Packs?

Critic scores don't mean a movie is good. In fact, 75% is pretty bad for critic scores considering how much attention this thing had and how much the media was trying to push it along to "combat the evil sexists". I went into this movie WANTING it to be good. I avoided as many spoilers as I could. I NEVER see movies in the theater anymore, but I specifically went to see this movie and was ready to like it. The movie was BAD. It had interesting ideas, and again when a lot of the dumb adlib humor is edited out and some heart edited back in (like the deleted scene where Erin confronts her former boss and Abby and her share a real moment) the movie shows its potential. As it was released in theaters, it was awful. It wasn't the evil sexist trolls that made me not like it.

Critic scores doesn't mean a film is 'good', because opinion is subjective, but it's a good indicator of overall quality. It means that in professional opinion the film isn't bad, and that people whose job it is to review and analyse film generally enjoyed it.

BTW, quote any hilarious lines from GB2016. Anything. Personally, I can't think of any.

"Rowan, collect your virginity from the lost and found!"

"That stuff went everywhere, by the way. In every crack,"

"It just makes me feel so warm and tingly inside." "That's probably the radiation."

"The hat is too much, right? Is it the wig or the hat?"

" Is it the boobs you don't like? Because I can make them... bigger,"

[Slimered]

Ever since the release of Ghostbusters (2016) all I've seen are torrents of sexist and racist abuse hurled towards the Ghostbusters (2016) cast and crew -

The only way that is ALL you saw, would have been because that was ALL you were focusing on. The majority of people that had a problem with the 2016 version disliked that it was being rebooted instead of being a sequel.

That's categorically not true. The main criticisms for the film seemed to be 'Ew, the Ghostbusters are ladiez now'.

[Alphagaia]

THAT'S just not true. Like, at all.

[savintheday]

The only way that is ALL you saw, would have been because that was ALL you were focusing on. The majority of people that had a problem with the 2016 version disliked that it was being rebooted instead of being a sequel.

That's categorically not true. The main criticisms for the film seemed to be 'Ew, the Ghostbusters are ladiez now'.

Holy hell, talk about tunnel vision!

You got a head full of outrage clickbait, and you've fallen for a narrative...hook, line and sinker.

I'm not saying the sexism wasn't there, but it was blown way out of proportion by the media for clicks.

[SSJmole]

That's categorically not true. The main criticisms for the film seemed to be 'Ew, the Ghostbusters are ladiez now'.

Holy hell, talk about tunnel vision!

You got a head full of outrage clickbait, and you've fallen for a narrative...hook, line and sinker.

I'm not saying the sexism wasn't there, but it was blown way out of proportion by the media for clicks.

Not wasn't. As I posted one of the women in movie had to leave social media as she was bombarded with racist and sexist comments non stop after film came out.

Like I said downplaying it and acting like it was toxic and vicious more than most fandoms is only helping those who do it hide. I've literally been girls physically attacked for it.

It was problem. Even if you disliked movie surely you can see that right? Just because some people have rational opinions doesn't change what happened or change how toxic and vicious this fandom was.

[savintheday]

She fed the trolls. You never feed the trolls. Not saying she deserved any of that, but she put herself out there and it got bad real quick.

Simple solution: Put the damn phone down. Ignore it. Don't engage. People forget that the internet is not real life.

[SSJmole]

She fed the trolls. You never feed the trolls. Not saying she deserved any of that, but she put herself out there and it got bad real quick.

Simple solution: Put the damn phone down. Ignore it. Don't engage. People forget that the internet is not real life.

But as I've mentioned it was RL too. Someone assaulted a girl my family for "ruining Ghostbusters" just because she was a girl in a ghostbusters top. (Fun fact the top was from the original movies but was just the logo) it bleeds into RL all the time and today's world people feel more connected than ever on social media. "Turn the phone off" doesn't work when the actresses you need to use it to promote films as social media is huge for that , people use it to talk to real friends and family ect .

Again downplaying it makes it worse.

[savintheday]

Well I'm sorry that happened to you. Unfortunately there are some real life scumbags in the wild.

My point is overall, the really bad trolls are a loud minority. Most people...normal people...were not nearly so volatile about the movie. Merely critical. The current "outrage culture" blew it way out of proportion.

[Wiggyof9]

But as I've mentioned it was RL too. Someone assaulted a girl my family for "ruining Ghostbusters" just because she was a girl in a ghostbusters top. (Fun fact the top was from the original movies but was just the logo) it bleeds into RL all the time and today's world people feel more connected than ever on social media. "Turn the phone off" doesn't work when the actresses you need to use it to promote films as social media is huge for that , people use it to talk to real friends and family ect .

