Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Old 07-10-16, 07:52 PM
  #601  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Josh-da-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Bible Belt
Posts: 43,910
Received 2,725 Likes on 1,881 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Why So Blu?
I actually like Salvation a lot. It's better than all of the DTV films from that franchise.
Yeah, it's kind of a low bar, but I thought Salvation was the best Crow sequel. Slightly better than CoA, which was too similar to the original, and Wicked Prayer was a clusterfuck.

Not a great movie by any stretch, but a decent enough DTV sequel.
Josh-da-man is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 08:04 PM
  #602  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Michael Corvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 62,516
Received 912 Likes on 647 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Why So Blu?
I actually like Salvation a lot. It's better than all of the DTV films from that franchise.
So better than Wicked Prayer? Damning with faint praise?
Michael Corvin is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 08:06 PM
  #603  
Dan
DVD Talk Hero
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: In the straps of boots
Posts: 27,999
Received 1,181 Likes on 834 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by B5Erik
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But the most disturbing thing is that Jones' character is a racial stereotype, and one that is outdated and particularly insulting.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.
A lot of "factual" statements from someone who hasn't even seen it yet.
Dan is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 08:24 PM
  #604  
DVD Talk Legend
 
B5Erik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern California
Posts: 13,597
Received 479 Likes on 351 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Dan
A lot of "factual" statements from someone who hasn't even seen it yet.
OK, let's not split hairs or argue over semantics.

G16 apparently does not come close to living up to the Ghostbusters legacy. Add apparently or reported information or what ever you want to my previous comments in place of fact, but the point still stands.
B5Erik is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 08:48 PM
  #605  
DVD Talk Legend & 2021 TOTY Winner
 
Obi-Wanma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Detroit
Posts: 12,522
Received 737 Likes on 364 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Josh-da-man
Yeah, it's kind of a low bar, but I thought Salvation was the best Crow sequel. Slightly better than CoA, which was too similar to the original, and Wicked Prayer was a clusterfuck.

Not a great movie by any stretch, but a decent enough DTV sequel.
It was actually shot to be a theatrical release, but poor reaction to CoA combined with poor test screenings (which probably included the one at SDCC) got that cancelled.
Obi-Wanma is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 09:46 PM
  #606  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Rosemount, MN
Posts: 43,347
Received 1,639 Likes on 1,026 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by B5Erik
OK, let's not split hairs or argue over semantics.

G16 apparently does not come close to living up to the Ghostbusters legacy. Add apparently or reported information or what ever you want to my previous comments in place of fact, but the point still stands.
I don't think anyone rational thought it would "live up to the Ghostbusters legacy". I'm pretty sure I said from day one that it might be good, it might not.

But the reaction was too extreme for what is apparently an "okay" movie. A trailer for an "okay" movie shouldn't be the most disliked trailer on the Internet.

The movie is currently 74% on Rotten Tomatoes. That's better than Spielberg's latest. That's pretty good any way you cut it.
Draven is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 09:55 PM
  #607  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Sean O'Hara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vichy America
Posts: 13,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by B5Erik
No, but they tried to minimize the fact that this isn't worthy of the Ghostbusters legacy. Not even close.
So exactly like every other thing ever made with the Ghostbusters name since 1984.
Sean O'Hara is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 10:00 PM
  #608  
DVD Talk Legend
 
B5Erik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern California
Posts: 13,597
Received 479 Likes on 351 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Draven
I don't think anyone rational thought it would "live up to the Ghostbusters legacy". I'm pretty sure I said from day one that it might be good, it might not.

But the reaction was too extreme for what is apparently an "okay" movie.
An, "Okay," movie that has some annoyingly loud characters to go along with some bad racial stereotypes that bring to mind black characters from the 30's and early 40's. Yes, from a technical standpoint it is possible that it's, "Okay," but when you think about that stuff it isn't quite so acceptable.


A trailer for an "okay" movie shouldn't be the most disliked trailer on the Internet.
It should be when it's the worst trailer people have seen in a long time - and this one was. It was terrible! Come on, you know the first trailer was awful.

