George Lucas is reading this thread and getting a good laugh.

74% with 43 reviews and a 6.6/10 average. Already shaping up to be one of the more highly rated live action summer tent poles. Curious what it'll be next week.

Next week we move on to bash the new Star Trek movie.

I mean, it sounds a lot more like the original, but if I wanted that, I'd just listen to the original. It's perfectly serviceable and inoffensive, but that's because it borrows all the beats from the original. Any decent cover band could do this. I mean, I don't really like the Fall Out Boy version either, but I have more respect for the effort than I have for this. If you're going to cover a song without trying to make it your own, then why bother?

I agree. But that's also Walk The Moon's MO, bland band.

Everyone online is going nuts over Paramount's confirmed embargo shenanigans.

Wait, no they're not. I'm thinking about the time some random Facebook poster lied about Sony's embargo.

Guru, you don't happen to have stock in Sony, do you?

The overall fresh rating is pretty high, but I do see a lot of 3/5's. Looks much better then what the trailers showed, but the actual content of most of the reviews aren't exactly filled with overwhelming praise either. Seems like a decent above average comedy to me. Don't really have a problem admitting that on my side

Probably not compelling enough for me to see it in theaters, but looks good enough to catch as a rental.

One thing I am sure of, it should look and sound great on Blu-ray or UHD.

To be honest I didn't really expect a ton of negative reviews. Whether or not I like the people involved with the film they (namely Feig and McCarthy) appeal to a broader audience and it was pretty unlikely that there were going to be scathing reviews from most of the mainstream critics. It seems about where I expected which is somewhere in the middle with most reviews which is more or less what I expected. That's fine but I'm not convinced it's a good movie just because it's not getting shit on.

So... better or worse than Evolution?

Will reserve judgment on that until there's a female Evolution made.

I still think that movie is underrated.

Actually there is a thread on r/movies about how the embargo on Star Trek 3 is a bad sign for the quality of the movie. It's getting a lot of hate.

In journalism, you generally stick to one idea per paragraph. If you just jam a sentence into a separate paragraph, an editor (the few that remain) would send it back and say "Flesh this idea out."

One of the reviews I just read said that the film did a good job addressing the class/gender issues, etc., but that it was just a shitty movie.

Jeezus, they're showing it at Comic Con for free to fans...if Paramount was concerned about things staying 'mum', they're taking the wrong approach. The whole plot's (and probably a pirated copy or two) is going to be online a couple days before release.

What is desperate? It is tracking as a middle-of-the-road comedy. Did anyone "defending" it say it was going to be a masterpiece?

If anything, people seem upset that it's rating as highly as it is. Seems anything more than an F or 0 out of 5 signifies a war against men

Fans who get to see it early for free will always over-rate the movie.

Not necessarily. I was part of a Comic Con crowd who got to see a free screening of The Crow: Salvation, and that audience laughed throughout at parts which were not intended to be funny, whilst the director and star of the film sat in the front row.

I actually like Salvation a lot. It's better than all of the DTV films from that franchise.

Getting back on topic...so will many critics who are given free passes (and, if reports are true, free candy and popcorn!) to an event that includes access to the stars of the film.

Ah so that's how TFA got so many good reviews.

I still feel bad because some friends and I laughed throughout a screening of a film that the director was at. At the Q&A afterward he said "I'm glad some of you got the humor."

No, it was just bad.

No, but they tried to minimize the fact that this isn't worthy of the Ghostbusters legacy. Not even close.

And the fact that there is the usual loudmouthed, annoying McCarthy and Jones stuff just makes the movie that much more unworthy.

But the most disturbing thing is that Jones' character is a racial stereotype, and one that is outdated and particularly insulting. I don't know how that gets any kind of a pass.

No, but it seems that rating as low as it does hardly constitutes a, "Good," movie. It seems like the best thing we're hearing is that it's, "OK," and has some funny stuff in it. Never mind that the style of humor used in this movie is much more lowbrow than the original, and this movie (from most reviews) falls on it's face when it tries to hit some of the same marks as the original, I think it's safe to say that this isn't a very good movie. It may not be a complete trainwreck, but it it certainly isn't an artistic success, either.

They forced this thing into a concept of a gender-bending movie without having a good script. It was contrived and it wasn't better because of the concept. If anything, the gender reversal painted Feig into a corner and he wasn't up to the task of writing a script that was better than one with a mixed gender Ghostbusters team (which is what they should have done). There appears to have been too much emphasis on role reversal and not enough on writing a good script. As if the gender reversal concept alone could carry the movie. It didn't necessarily have to make it a bad movie, but it made it more difficult for Feig, and he failed to come up with something nearly as good as the original.