Again downplaying it makes it worse.

Not to down play what happened to the girl you are speaking of, but one story of something happening to someone is not indicative of a mass movement of angry sexists attacking women. It's just a story of one asshole being an asshole. Yes, those people exist. That doesn't mean an entire anti-woman movement took down GB2016. It's not like there are two options: either sexism doesn't exist in regards to GB2016, or sexism is so extreme in regards to GB2016 that it destroyed a perfect movie!

Also, just out of curiosity, what was the assault? Was it physical assault? Was it verbal assault? Was it just some guy that yelled "Women ruined Ghostbusters!"? None of those are okay, but I ask because "assault" has many denotative meanings. However, connotatively it usually refers to physical assault.

[Lefty Throckmorton]

I haven't been on this forum for a while because the Ghostbusters fandom has become a toxic place. Ever since the release of Ghostbusters (2016) all I've seen are torrents of sexist and racist abuse hurled towards the Ghostbusters (2016) cast and crew - abuse which created a negative word of mouth around Ghostbusters (2016), and ended with Paul Feig's directorial record tarnished before his blockbuster Summer tentpole movie directing career had even begun.

Paul Feig will probably only be able to direct 15/R-rated comedy films now, and we'll likely never see him direct a big Summer blockbuster again.

What made me come back was today's announcement of Ghostbusters 3, a film that's a direct sequel to the original 1984 continuity. Now I'm very excited about this film, and I can't wait to see it, but the behind-the-scenes issue with this film is that it's letting the sexists win.

This is exactly what those disgusting misogynists wanted. In their minds, it validates their 'point' that women fighting ghosts 'doesn't work' (even though it does), and turns what should really be a harmless supernatural comedy movie into a political victory for people who only spread hate and contempt towards others.

I hope Jason Reitman has a plan to address this before the film's release.

Somebody at Jezebel feels the same way;

https://themuse.jezebel.com/1831793661

[SSJmole]

Well I'm sorry that happened to you. Unfortunately there are some real life scumbags in the wild.

My point is overall, the really bad trolls are a loud minority. Most people...normal people...were not nearly so volatile about the movie. Merely critical. The current "outrage culture" way out of proportion.

See critical is fine and I actually understand the reboot anger as personally I hoped it'd be same continuity. Also the trailer sent mixed messages on that by saying it happened before ect. Those are ok

But I don't see the toxic part as a minority. When you have it at that level it reached. Also downplaying it and not trying to stop it is almost as bad. When star wars has similar stay fans rally together and even if they hate films defend the actresses. Ghostbusters fand burried their head in the sand and allowed it to get worse and worse because they didn't care about the effect or the women , they just wanted it to fail even that means enabling the haters.

It was heartbreaking and sickening to point I had to get out of the fandom because of it.

[RichardLess]

No, a reboot and a re-imagining are two different things. A reboot of a franchise takes the characters you know and does a new story with them that is separate from previous iterations. A soft-reboot takes places in the same universe as previous iterations, but changes things in a similar way as a full reboot. A re-imagining is when you take a concept and re-make it in your own image. Batman and Spider-man are reboots. GB2016 is a re-imagining. Also, by your logic anyone can be Batman or Spider-man. In fact, there are plenty of else worlds stories where that is the case.

The problem with the term 'reboot' is that it can mean different things to different people. It can be used to mean a sequel that doesn't feature the characters from a previous movie in a franchise, a film in a franchise set within a different continuity, a remake etc...

To me, Ghostbusters (2016) IS a reboot. It's a retooling of the original film, with four new characters who happen to be women. 'Batman Begins' and 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' are also reboots, because they tell different stories in different continuities (albeit with characters who have been in previous films).

A reimagining in my mind would be taking a pre-existing story and telling it in a completely different genre.

If you think GB1984 was just about the action of busting ghosts and not the characters then I don't think we saw the same movie.

I never said that, I said the action genre was a part of it. The 2016 just exaggerated that side of things more.

Ghostbusters is NOT an action movie!

Again, it's a part of the film.

What action is there?

What do you think they are doing whenever they are busting a ghost with the Neutron Wands from their Proton Packs?

