![]() |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Cloris Leechman
Lisa Lampinelli Margaret Cho |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by Guru Askew
(Post 12796429)
And there's also the fact that Wiig and McKinnon don't get 5% of the shit over this movie that McCarthy and Jones do.
Because from the trailer it looks like McCarthy is just playing the same character she plays in all her other movies, and Jones is playing the stereotypical black woman. It has nothing to do with their attractiveness or even lack there-of. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
I liked McCarthy in Bridesmaids, but haven't cared for her in anything i've seen with her since then. I don't know how you separate folks that are being assholes and making jokes about physical appearance versus those that just may not find them funny.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
I didn't realize my sense of humor needed the go-ahead from my dick.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by DaveyJoe
(Post 12796444)
I didn't realize my sense of humor needed the go-ahead from my dick.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by Solid Snake
(Post 12796449)
I'm a homo and I didn't know it.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by Guru Askew
(Post 12796429)
And there's also the fact that Wiig and McKinnon don't get 5% of the shit over this movie that McCarthy and Jones do.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by DaveyJoe
(Post 12796444)
I didn't realize my sense of humor needed the go-ahead from my dick.
Originally Posted by Michael Corvin
(Post 12796460)
:rolleyes: It couldn't possibly be because Wiig and McKinnon are playing characters and McCarthy and Jones are playing their usual stereotypes at all.
And again, hold the original cast to the same standards as the remake cast. With the obvious exception of his role in Caddyshack how is Peter Venkman any different from Murray's previous roles? If McCarthy had a single comedic persona that was plugged into a bunch of different vehicles she certainly wouldn't be the first comedic actor to be "guilty" of that, but again, her roles are a lot more varied than people give her credit for. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
McKinnon and Wiig are barely in the trailer compared to the other two.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Based on the trailer, it looks like even Wiig is just doing her typical type of character; no different than Jones doing her own type. McCarthy seems different than her own status quo, and I haven't seen McKinnon in enough to know what her characters are like, but she seems like the "goofy" type.
I just mean...
Originally Posted by Michael Corvin
(Post 12796460)
:rolleyes: It couldn't possibly be because Wiig and McKinnon are playing characters and McCarthy and Jones are playing their usual stereotypes at all.
Still, backpacks guys. Backpacks. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Something tells me we'll all come to an agreement by the movie's release date.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by DaveyJoe
(Post 12796494)
Something tells me we'll all come to an agreement by the movie's release date.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Here's a challenge: can you name a female comedian or comedic actress that you'd admit is funny AND sexually unattractive? [QUOTEThe "fuckable" factor is absolutely an aspect of the Ghostbusters backlash too. For every person who believes women can't physically support the weight of proton packs there's another who says "I wouldn't be upset it it was BLANK and BLANK instead of McCarthy and Jones." with the women in question inevitably being physically attractive. And there's also the fact that Wiig and McKinnon don't get 5% of the shit over this movie that McCarthy and Jones do. ][/QUOTE] Yeah your right it has to be based on attractiveness and not the fact that people have said that Leslie Jones is the least funny cast member on Saturday Night Live, and according to the trailer her "funny" moments CONSIST OF TALKING LIKE THIS! and that if the script leak is to be believed McCarthy's main character trait is liking Egg Rolls. [QUOTEI liked McCarthy in Bridesmaids, but haven't cared for her in anything i've seen with her since then. I don't know how you separate folks that are being assholes and making jokes about physical appearance versus those that just may not find them funny. ][/QUOTE] You can't even though the people defending the movie do there damndest to make it that way. That's basically my point. A lot of these McCarthy and Jones haters apparently take offense to the notion that a woman could waste precious screen time without serving as eye candy. I certainly see a correlation between robin2099's relative tolerance for Wiig and hatred of McCarthy/Jones and their physical appearances. 100% pure bullshit. McCarthy's characters are actually quite varied. You can't tell me her character in The Boss is the same as her character in Spy or that either is the same as her Bridesmaids character. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Farley played different roles? Last I checked he played the wild man against a straight man in all 4 of his starring roles, 3 of which even used the exact same device in which a father figure assigns the straight man to act as a babysitter/chaperone. The parallels with McCarthy's career are shocking.
Farley would have killed for McCarthy's career. She's surpassed his successes in every way, and that's coming from a Farley fan. She's not playing the same character over and over again. She landed the dramatic role that eluded Farley and successfully pulled it off too. Her movies are much more successful critically and commercially. The same goes for Candy and Belushi too. Again, I'm a huge fan of these guys, but I doubt you'd dismiss their work by saying they're fat and they fall down a lot. And they did. All of em. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
I have no idea how this movie is going to do at the box office but every time I have seen the trailer in the theater, there are a lot of groans in the audience afterward. It is a terrible trailer. It makes me wonder how bad this movie is going to be if some of the best/funniest parts of this movie are in the trailer (of which there are none).
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by Solid Snake
(Post 12796449)
And all this time... we want to fuck Bill Murray. Fuck. I'm a homo and I didn't know it.
