Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
#151
Banned
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 20,052
Received 169 Likes
on
127 Posts
From: Conducting miss-aisle drills and listening to their rock n roll
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
The brew of violence and anger, combined with the lack of a proper advertising campaign, led to the film's lukewarm box office intake of only $23 million, when compared to its $18 million budget. It only earned $10.1 million in theatrical rentals (about $27 million in 2013 dollars). Scorsese became concerned for his future career and worried that producers and studios might refuse to finance his films. According to Box Office Mojo, the film grossed $23,383,987 in domestic theaters.
#152
Banned
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 20,052
Received 169 Likes
on
127 Posts
From: Conducting miss-aisle drills and listening to their rock n roll
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
BTW, has the film been rated yet? I'm surprised it would be in front of Finding Dory. In fact I almost don't believe that. That's going to give some kids some nightmares.
#153
Moderator
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
hey - I'm just reporting what I saw ... yes it was a rather bizarre inclusion for a film geared to kids (and quite a few under 6 year olds at a 7pm screening).
#154
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
#155
DVD Talk Gold Edition
#157
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
I disagree. And the situation you cite is different, because people were apparently panning The King of Comedy AFTER it was released. So that movie at least had a chance until it was released. The New Ghostbusters isn't even out yet and it's already associated with negativity ie "most disliked trailer in YouTube history".
There's a lot of money invested in this film, and careers are on the line. Sometimes perception is reality, especially when it comes to consumers and marketing. The producers here don't want to appear passive and allow the critics to define the image of this movie, so they're going on the offensive. I myself and am put off by it, but I see why, from a marketing standpoint, they are doing this.
There's a lot of money invested in this film, and careers are on the line. Sometimes perception is reality, especially when it comes to consumers and marketing. The producers here don't want to appear passive and allow the critics to define the image of this movie, so they're going on the offensive. I myself and am put off by it, but I see why, from a marketing standpoint, they are doing this.
#158
DVD Talk Hero
#159
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
There were fewer major review outlets back then, the New York Daily News and Variety slammed it for being about a character they didn't want to know. Roger Ebert and many other critics gave it rave reviews
#160
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
Had you seen all the trailers released so far? This new one was actually funny and better than the ones you had seen?
#161
DVD Talk Hero
#162
Banned
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 20,052
Received 169 Likes
on
127 Posts
From: Conducting miss-aisle drills and listening to their rock n roll
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
I disagree. And the situation you cite is different, because people were apparently panning The King of Comedy AFTER it was released. So that movie at least had a chance until it was released. The New Ghostbusters isn't even out yet and it's already associated with negativity ie "most disliked trailer in YouTube history".
There's a lot of money invested in this film, and careers are on the line. Sometimes perception is reality, especially when it comes to consumers and marketing. The producers here don't want to appear passive and allow the critics to define the image of this movie, so they're going on the offensive. I myself and am put off by it, but I see why, from a marketing standpoint, they are doing this.
There's a lot of money invested in this film, and careers are on the line. Sometimes perception is reality, especially when it comes to consumers and marketing. The producers here don't want to appear passive and allow the critics to define the image of this movie, so they're going on the offensive. I myself and am put off by it, but I see why, from a marketing standpoint, they are doing this.
#163
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
If my assumption is correct I'd point out that there was an almost-unanimous consensus that it was an improvement over the first trailer. I don't know why you're grilling him.
Of course, almost all the "critics" doubled down and refused to admit it was anything but as-bad or worse.
#165
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
#166
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
I'm almost certain there isn't a new trailer, he likely just saw the 2nd trailer for the first time.
If my assumption is correct I'd point out that there was an almost-unanimous consensus that it was an improvement over the first trailer. I don't know why you're grilling him.
Of course, almost all the "critics" doubled down and refused to admit it was anything but as-bad or worse.
If my assumption is correct I'd point out that there was an almost-unanimous consensus that it was an improvement over the first trailer. I don't know why you're grilling him.
Of course, almost all the "critics" doubled down and refused to admit it was anything but as-bad or worse.
And still not sure why you can't seem to grasp the fact that people just think the movie looks terrible.
Yes it is. And still not sure why the mods refuse to do anything about it.
#167
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
Google "2nd Ghostbusters trailer" and read the news article. The first two that come up say it's an improvement. People here thought it was better. Even on Reddit and IMDB people thought it was better. You were literally just replying to someone who thought it was better.
#168
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
It felt a lot shorter than the previous trailers. It didn't seem to rehash scenes from other trailers. I felt like I saw new stuff.
Or maybe the heat made me delirious
Or maybe the heat made me delirious
#169
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
Nah, you weren't delirious. You just saw the 2nd trailer that was widely seen to be an improvement.
Still, would you be willing to submit to a polygraph test to prove that you did, in fact, view and enjoy the trailer?
Still, would you be willing to submit to a polygraph test to prove that you did, in fact, view and enjoy the trailer?
#170
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
Google "2nd Ghostbusters trailer" and read the news article. The first two that come up say it's an improvement. People here thought it was better. Even on Reddit and IMDB people thought it was better. You were literally just replying to someone who thought it was better.
The person I replied to stated that "this trailer was better than the previous trailers." So, according to him we were discussing at least a third trailer. I haven't seen this third trailer, but I have seen the two terrible ones, and I guess you could say that the second one was slightle less terrible if you really wanted to. But they were both pretty shitty in my opinion.
#171
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
There are two trailers with two international variants. Your response confirms what I said about you grilling him. God forbid he like one trailer more than the other like a lot of people did.
#172
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
#173
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
How else could you read it? It was a pretty loaded response:
Dude said he'd seen the first one and had recently seen the second. To even question whether he'd done is due diligence and seen all the trailers is absurd to the extreme and wouldn't be asked for any other trailer. Then he gets into this incredulous and condescending "really?" tone that also questions a point that he made absolutely crystal-fucking-clear.
Dude said he'd seen the first one and had recently seen the second. To even question whether he'd done is due diligence and seen all the trailers is absurd to the extreme and wouldn't be asked for any other trailer. Then he gets into this incredulous and condescending "really?" tone that also questions a point that he made absolutely crystal-fucking-clear.
#175
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Ghostbusters (2016, D: Feig)
Wait, why was my previous post deleted? I didn't make any sexist jokes or comments. Other posters were making "go fuck yourself" comments which I also avoided. Are only positive comments regarding this movie allowed now? I was under the impression this was a movie discussion board; I was discussing the movie without attacking any person or group of people and yet my comments were deleted along with all the "go fuck yourself" comments? WTH?