Critic scores don't mean a movie is good. In fact, 75% is pretty bad for critic scores considering how much attention this thing had and how much the media was trying to push it along to "combat the evil sexists". I went into this movie WANTING it to be good. I avoided as many spoilers as I could. I NEVER see movies in the theater anymore, but I specifically went to see this movie and was ready to like it. The movie was BAD. It had interesting ideas, and again when a lot of the dumb adlib humor is edited out and some heart edited back in (like the deleted scene where Erin confronts her former boss and Abby and her share a real moment) the movie shows its potential. As it was released in theaters, it was awful. It wasn't the evil sexist trolls that made me not like it.

Critic scores doesn't mean a film is 'good', because opinion is subjective, but it's a good indicator of overall quality. It means that in professional opinion the film isn't bad, and that people whose job it is to review and analyse film generally enjoyed it.

BTW, quote any hilarious lines from GB2016. Anything. Personally, I can't think of any.

"Rowan, collect your virginity from the lost and found!"

"That stuff went everywhere, by the way. In every crack,"

"It just makes me feel so warm and tingly inside." "That's probably the radiation."

"The hat is too much, right? Is it the wig or the hat?"

" Is it the boobs you don't like? Because I can make them... bigger,"

I love it. Ask's for quotes that are funny, quotes lines featured in the trailer. You think those lines are funny? Seriously?

Ah well.

Also GB fandom is not more toxic than any other fandom. It's just the fandom YOU happen to pay attention to. You want Toxic fans? See: Rick & Morty, South Park, Family Guy, Star Wars, Star Trek, Jumanji, Transformers, Gi: Joe, Monopoly, Simpsons, Scrabble(those scrabble fans be crazy yo!)

[savintheday]

Ugh. Jezebel. Case in point.

[SSJmole]

But as I've mentioned it was RL too. Someone assaulted a girl my family for "ruining Ghostbusters" just because she was a girl in a ghostbusters top. (Fun fact the top was from the original movies but was just the logo) it bleeds into RL all the time and today's world people feel more connected than ever on social media. "Turn the phone off" doesn't work when the actresses you need to use it to promote films as social media is huge for that , people use it to talk to real friends and family ect .

Again downplaying it makes it worse.

Not to down play what happened to the girl you are speaking of, but one story of something happening to someone is not indicative of a mass movement of angry sexists attacking women. It's just a story of one asshole being an asshole. Yes, those people exist. That doesn't mean an entire anti-woman movement took down GB2016. It's not like there are two options: either sexism doesn't exist in regards to GB2016, or sexism is so extreme in regards to GB2016 that it destroyed a perfect movie!

Also, just out of curiosity, what was the assault? Was it physical assault? Was it verbal assault? Was it just some guy that yelled "Women ruined Ghostbusters!"? None of those are okay, but I ask because "assault" has many denotative meanings. However, connotatively it usually refers to physical assault.

Its an indication that it bled out of the internet and into the real world.

The assault was an adult male throwing a glass bottle at young teenager girl while shouting "that's for ruining Ghostbusters" I was going to beat the crap out him for that but she begged to just go. It was sick and the friends he was with cheered. She was cut but luckily not seriously. She was however to scared to go out for months and still has not worn that top or touched anything of ghostbusters even if her little sister has got in to it after watching ATC on Netflix (she even loves the cartoons and originals since and was the one that got me easing back into it)

Needless to say the online stuff and the offline stuff left me just disgusted and bitter towards the fandom for the most part

[Wiggyof9]

That's categorically not true. The main criticisms for the film seemed to be 'Ew, the Ghostbusters are ladiez now'.

There was also a lot of people saying negative comments critiquing the movie on it's merits were being removed while negative comments bashing women were left up. So...

Also, entertainment news sites ran with the sexism story. So, I am sure most of what you saw were sexist comments. Again, I ignored all that and went in expecting to see a good movie. Based on the trailer, I thought maybe it was connected to the original in a soft reboot kind of way. I thought maybe the trailer just showed the bad parts, or parts that were out of context. The further along it went to more disappointed I was. Then they got to the part where a possessed Kevin made all the soldiers freeze in a dance move and I thought "oh no! They are really doing a dance sequence like in The Mask?" but then they didn't and I was actually relieved.... until the end credits....

Clearly you and I disagree on what a Ghostbusters movie is. To me, GB2016 was like a GB parody. Everyone was silly and goofy and jokey and exaggerated. The jokes were dumbed down, the equipment and action were made "extreme", none of the GBs were ever scared of the ghosts except Patti. It just didn't feel like a movie in the same way the original did.