Originally Posted by DaveyJoe
(Post 12796451)
I think it's supposed to be 'poet' but what do I know.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by HN
(Post 12796329)
Fucking issues with scientists carrying 40lb backpacks in a movie about busting ghosts. im pretty sure now I've seen it all on these boards. Kate Mckinnon-5'4" Kristen Wigg-5'5" Melissa McCarthy-5'2" Leslie Jones-6' Two of the ladies are too short and too skinny, and not believable to carry 40+ pound proton packs. Add in Melissa McCarthy at 5'2" probably north of 200 pounds wouldn't do that job either. Leslie Jones at 6' feet tall the only woman who I think is believable for this movie. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
I've encountered plenty of female backpackers who can handle 40+ pounds with ease. Please stop this line of argument.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
When Three of the leads range in height from 5'2-5'5" that's not realistic.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
40 lbs is believable, I see 5'3 housewives sporting that in weighted jackets with no issue at the gym (Though the weight is better distributed than a backpack). But then, was 40 lbs discussed in one of the clips? If so that was fucking stupid.
I know they always discussed them being 30 - 35 lbs in the originals, and then a lot lighter in the sequel. So by todays standards, that thing should weigh about 10 lbs. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
I remember years ago, on another board, there was an argument about an episode of Seinfeld, where Kramer sees something out his window and asks Jerry to look out his window to confirm. People were arguing whether they could possibly have the same view, and started drawing ASCII images of the layout of both of their apartments to argue their points. Probably one of the stupidest arguments over pointless shit I have seen on the internet.
Today, this backpack argument surpasses that. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by bluetoast
(Post 12797010)
I remember years ago, on another board, there was an argument about an episode of Seinfeld, where Kramer sees something out his window and asks Jerry to look out his window to confirm. People were arguing whether they could possibly have the same view, and started drawing ASCII images of the layout of both of their apartments to argue their points. Probably one of the stupidest arguments over pointless shit I have seen on the internet.
Today, this backpack argument surpasses that. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
For sure, but this 40 pound thing has joined those hallowed halls.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by Bluelitespecial
(Post 12796992)
When Three of the leads range in height from 5'2-5'5" that's not realistic.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by RichC2
(Post 12797000)
40 lbs is believable, I see 5'3 housewives sporting that in weighted jackets with no issue at the gym (Though the weight is better distributed than a backpack). But then, was 40 lbs discussed in one of the clips? If so that was fucking stupid.
I know they always discussed them being 30 - 35 lbs in the originals, and then a lot lighter in the sequel. So by todays standards, that thing should weigh about 10 lbs. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by DaveyJoe
(Post 12796444)
I didn't realize my sense of humor needed the go-ahead from my dick.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by Draven
(Post 12797028)
For the love of god...just meet a woman sometime. They might surprise you.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Dude.
My mother is about 5'2". She's maybe 100lbs, if that. She can carry 40 pounds or more without breaking a sweat, and I guarantee she'd put most dudes here (myself included) to shame. And she's 64 and not remotely athletic. And, what, do you think pregnancy isn't the same shit? Women gain 15 to 40 pounds during pregnancy (the child + water weight + whatever else), and for the last two months especially, it's not like they can remove the weight whenever they want. It's there 24/7. I mean, what the fuck are we even arguing here? :lol: Women can't carry 40 pound backpacks?? You guys seriously believe this shit? |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Yes, not only that women are not believable as Ghostbusters because no women are garbage men. Which is what the ghostbusters are based off of.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
:lol: I have to admit. This is the best long-con trolling I've seen. :up: bluelitespecial
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
No way am I watching this movie unless its for free.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
I wonder how accurate this is.
http://www.gbfans.com/faq/equipment/proton-pack/#6 Q. How much does a Proton Pack weigh? A. According to various sources in Ghostbusters, the average proton pack weighs around 30 - 35 lbs fully loaded with batteries. In Ghostbusters 2 packs were developed that weighed a lot less by having different batteries. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by Bluelitespecial
(Post 12797083)
Yes, not only that women are not believable as Ghostbusters because no women are garbage men. Which is what the ghostbusters are based off of.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by Dan
(Post 12797088)
:lol: I have to admit. This is the best long-con trolling I've seen. :up: bluelitespecial
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/...l#post12796080 you gotta admire the commitment to that line of argument though. |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Blah..Blah..Blah... You pick one city with a handful of women who do a man's job. Let me guess you think gender is a construct, which are the same people behind this movie, who are trying to make an indoctrinating piece of trash to force men out of STEM(science, technology, engineering, mathematics) fields. Besides B5Erik is right.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
:lol:
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
What the hell is going on now :lol:
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
Originally Posted by Bluelitespecial
(Post 12797130)
Blah..Blah..Blah... You pick one city with a handful of women who do a man's job. Let me guess you think gender is a construct, which are the same people behind this movie, who are trying to make an indoctrinating piece of trash to force men out of STEM fields. Besides B5Erik is right.
Here's another. http://onmilwaukee.com/buzz/articles...bagewoman.html Mental Floss estimates there are about 1,000 female garbage collectors, about 1% of the field. So don't worry, the field of garbage collecting is largely safe from ladies. As is the field of talking garbage on the Internet. http://mentalfloss.com/article/62038...age-collectors |
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
This ended up exactly where the closed Ghostbusters shemake / shequel thread left off and will likely suffer the same fate.
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016) - The Trailer
We need to get off this backpack thing. Here's an argument.
James Cameron has been making feminist action movies his whole career. And I've never heard a complaint. It's because the films themselves are good. This doesn't look good. It's just that simple. If it looked good no one would complain. Just as no one complained about the strong female roles in Aliens and Terminator and The Abyss and True Lies. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:22 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.