You're right. There's no way in hell you can find women who are as physically fit as the original team. I mean, Kate McKinnon and Kristen Wiig as strong as those hunks of manly man meat that are Dan Aykroyd and Bill Murray?



Inconceivable!

I just hope they do a good digital wire removal job since the dainty lady stars of the movie were apparently physically incapable of wearing proton packs which obviously suggests some kind of elaborate wire/crane rig. They've sure done an adequate job of perpetuating the illusion of ladies wearing proton packs in the officially-released promo but I'll be the first to admit that Sony isn't gonna use the countless hours of footage they undoubtedly have of the cast struggling to get off the ground like a turtle on its back when they're cutting trailers, etc.

of all the ridiculous arguments in this thread, "women can't wear backpacks" is by far the most entertainingly absurd.

I'm willing to bet this thread will be more entertaining than the film.

There's no chance that this movie will be as entertaining as reactions to it.

Edit: Damn, I guess I owe Leacha a Coke.

Who said they can't? I'm just saying it's unrealistic to expect that three women who are scientists are also physically fit enough to handle 40 pound packs on their backs for extended periods of time while they're running around without getting totally gassed and sore as hell. It's a stretch with the original Ghostbusters, and they even made a joke about it in the original (when they get winded going up the stairs to take on Gozer), but men ARE bigger and stronger than women, so they, ON AVERAGE, can handle a pack like that better than women can. Could three women scientists handle it? Maybe, maybe not. But three reasonably healthy men in their 30's certainly could. Sorry if reality bothers you.

Now, if you we're talking about four female cops or military members (where physical fitness is a requirement), then I'd say, "Fine, totally believable for them to do that," but since we're talking three female scientists you're probably not talking about fitness fanatics (you could be, but look at the actresses they chose - hardly fitness freaks). Again, the fact is men are bigger and stronger than women, and could handle the proton backs better (on average).

And to make my point clear, this whole gender reversal is a gimmick - a stunt - to justify a remake. Nothing more, nothing less. It wasn't organic to the story that they HAVE to be an all women's Ghostbuster team.

And it does stretch credibility a little to say that three women scientists would all be perfectly capable of handling 40 pound proton packs on their backs for extended periods of running around. Not impossible, but pushing it. Would they even want to do it after finding out how grueling it is? Most people I know, men and women alike, don't like doing things that wear them out and make them sore for days. If they can avoid that kind of thing, they do. They certainly don't do it on a daily basis.

So if using logic, common sense, and statistical facts is sexist then we've crossed over that slippery slope.

Don't be stupid. The packs the actresses are wearing are empty shells - lightweight and easy to carry.

It is clear that some people here are so far to the left that any suggestion that men can do something physically that women can't is automatically deemed sexist - regardless of whether or not it's factually accurate.

Like I said before - the ultra PC people are pathetic.

Luckily, technology never gets lighter over a period of 30 years.

I assume everyone else is still using a DynaTAC phone, right?

It's hard trying to provide a reasonable opinion for not caring for the movie when others are throwing out really bad excuses

So the proton packs in the trailer aren't really the ones in the movie? Because they sure didn't make them any smaller than the originals...

I really don't get why some people are hell bent on defending this movie and will pull out the, "Sexist," card and try to discredit anyone who posts anything stating that men can do something with greater ease than can women (physical stuff).

This movie has one of the worst trailers of the last 20 years and people are surprised that it's getting such harsh criticism when the entire premise is a gimmick and a stunt?

Why do you keep adding that "scientist" caveat? What, you think scientists are all wimps? They never go backpacking or mountain climbing or anything that requires physical activity?

But we aren't talking about the average. We're talking about the Ghostbusters. And I guarantee you, there are plenty of women out there -- even ones with PhDs, who are stronger than Dan Aykroyd was in his prime.