RGB felt like it had the soul of the original (again, season 1). EGB felt the same way. These were continuations of the movie. The video game had the same darker and serious tone too, though obviously was more action based being a video game. GB2016 barely took itself seriously, and that has a lot to do with the director. Look at how he talks in interviews, its the same way he allowed his actors to act in his movie. He fills time saying as much as he can, he doesn't really think before he speaks and talks in a stream of conscience way. Thats fine for a movie about everyday life, but not a movie whose predecessor was the exact opposite.

Also, some of the issues I have with GB2016 are the same issues i have with GB2, though not as much. As a kid I loved GB2. As an adult I can barely watch it. It became more cartoonish, the jokes were a little more obvious, it was more or less similar to the plot of the first one beat for beat.

[SSJmole]

I love it. Ask's for quotes that are funny, quotes lines featured in the trailer.

To be fair usually the trailers now show funniest things. Like I adore Deadpool movies. 1st the funniest jokes were in the trailer imo

Also As I posted earlier "You guys, this is exactly how I pictured my death." After staypuft balloon crushes them is one of my favourite Ghostbusters scenes/lines , I don't see how that wouldn't at least make you crack a smile. It's hilarious as was the dance I showed in video before

[Wiggyof9]

Its an indication that it bled out of the internet and into the real world.

The assault was an adult male throwing a glass bottle at young teenager girl while shouting "that's for ruining Ghostbusters" I was going to beat the crap out him for that but she begged to just go. It was sick and the friends he was with cheered. She was cut but luckily not seriously. She was however to scared to go out for months and still has not worn that top or touched anything of ghostbusters even if her little sister has got in to it after watching ATC on Netflix (she even loves the cartoons and originals since and was the one that got me easing back into it)

Needless to say the online stuff and the offline stuff left me just disgusted and bitter towards the fandom for the most part

Thats really messed up. I'm sorry that happened. However, it was still one instance of an asshole being an asshole. Problem is the asshole stand out. I am sure there were tons of people that day that saw her shirt and did absolutely nothing, but the one guy throwing a bottle (seriously, who does that?) is the one she remembers. I hope she doesn't continue to keep that one incident from allowing her to enjoy Ghostbusters. If she does, then the asshole wins.

[SSJmole]

Clearly you and I disagree on what a Ghostbusters movie is. To me, GB2016 was like a GB parody. Everyone was silly and goofy and jokey and exaggerated. The jokes were dumbed down, the equipment and action were made "extreme", none of the GBs were ever scared of the ghosts except Patti. It just didn't feel like a movie in the same way the original did.

Personally I see that as the times. Compare Jurassic park to Jurassic world for example. Not blaming them but since marvel movies made alot of money every big comedy action is kinda like that. Look at Thor He's making jokes while the villian has him trapped at start ect...

Orginal was made in a different time with different ideals and culture. The ghosbuststers smoked , Peter acted in a away inappropriate today (he's still my favourite with Holtzmann)

The 2016 was made to match similar style films of the time. Like 1980s busters looked cool busting ghosts but today years later with new CGI ect.. itd be tame. The times Square scene looked awesome (props to Holtzmann's weapon in that scene as it was just cool)

[Wiggyof9]

So, here is where I just don't find the movie to be all that funny.

"Rowan, collect your virginity from the lost and found!"

- This line makes no sense. If it's in the lost and found, then he lost it. So, she is making fun of him for being a virgin by saying he lost his virginity? That makes no sense. On a surface level is sounds like an insult, but it's really not. It's the kind of thing that would have been caught during the writing process, but since it was an adlib it was just kept in because some people on the set laughed without realizing the actual meaning. Plus, it's really juvenile to called someone a virgin as an insult.

"That stuff went everywhere, by the way. In every crack,"

-This line is an example of the bathroom humor that go injected into the movie. When peter got slimed he just said he felt funky. When Erin got slimed she made jokes about it getting into her cracks? That's like if Peter said "Man, I had such a hard time getting that slime off my balls." Again, it's juvenile. Can that be funny in a comedy? Yes. Is it the humor i expected from Ghostbusters? No.

"It just makes me feel so warm and tingly inside." "That's probably the radiation."

- I'll give you this. You found a funny line that was situation based. I bet this was a scripted line and not an adlib like the others. Like i said, in the fanedit I actually like the movie because it cuts out most of the adlibs and focuses on the scripted stuff like this line.

"The hat is too much, right? Is it the wig or the hat?"

