Your comment makes absolutely no sense. You quote two different people saying two different things, and then try to amalgamate them into one contradictory statement to prove a logical fallacy (where none ever existed in the first place).

The gender-bending aspect of the movie is nothing more than a cheap stunt to garner attention to the movie - a "hey, look at me!" type of stunt. That alone does not imply that the movie will be good or bad, but it is a significant data point.

You can have zero problems with an all-women Ghostbusters movie and still find the trailer to be a horrifically-unfunny, poorly-edited piece of shit.

Not a problem, per se. But it would definitely be a gimmick. As this new Ghostbusters so obviously is.

Why do so many posters seem unable to understand that simple fact?

It seems like a fairly typical Hollywood trailer to me.

I'm not a huge GB fan, and the only way a new GB film would have interested me would probably be a reunion of the original cast of Murray, Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson, but thay ship done sailed. I don't really care about a reboot with a new cast, so I'm just sort of meh on the whole thing.

You are absolutely correct.

However, this particular trailer (and movie) has garnered a far greater negative reaction than anything comparable to it.

One of the main points of discussion about this film is the all-female (and not hot enough) cast. Isn't there a chance that the reason this film is getting a reaction FAR BEYOND "it's a shitty trailer" is because of that casting? The whole MRA thing really has ramped up online in the last few years and this is sort of a perfect storm (movie that guys love that now stars women instead).

We have proof in this very thread that that just might be the case.

What is MRA?

It's possible, but it's also a remake of a beloved comedy classic which hurts it even if it's an alright trailer with a mixed or all male cast.

Plus the internet always works that way, it gets to be cool to hate on something. Not saying the all female cast doesn't factor into it, just saying that without the original crew, it was screwed regardless.

I'm still convinced MRA blogs are largely satire (I'm told they're not), but then I was convinced Brietbart was too.

spoilerized for size...


Oh, I wish you were right.

Not a very analogous comparison. Are any of them cult classics or be well regarded in 30 years?

If the amount of butthurt being expressed and generating the kind of hate towards this shemake is due to that then those people need to get over themselves. Their movie will always be there to enjoy.

Yeah, but we could have had a third movie with the cast, but Sony stole the film from Reitman and gave it to Feig.

^^ and could have just as easily ended up with something worse, jokes about 'getting too old for this shit, and all the bitchin' woulda been about how they shoulda gone with fresh ideas

Or we could have had the first Oscar winning Ghostbusters movie. Alas, we'll never know.

It's the Windows Vista of 2016.

Sony stole the movie from the director of 30 years worth of shitty flops and gave it to a director who made three straight $100+ mil grossers including one that landed almost-unheard-of Oscar noms for a comedy movie?

Idiots!

You're right, Sony's judgment has been rock-solid the past few years.

At best, we would have had a movie with Ray and Winston. I can replay the birthday party scene from GBII if I want that.

I'm just posing a question based on someone else's analogy. Ghostbusters is a classic. Will Pitch Perfect or Bridesmaids be in 30 years? So just taking a recent & popular female driven movie for a gender swap discussion doesn't quite work, IMO.

If they remake Dirty Harry with Will Smith I will riot.

A little off-topic, but I do think this is a valid point of discussion. I don't think those films will be considered classics, but in all fairness, other than maybe The Force Awakens, are there any movies from the last 10 years that will be considered classics in the same way as the original Ghostbusters?

My answer is: Maybe.

I think a more apt comparison is Jurassic World.

Are you or I going to consider JW a classic in 30 years? I know I won't.

But kids today, seeing JW at the ages of 5-13 (roughly)? I think they're going to hold onto it as the pinnacle of sci-fi/family flicks of their generation. The only thing stopping them is their parents that keep reminding them that, "No, it's not as good as the original" even if the kids secretly disagree.

My point is, I think it's about perspective.

You and I may not see any longevity in Bridesmaids or Pitch Perfect (and maybe this new Ghostbusters), but I think there's a newer generation of teens and young adults who may hold onto them as the edgy comedies they could see in the theatre at a time when the usual sci-fi-teens-saving-the-world stuff like Maze Runner and Hunger Games are the alternative.

That doesn't hold so strongly. Think of the context involved. They've more resources now than before to see that it won't be as good as heralded as the first JP when they're older. Sure. They'll all love it and be fond but will it really hold? Doubt it. Older films have been able to be held higher based on the culture evolution and the resources to maintain it so. Films today have it harder than before. Shit. Avengers has more going for it to stay remembered as a sigular film than JW does. Just cuz of what it does. Franchise or not.

It's a completely different landscape. I hoarded my favorite movies and watch them constantly. But my options for entertainment were far more limited. My kids are 10 and 12 and while they enjoy movies (always want to see the newest Pixar flick, loved Civil War, etc.) they rarely rewatch anything. It's all about YouTube videos of people playing Minecraft or "did you know?" type clips about random topics. They just aren't "movie watchers" like my wife and I were at that age.

You're lucky. I've seen "Frozen" over 100 times now and "Tangled" almost as many times.

And "Hotel Transylvania 2" three times this week.

Fuck.

^ yeah well, my niece and nephew outright think Pixels is a better movie than Wreck-it Ralph.

My kid loves HT2, Wall-E, Wreck-it Ralph, and Inside Out. I guess I'm lucky it's not Frozen.

I've actually become very fond of Frozen.

Or maybe it's just brainwashing.