Actually, yes. To become a scientist requires a hell of a lot more time on schoolwork than physical fitness activity, and to maintain a position as a scientist requires a level of time commitment that would preclude getting in the kind of shape that a cop, firefighter, or member of the military would have to get in.

Sorry, my stepmother is a PHD and she couldn't handle any kind of physical activity, even when she was 30.

And, YES, women who do physical jobs are likely in better shape than Dan Akroyd was at 30 or 35. But they didn't pick women like that to play these roles, did they?

Whatever. It's clear that no amount of common sense based on facts will persuade anyone who is hell bent on defending this movie. Why you people feel it has earned your defense is beyond me, though.

I hope you enjoy it when it comes out. Me? I think the trailer makes it look like utter garbage, and since the premise is just a gimmick and a stunt I have no desire to see it.

Hell, I said ten years ago that for an original cast Ghostbusters 3 they should have them struggling through it physically and being forced to hire a new Ghostbusting team since the original guys couldn't handle it anymore.

Oooooh - that's agist!

I invite you to hike out a few miles in the backcountry until you find a group out camping with at least one woman (based on my experience shouldn't take long) and explain your "backpack theory" to them.

Are they carrying 40 pound backpacks composed of metal, filled with metal parts? And what lines of work are those women going to be in? I'd bet a hundred dollars that you won't run into a scientist (it's a very demanding job when it comes to time - for both men and women).

Come on, can we please tone down the hyperbole and condescension?

Or is any and all criticism of this movie going to be labeled as sexist? If that's the case, then this thread, too, should be closed because it isn't a discussion anymore.

My original iPad is about four years older than my IPad Air 2. They're basically the same size, but one feel like a brick compared to the other.

Whoah, I guess that settles it. One person's experience means everyone else's must be the exact same.

A backpack made of 40 pounds of metal weighs the same as one containing 40 pounds of feathers. Or 40 pounds of "I'm not sexist, but..." excuses.

Are we really going to nit pick little shit like this? Really???

OK, let's use some common sense.

The IPad Air 2 is the same size becuse it has to be for the screen.

The only reason the Proton Packs would still be that size is because it has to be for the mechanism inside. Your IPad Air 2 is mostly air inside. The Proton Pack wouldn't be. That would make it more fragile and breakable. They'd just make a smaller pack. Common sense.

OK, do you know any women scientists who are also fitness freaks and have the free time to work out every day?

Look, I'm just applying common sense. You're saying, "Well, it COULD happen, so therefore your entire argument about it not being likely is a joke!"

Nevermind that they didn't cast women who look like fitness freaks...

Who is the one getting nit picky here? A proton pack built with 2016 tech would be lighter than one built with 1984 tech.

Not if it's the same size. They wouldn't make proton packs that are mostly empty. That would make them fragile and breakable. They'd just make smaller, sturdier packs. Why are you having such a hard time with that concept?

I'm done. You people can have this thread and this movie. It looks like shit and since it was just made on a premise based on stunt casting for a gender reversal that is totally NOT organic to the story you're likely going to see a really bad movie (much like Fant4stic, which had it's die hard defenders, too).

I'm totally wrong. Women are as big and strong as men and can handle anything that men can.

Enjoy your thread.

This is movie about people coming back from the dead and "sliming" the living, and somehow 6' Leslie Jones wearing a backpack is the "unrealistic" part.

That's why I skipped Wild for a more believable movie like The Hobbit.

There is nothing "common" about the sense that B5Erik has regarding this topic.

You don't understand that items can be the same size but built with lighter parts? Of all the arguments and stances to take, this is a really weird one. Maybe they are more fragile? Maybe the movie actually shows them struggling with the weight of the packs the same way the guys ran awkwardly with them?

It's funny, because I completely agree that it's a gimmick but using the weight of a proton pack is a pretty funny position to take a stance on.

I do, actually. My niece. And several of her coworkers, in fact.

Cars are more or less the same size as they were 30 years ago. They do the same things and contain mostly the same parts. But newer cars weigh a lot less.