The movie is currently 74% on Rotten Tomatoes. That's better than Spielberg's latest. That's pretty good any way you cut it.
Yes and no. None of the reviews are really good. They're all middling at best. When the review has a 3/5 score and says, "It isn't bad," that's not exactly a ringing endorsement.
B5Erik is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 10:08 PM
  #609  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,864
Received 216 Likes on 155 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

The final RT score will probably be in the 60's (all movies tend to drop), which is definitely better than most expected. The opening wknd might tick up a bit into the 45m range.
Artman is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 10:16 PM
  #610  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 45,326
Received 1,021 Likes on 812 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Artman
The final RT score will probably be in the 60's (all movies tend to drop), which is definitely better than most expected. The opening wknd might tick up a bit into the 45m range.
Well, as long as it's above a 50% and a 5.2/10 then I guess it isn't "Damaging to its legacy"
RichC2 is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 10:18 PM
  #611  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,864
Received 216 Likes on 155 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by RichC2
Well, as long as it's above a 51% and a 5.2/10 then I guess it isn't "Damaging to its legacy"
I'm glad it's not (apparently) a disaster, and should do OK at the Box Office. I'm also glad it isn't a sequel. Still no real interest, but it went from a 'never see' to probably a rental for me.
Artman is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 11:04 PM
  #612  
DVD Talk Hero
 
TomOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 40,141
Received 1,300 Likes on 944 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by B5Erik
An, "Okay," movie that has some annoyingly loud characters to go along with some bad racial stereotypes that bring to mind black characters from the 30's and early 40's.
You keep repeating about "loud" "annoying" that I think we get it. Why the need to keep saying it? I've worked with black women like her. They exist. There's also white men that are loud and annoying.

I don't get why you're putting yourself through all this aggravation of this thread. You seem obsessed.
TomOpus is offline  
Old 07-10-16, 11:08 PM
  #613  
Dan
DVD Talk Hero
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: In the straps of boots
Posts: 27,999
Received 1,181 Likes on 834 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

From reddit, naturally.




Originally Posted by TomOpus
I don't get why you're putting yourself through all this aggravation of this thread. You seem obsessed.
He needs it to fail to justify his ridiculous "women can't carry backpacks" theory, among everything else.
Dan is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 12:26 AM
  #614  
DVD Talk Legend
 
B5Erik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern California
Posts: 13,597
Received 479 Likes on 351 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Dan
He needs it to fail to justify his ridiculous "women can't carry backpacks" theory, among everything else.
So back to that tired line? Really? (And, for the record, I never said that. I only pointed out that the battery alone for those things would be damned heavy, and that even most guys - myself included - would get tired after 5 or 10 minutes carrying something like that around.)

Whatever, man. The movie still looks like it's lame. Racist stereotypes, half-assed attempts at recreating parts from the original, annoying comediennes who aren't really funny - talk about a huge letdown when Akroyd and Ramis tried for over a decade to get a proper sequel made and were shut down at every turn. But I guess since it's a Girl Power move criticizing it immediately gets you thrown under the bus... (Gotta love the social justice/politically correct folks - any criticism of any project led by women immediately gets you branded as a misogynist, even if the criticism is well founded.)

The original was clever. I have yet to read or hear one thing clever about this movie. Are there some funny parts in the movie? I'm sure there are, but the type of humor that we've seen from this just isn't the kind of thing I'm into. At all.

Enjoy the movie. I'm skipping it - just like I skipped Batman VS Superman (another movie I ripped into, even more than this one, but received only about 1/10 the personal criticism for doing so - funny, that.)


Originally Posted by TomOpus
You keep repeating about "loud" "annoying" that I think we get it. Why the need to keep saying it? I've worked with black women like her. They exist. There's also white men that are loud and annoying.
And I don't find them any funnier on the big screen than I do in real life. Why would anyone want to watch a movie about the type of people they can't stand?

I don't get why you're putting yourself through all this aggravation of this thread. You seem obsessed.
Because the long time Ghostbusters fans got screwed by Amy Pascal and her predecessor. They stonewalled Ramis and Akroyd for no good reason while greenlighting some of the worst movies of the last 15 years. That's frustrating when you were really hoping for a G3 and knew that Ramis and Akroyd were trying hard to make it happen. When the first two movies of a franchise are big box office hits that turn sizeable profits it isn't unreasonable to expect the studio to greenlight a third. The fact that a gender reversal G3 was greenlit without a script even being written is a further slap in the face to both Ramis/Akroyd and to the fans.

Last edited by B5Erik; 07-11-16 at 12:32 AM.
B5Erik is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 12:41 AM
  #615  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
fumanstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 55,349
Received 26 Likes on 14 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Even as someone here that's argued against going this gimmick route and thought the trailers and marketing were pretty poor can see that the movie clearly isn't as bad as the "haters" thought it would be. I don't really understand still trying so hard to shape an argument against the movie despite fairly positive reviews, or it being THAT difficult to say "hey, guess I was wrong about the movie being crappy but I still don't think it's for me."