- Where is the joke here? It's just Holtzman not taking the scene seriously. Though I did think this was a reference to the RGB episode People Busters when Egon and Peter had to pretend to be heads on display at the beauty parlor.

" Is it the boobs you don't like? Because I can make them... bigger,"

- Again, juvenile humor. Not what I want from a Ghostbusters movie.

[SSJmole]

Again, juvenile humor. Not what I want from a Ghostbusters movie.

The originals had lots of that too like "this man has no dick"

As for her not taking the moment seriously that's what Peter did too and it was hilarious then too.

[montclaire]

Personally I see that as the times. Compare Jurassic park to Jurassic world for example.

I really liked Jurassic World. Why? Because they stayed true to the original concept and what really mattered didn't change - the dinosaurs. Jurassic World may be one of the worst examples to prove your point here. Tons of fan service and easter eggs, updated but true to the first movie, strong male lead, etc., etc.

[Wiggyof9]

Personally I see that as the times. Compare Jurassic park to Jurassic world for example. Not blaming them but since marvel movies made alot of money every big comedy action is kinda like that. Look at Thor He's making jokes while the villian has him trapped at start ect...

Orginal was made in a different time with different ideals and culture. The ghosbuststers smoked , Peter acted in a away inappropriate today (he's still my favourite with Holtzmann)

The 2016 was made to match similar style films of the time. Like 1980s busters looked cool busting ghosts but today years later with new CGI ect.. itd be tame. The times Square scene looked awesome (props to Holtzmann's weapon in that scene as it was just cool)

I don't care why the movie's humor stinks. That's like going to a restaurant and the food is terrible and the Chef says "well, most of the food around here is terrible so thats what I make". That's not a good reason.

As for the CGI, yes obliviously the effects would be different and updated. I have no real issue with that. However, in GB1984 the Ghostbusting wasn't done to have kick ass action. Each busting scene served a comedic purpose. When they caught Slimer it was hilarious that they were wrecking this hotel and had no idea what their equipment could actually do. The first time a shot is fired they almost kill a house keeper and her reaction is great "What the hell are you doing?" and all they can say is "Sorry, I'm sorry, sorry". Even when they go to save Dana from Gozer they are inept at what they do. Gozer flings them away, their equipment is useless, they are all terrified. It's funny. It almost seems like they were scared to show the GB2016 busters being scared s instead they made them act super tough and action hero like.

[SSJmole]

Personally I see that as the times. Compare Jurassic park to Jurassic world for example.

I really liked Jurassic World. Why? Because they stayed true to the original concept and what really mattered didn't change - the dinosaurs. Jurassic World may be one of the worst examples to prove your point here. Tons of fan service and easter eggs, updated but true to the first movie, strong male lead , etc., etc.

1) Not really I liked it too but I stead of actual dinosaurs with some basics in research they made one up that made no sense as they made a dinosaur that could turn invisible .... In universe they made it to be a cool attraction but why would you spend all that money on an attraction would probably be invisible so you could have just had an empty room lol

Also look at the jeeps vs Gyrosphere to see it taken more over the top and ridiculous.

2) strong male lead. So your saying the gender does matter?

I'm not on a out it been in or out of continuity. Just pointing out that it's a lot sillier (that helicopter scene lol) a lot more comedy Vs orginal ect... It's just to show the times are different and the films are different based on the times

[Wiggyof9]

Again, juvenile humor. Not what I want from a Ghostbusters movie.

The originals had lots of that too like "this man has no dick"

As for her not taking the moment seriously that's what Peter did too and it was hilarious then too.

Yes, "this man has no dick" was one juvenile joke in a sea of awesome comedy. Plus, it was spoken dryly and sarcastically with great timing. It wasnt shouted out. Plus, there was a set up. Ray calls Peck "dickless" and say he blew up their containment unit. Them mayor asks if this is true. Peter replies "Yes it's true..." and you think he is talking about what happened but then he continues "...this man has no dick.". That is what makes it funny. Set up, pay off. Plus the insult actually makes sense as opposed to the shouted terrible virginity line.

Peter made jokes, but he wasn't silly and goofy.

Venkman in GB1 was like Lorenzo Music's Venkman from RGB season 1. He made jokes, but he also took it seriously when he had to. Holtzman is like Dave Coulier's Venkman. She is goofy and doesn't really take things seriously.

