Alphagaia wrote: ↑January 20th, 2019, 3:07 pm No, I know what Twitter is I made a joke.
There is so many things wrong with P_Venkmans assessment of ATC I do think even know where to begin. I can understand that you didn't want a reboot and disliking it for it's story, but only the men are bumblings fools? The women are as well! Erin even kills a person by accident, slips on slime, fails to open doors, they blow stuff up, give a ghost a nuke, etc. Now, if you don't like that everybody is the comic relief I can understand that, but saying only the man do stupid stuff is looking at the movie from the wrong perspective, and forcing politics upon a movie that just wants to entertain. Yes, Feig prefers putting female as leads in his movies because he finds they are underrepresented, but the movie, just like his others he makes are aimed at the while audience and not just the females, and doesn't promote that message on screen.
This. Plus ironically one the most intelligent people in the whole thing is rowan look how he figured out the lines before everyone , killed himself knowing he'd resurrect. He's actually a really intelligent character. The only make that was that way was Kevin but he was meant to be as he's a twist obbthechot dumb receptionist we always see.
The movie is great. The problem tone wise is the times imo. Compare comedies in the 80s to today. Today they have a different feel and flow. Ghostbusters is a mix of genres too like others. I've said it before so I'll say it again. Look at the marvel movies. They make billions. But say Thor Ragnarok, how many jokes were in it? It literally starts with making jokes as a giant enemy has him captured. That's how this was.
Saying it's a spoof of Ghostbusters isn't true at all. What they did and in my opinion did well was they made a MODERN Ghostbusters. I love the 1984 one but some of it doesnt hold up today. That's ok though as it's a classic. But the new one followed the current movie trend and mixed in superhero elements as that's the big thing. Let's look at it structurally :
It starts like the original. A scene that sets up ghosts are real and scare people. That makes sense it's a good start. But notice it's less scary than the 1980s opening and ghosts are more cartoonish like goosebumps movie. That's modern twist on it as age guidelines now are stricter than the 1980s no smoking , no ghost head ect...
Then we cut to Erin she is the audience surrogate. She is the every girl. She is awkward , she is just trying to do her job and gets pulled into this world. Replace her with a male and that's pretty much your Peter Parker archetype. This is a common one in movies today that are superheroes.
Eventually we see them all in subway introducing us the other audience surrogate. Patty she gets to ask the questions that help us the audience understand the science as she does that well.
Later we see them comically try their new technology and it fails hilariously. Really is it much different to say :
https://youtu.be/vQEkcPeYsx0 or iron man learning? No it's not. It's a tropevin a lot of hero stuff now days.
Then you have the concert scene. This is them showing they've gotten better so we rally behind them. In comic films its usually a lieutenant or big brute. Here it's a giant flying monster ghost. It works too we see them getting better.
City is frozen , this is the threat showing us they are the only ones who can save us. That makes sense this the big heros choice moment. That leads to them going one on one with the big bad.
During this final fight we have all the hero tropes. Big CGI light that goes into sky , sacrifices in the form of giving up their car this can be loosing a suit , a gadget or something this film it's the car. Then we have Heroes go through portal with a fake out about possible death (see iron man in avengers) , celebration and teaser of more to come
See that's the point some will hate and I get it but Ghostbusters was 1980s highest grossing films? E t , star wars , batman , back to the future. And more they were focused for the most part on the adventure and freedom from "the man" that's why Ghostbusters has sticking it to Walter Peck , back to the future has the principal , star wars has the empire trying to control you , Indiana Jones has him been rebellious. But at the same time there's no clear "this is the genre" which is good leads to more freedom but most elements of Ghostbusters are products of the time , they even have the scrawny nerd looser type as let's face it Louis Tully has a lot in common with George McFly as nerds were also something to mock in that era.
Cut to 2016 Ghostbusters. The biggest movies of 2010s? Star wars , infinity war , Jurassic world , avengers , black panther , age of Ultron , iron man 3 and more , notice a trend? It's dominated by superheroes, resurgence of old properties ect. Ghostbusters falls into this. It's bringing back and old property , it's about heroes and the big summer blockbuster. That's what they were hoping for. If your not the big trending Sumner blockbuster type now days you don't do that well. A lot of these have big political stances or messages too. They played up some of that as everyone is.
Basically if you went in expecting 1980s Ghostbusters in 2016 then you would be disappointed. It's making the series relevant in the current climate. That's what they tried and were banking on. Age raitings and social changes means they had to make a different type of movie. They mixed superhero with comedy with action on a supernatural backdrop. And it was great.
Look at current film they teased and the rumours. Old run down car with classic logo?
Kid main characters to show fear and help younger viewers enjoy the world?
Possible older characters will appear but maybe not all?
I don't expect the new one to feel like 80s either I expect it to feel like Jurassic world or force awakens. Which Jurassic world didn't feel like Jurassic park 1 at all. But nostalgia and cool action stuff makes people foreget. And that's ok I like Jurassic world.
All I'm saying is 2016 tried something it was a clever strategy as I'd it had been successful it could have been a goldmine. Now yes the negative sexist backlash hurt the film. That's a fact. As it couldn't use nostalgia to hook you or vetvits messages across when it had to over come overwhelming negativity before anyone had even seen it. Look at how the world works now. Movies trend , when I was a kid it was adverts + word of mouth. Now it's social media. Everyone wants likes on Facebook or Twitter ect. And if they think saying "I like this movie" or "in going to watch this movie" will hurt their online stock they won't admit it a d maybe not even see it
A great example of this was Xbox. They messed up 1 E3 and it didn't matter. Word spread of the negativity and even when they fixed most of it before launch it didn't matter. The internet continued believing the old hate. Spreading the hate and they haven't even come close to ps4 numbers. Last generation they were on top for a long time and when they weren't it was still close.
The difference is when that happens to a movie they can't afford to win people back 5 years later as if it hasn't got money in 6 months it's over , it's near impossible for dvd and Blu-ray to save it. That's what happened. Hate spread hate creating more hate to the point no one wanted to see it.
If everyone online who claims to have seen it to base their hatred on fact had actually seen it , it gave made money. Don't doubt the hate by the trolls effected it. It did. But a spoof or badly made movie it wasn't. It was just repurposing the ideas into a new modern film that tried to move genres. That works alien to aliens , fallout 2 to 3 ect... This failed because of the targeted and vicious campaign against it online by trolls and bullies. Not everyone who hated is that but enough are to spread it to mainstream.