At least Batman v Superman had the critic consensus to validate how poor that movie was. Of course, I still think the proton pack weight argument is one of the funniest and most ridiculous points of contention i've seen on here in years.
fumanstan is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 12:44 AM
  #616  
DVD Talk Legend
 
dsa_shea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Posts: 22,196
Received 309 Likes on 231 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by TGM
Ridiculously positive reactions to The Phantom Menace: http://geektyrant.com/news/read-ridi...teaser-trailer
Kind of like a positive reaction after the first time you get laid. However, once you think about it and have some other experiences to compare it to, your opinion likely changes. Hell, I'm going to be honest and say that my opinion of Phantom was good after the first viewing. A lot of it had to do with being hungry for new Star Wars for so long. The reviews for this will be all over the place at first. It will take some time to see if it is shit and really does stink.
dsa_shea is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 12:52 AM
  #617  
DVD Talk Legend
 
B5Erik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern California
Posts: 13,597
Received 479 Likes on 351 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by fumanstan
Even as someone here that's argued against going this gimmick route and thought the trailers and marketing were pretty poor can see that the movie clearly isn't as bad as the "haters" thought it would be. I don't really understand still trying so hard to shape an argument against the movie despite fairly positive reviews, or it being THAT difficult to say "hey, guess I was wrong about the movie being crappy but I still don't think it's for me."
I still don't see, read, or hear anything remotely good. The stuff that I read the critics saying, "This was fairly funny," sounds lame to me. Sorry, maybe I'm just too old and cranky to get or appreciate the new humor. There are damned few comedies that I like anymore.

At least Batman v Superman had the critic consensus to validate how poor that movie was. Of course, I still think the proton pack weight argument is one of the funniest and most ridiculous points of contention i've seen on here in years.
Have you tried carrying around 50 pounds for more than a couple minutes? I have, and I know for a fact that a 50 pound pack of battery and electronic equipment would be too much for me to handle for any extended period of time. I can buy someone bigger and stronger (and younger) than me doing it, but not someone smaller and weaker. Something like that takes me out of a movie and ruins it for me. That's all I'm saying. If a movie makes me say, "Oh, COME ON," then it's over - I'm not going to like it. Even with something as fantastically unrealistic as Ghostbusters (they have to play it straight in order to sell the concept).

You know what? They probably could sell me on the proton pack thing by claiming that one of them came up with some new, amazing battery technology that is 1/10 the size and weight with 500% more power - but I'd still have major issues with the style of humor in this movie, and the fact that I HATE McCarthy and Jones.

Sorry. I do, I hate McCarthy and Jones, and I guess I don't want to buy into ANY movie with them in it.

Now get off my fucking lawn!!!
B5Erik is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 01:36 AM
  #618  
DVD Talk Legend
 
DaveyJoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 19,336
Received 186 Likes on 129 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Draven
I don't think anyone rational thought it would "live up to the Ghostbusters legacy". I'm pretty sure I said from day one that it might be good, it might not.

But the reaction was too extreme for what is apparently an "okay" movie. A trailer for an "okay" movie shouldn't be the most disliked trailer on the Internet.
I disagree, the internet is a place of extreme negativity and hyperbole. Look at any movie that doesn't live up to fanboy expectations and you'll see that they go to over-the-top lengths to rip it apart. This thread doesn't have much more ridiculous exaggeration than the Fant4stic thread. BvS, was equally torn to shreds.

The sexism angle adds an interesting dynamic to the discussion, but the reaction to this movie is pretty typical of internet fandom. Changing the Ghostbusters' gender is akin to making Johnny Storm black, or Lex Luthor Jesse Eisenberg. If movie adaptations/sequels/reboots fail to live up to fans' preconceived expectations, they hate it with unbridled passion.
DaveyJoe is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 01:45 AM
  #619  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
fumanstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 55,349
Received 26 Likes on 14 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by B5Erik
I still don't see, read, or hear anything remotely good. The stuff that I read the critics saying, "This was fairly funny," sounds lame to me. Sorry, maybe I'm just too old and cranky to get or appreciate the new humor. There are damned few comedies that I like anymore.
If you haven't read anything remotely good about the movie then either you're not reading enough reviews, or you're deliberately picking and choosing which ones you want to read to support the arguments you've had from the get go as there are plenty of reviews that do have much higher praise for the movie.