That doesn't mean that I don't like Holtzman. I actually like the scene where they see their first ghost and she is eating and Erin asks how she can eat at a time like this and she says "Once you pop...". That's pretty funny. It breaks the tension of a serious scene, but it isn't goofy like putting a silly wig on and mugging for the camera. It's a quick line, she doesn't even blink when delivering it, and it feels like something someone would actually do. Putting on a wig while tracking down a ghost and carrying a nuclear device is just silly.

Everything in GB2016 is just exaggerated. Kevin being stupid can be funny. Chris Hemsworth plays the big dumb guy pretty well. But, he was turned up to 11 in this. When he says he took the lenses out of his glasses because they kept getting dirty, that's kinda funny. When he says he won't listen to them and covers his eyes, that's funny. He is stupid and he doesn't get that he isn't making sense. His sense of logic is off. When they hit hits the gong and covers his eyes because it's loud... that makes no sense. Pain from something being loud is a physical response. Covering his eyes from the noise doesn't make him stupid, it makes him cartoonishly stupid. They took a good joke and they went too far with it. That is how I feel about this movie. They showed no constraint. They couldn't just let the jokes sit and be funny, they had to pile them on.

It's like taking a decent pizza and piling all the toppings on at the same time. Sure, pizza with sausage and mushrooms can be good, but when you add pineapple, peppers, anchovies, pepperoni, bbq chicken, etc it becomes a muddled mess and you lose the parts that were good.

[SpaceBallz]

I don't understand how finally making a third film, that's directly connected with the originals, is "letting the sexists win." From what I understand, he's introducing a new team that's gender equal. This is what they should have done from the start, a soft reboot ala "Force Awakens." Introduce new characters whilst keeping in continuity with the originals. That's what everybody wanted for the past 30 years.

I highly doubt there will be gender jokes/political messages in the film that Feig had plastered all over ATC (and that was just one aspect I didn't like in his film). Smaller things in that film bothered me, like the fingerless gloves they wore along with the shin guards. Why? WHY? IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE OTHER THAN TO LOOK COOL. They trapped maybe one ghost that they used on Bill Murray's skeptic character to kill him. The rest of the film they blast ghosts with pistols and kill them (again I guess?) with a "ghost chipper." None of it made any sense to me.

[Lefty Throckmorton]

Also GB fandom is not more toxic than any other fandom. It's just the fandom YOU happen to pay attention to. You want Toxic fans? See: Rick & Morty, South Park, Family Guy, Star Wars, Star Trek, Jumanji, Transformers, Gi: Joe, Monopoly, Simpsons, Scrabble(those scrabble fans be crazy yo!)

The absolute worse I've seen is the Steven Universe fandom, who caused a young girl to nearly commit suicide because she drew Rose Quartz (the mother of the titular character) as thin instead of the plus-size (fat-to morbidly obese, IMHO, like most of that show's characters with a few exceptions). The media loves to blast mostly male fandoms as being toxic, but this one's the most toxic of all-and it's female, and on Tumblr.

https://www.dailydot.com/parsec/steven- ... ntroversy/

And these 'progressive' fans get nary a scold from the mainstream media.

[UntouchableGen]

I half ass read what was in this entire thread.... but I feel like regardless of all the failures, we need to embrace the potential of tech from EVERY MOVIE. alot of thought was given and every time it's based on stuff that makes since to the story.....

[UntouchableGen]

Oh, and GB reboot could have worked in a ghost Corp world.... if you wanted it too....

[Wiggyof9]

I half ass read what was in this entire thread.... but I feel like regardless of all the failures, we need to embrace the potential of tech from EVERY MOVIE. alot of thought was given and every time it's based on stuff that makes since to the story.....

The only issue I have with the tech is that they were making weapons, not ghost catching equipment. It was weird. I thought the whole idea was that Erin wanted to prove ghosts were real and capture them. Why would they make ghost bombs and ghost wood chippers? That doesn't make sense for the story. It makes sense for a video game and could be cool there, but it makes no sense for them to make weapons. In he original their equipment was a weapon, it was a device used to retrain and capture a ghost. The fact that they were destructive is what makes it funny, but in the end they were not made to be weapons.

Maybe that is the issue. In the fandom you have a lot of people that just LOVE the tech side. They love the lore of the ghosts, the lore of the technology used, and they love the actual busting even though it is few and far between on the movie. Then there are fans like me that think that stuff is neat, but love the move for it's comedy and think the "action" is less "action" and more comedic. It's like saying the 3 Stooges are an "action" trio because they fight a lot. No, they do physical comedy. That's what Ghostbusters is to me.