Look, my point is that i'm not that far from you as far as not caring for the people involved in this movie, or thinking that the movie doesn't look good. I posted earlier about a lot of the reviews being 3/5 or C+ type scores too with enough of those to dissuade me from watching this in theaters. But as I said in the post you quoted, the fact is the movie isn't a train wreck or shit show. It seems fairly competent and certainly an above average movie given the overall critical response so far. Hence my previous post about just chalking it up to not being my type of thing. I just don't really understand continuing to rant and rave about it or cherry picking the negative reviews to support whatever confirmation bias about the issues you have with the movie.

Have you tried carrying around 50 pounds for more than a couple minutes? I have, and I know for a fact that a 50 pound pack of battery and electronic equipment would be too much for me to handle for any extended period of time. I can buy someone bigger and stronger (and younger) than me doing it, but not someone smaller and weaker. Something like that takes me out of a movie and ruins it for me. That's all I'm saying. If a movie makes me say, "Oh, COME ON," then it's over - I'm not going to like it. Even with something as fantastically unrealistic as Ghostbusters (they have to play it straight in order to sell the concept).

You know what? They probably could sell me on the proton pack thing by claiming that one of them came up with some new, amazing battery technology that is 1/10 the size and weight with 500% more power - but I'd still have major issues with the style of humor in this movie, and the fact that I HATE McCarthy and Jones.
I carried a sousaphone/tuba around for a few years in high school when I weighed about 115 pounds, being a pretty slim guy at the time, including walking a few miles with one in a carrying case. Regardless, seems pretty easy for suspension of disbelief to kick in with lighter batteries in a world where busting ghosts is a real thing, but in the end I think that's on you and not the movies. So yeah, still one of the sillier arguments i've seen and people are going to remember it.

Sorry. I do, I hate McCarthy and Jones, and I guess I don't want to buy into ANY movie with them in it.
There's nothing wrong with that. I generally don't like McCarthy either, and don't like what i've seen of Leslie Jones either.
fumanstan is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 02:09 AM
  #620  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Hazel Motes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 7,507
Received 398 Likes on 266 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

#AllGhostbustersMoviesMatter.
Hazel Motes is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 04:46 AM
  #621  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Me007gold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,246
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Dan
From reddit, naturally.






He needs it to fail to justify his ridiculous "women can't carry backpacks" theory, among everything else.
That dude is an even bigger trol then me. All the comments in there are calling him out for being wrong.
Me007gold is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 08:17 AM
  #622  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 45,326
Received 1,021 Likes on 812 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

I actually don't know why I keep coming back to these threads



I know it'll go down during the week, but this now has a 79% with 52 reviews, seems to teeter between a 6.6 and 6.7 out of 10. If it stays in that range, it'll have nothing on the original but will be an improvement on the sequel.

Last edited by RichC2; 07-11-16 at 08:25 AM.
RichC2 is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 08:30 AM
  #623  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Rosemount, MN
Posts: 43,347
Received 1,639 Likes on 1,026 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by DaveyJoe
I disagree, the internet is a place of extreme negativity and hyperbole. Look at any movie that doesn't live up to fanboy expectations and you'll see that they go to over-the-top lengths to rip it apart. This thread doesn't have much more ridiculous exaggeration than the Fant4stic thread. BvS, was equally torn to shreds.

The sexism angle adds an interesting dynamic to the discussion, but the reaction to this movie is pretty typical of internet fandom. Changing the Ghostbusters' gender is akin to making Johnny Storm black, or Lex Luthor Jesse Eisenberg. If movie adaptations/sequels/reboots fail to live up to fans' preconceived expectations, they hate it with unbridled passion.
I agree, which is why it's strange that neither movie got slammed as hard with dislikes as this one did.
Draven is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 09:31 AM
  #624  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 38,208
Received 1,191 Likes on 917 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by Michael Corvin
So better than Wicked Prayer? Damning with faint praise?

Yup, and it had an awesome soundtrack.
Why So Blu? is offline  
Old 07-11-16, 09:33 AM
  #625  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Posts: 17,186
Received 843 Likes on 589 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)

Originally Posted by RichC2
I actually don't know why I keep coming back to these threads
Maybe the same reason that I do... because it's fun to witness so much butt-hurt... especially now that the reviews are good.

This is obviously better than the original sequel - which isn't hard to do because the sequel was a piece of shit. And I'm sure in a universe where the original GB didn't exist - this would've gotten just as high a score. It only loses points simply because it's not an original premise.

Hopefully this will have a sequel - since so many are enjoying it.

Last edited by Coral; 07-11-16 at 09:39 AM.
Coral is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.