Shannon Nutt

Yes, the guy with the negative review gives well thought out reasons why he doesn't think the movie is good. The guy who likes the movie just seems like a cheerleader fanboy.

All I know is if the negative guy is right about his description of some scenes, I'm going to HATE this film. He's probably wrong about it bombing - good or bad, it's going to have a huge opening weekend.

Artman

Maybe..I haven't seen the positive reviews/outlook yet, we'll come back to this in a wk and see...

tylergfoster

I got my press invite two weeks ago and an entirely separate email reiterating the 10AM Sunday PST embargo. As of today I have yet to hear about any changes to that embargo.

It should also be noted that many of the same Twitter trolls who held that up as a sign the movie was bad have since moved onto claiming that the mere existence of an embargo is some sort of smoking gun. Having been at this since 2005, I can tell you, every movie is embargoed. Every single one. Sometimes the studio does make the decision to drop the embargo early (very rarely -- maybe 10 instances in all of that time). Sometimes the studio mandates embargo by city for platform releases, or by country (in this case, the reason the embargo isn't midnight on July 14th crossing into the 15th is that the film is opening in the UK on Monday -- although even then it's dropping 24 hours early for them). I have never heard of an embargo being moved forward.

You're also going to hear from the 300+ Ghostbusters fans and fansite administrators who were invited to the premiere tonight. Seems entirely possible you might hear from them before actual critics, given they see the movie at 10PM PST (less than 30 minutes from now as I write this) and will be out of it at midnight or so, which is a seemingly negligible amount of time to hold them off from talking about it.

Dan

^ Thanks for the insight, Tyler.

I'm not a reviewer at all, but I recall that one of the Assassin's Creed games had its embargo pushed to noon on the day of release (Unity, I think.)
That, or the embargo was ALWAYS noon on the day of release. Either way, THAT'S a shitty practice.

What I do find strange is this situation with Ghostbusters fansite admins, YouTubers, etc. and that they're getting to talk about it before professional reviewers. Maybe that's Sony sending a message to professional reviewers. Or maybe that's just how their timeline/schedule worked. It's just weird that they'd hold one group to an embargo, while the other group is free to share their review ASAP. That doesn't seem like a common thing, but maybe the professionals here can weigh in.

I think reviewers are in an impossible position, but I'm very interested to see how each person handles their own reviews for this one. Do they address the backlash/criticism/etc. or do they ignore it completely? Depending on which they choose, will they get bombarded with hate mail for daring to attack the mob, or bombarded with hate mail for outright ignoring this super important group of very loud critics that are totally entitled to be acknowledged by every professional critic? Do they talk about the film's long sordid history in production limbo, or do they keep it simple for the larger crowd only interested in whether or not it's any good today, on its own?


No matter what, there's going to be a plethora of angry dudes yelling into their webcams on YouTube for weeks to come, and a TON of them surely basing their entire opinion on a torrent of an iPhone-recorded copy of the movie. It'd be kind of funny if Sony were to "leak" a butchered version of the film for the thieves, like some game devs have done with copies of their games.

Guru Askew

Woke up to take a leak, found two more reviews:

tylergfoster

I was right, a few Tweet impressions trickled out:

https://twitter.com/centralokgb/stat...45362567794690
https://twitter.com/TKKarma/status/752045110120976384
https://twitter.com/cegoodman2/statu...43967097606144
https://twitter.com/evilyn_13/status/752043843642589184
https://twitter.com/ASinCALIFORNIA/s...43201469435904
https://twitter.com/NanaAnna83/statu...42639147630592
https://twitter.com/DrKorkaboltz/sta...40748401385472

Plus, also:

https://twitter.com/ChrisKattan/stat...44507017781248

Me007gold

So basically It would have been better if it wasn't called Ghostbusters. I also don't think compassion to JP and JW is a good one. JW never pretended like JP didn't exist.

fumanstan

http://www.villagevoice.com/film/bus...remake-8841463

Short review, not particularly good.

Artman

If I went to the premier, was in the industry, etc I'd probably post some appreciative twitter reactions as well... none of those ring true to me. After hearing about what is actually in the film, the actors (or actresses, not sure which is acceptable) reactions to the criticism... I want this to fail so F-ing hard, and again... thank God it isn't attached to the previous two, that's the best news to take from this.

B5Erik

He didn't seem to really like the original all that much, either, and was really open to stylistic change - and he still didn't like the new version very much.

Guru Askew

Den of Geek posted their review early and then pulled it. 3/5.

Cached version thanks to a Reddit poster: http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=htt...igZlBJCdy8KGgi

Dan

She.

Shannon Nutt

Twitter reactions to early screenings are the WORST way to judge a movie...did we learn nothing from the Twitter response to early screenings of Batman v Superman? And Chris Kattan is friends with the cast...what's he going to say?!

RoboDad

And that review seems to have been taken down.

B5Erik

Whatever. My bad for not reading the name. Either way, the point remains true - this reviewer was open to change in the franchise (not being a big fan of the original) and didn't like this movie much.

TGM

Ridiculously positive reactions to The Phantom Menace: http://geektyrant.com/news/read-ridi...teaser-trailer

I'd likely post a reserved and cordial tweet too if I were invited to an early screening by the director.

But enough. It's almost here for the masses to consume and digest. I'm not going to see it in the theater anyway... never was... not out of protest, but because I usually can only find time to go to the movies about twice a year, for movies I'm really interested in like Star Wars, Marvel, or Star Trek.

I'll watch it on cable or something, and will probably end up being marginally entertained. I truly hope so. I also hope it's "smarter" than it looks from the previews, because regardless of the all female Ghostbusters squad, it just comes across as loud, crude, and slap-sticky, not what I associate with the Ghostbusters I grew up with. Some of that is fine, but 2 hours (1 1/2 hours?) of that is painful to sit thru.

Guru Askew

Like Den of Geek they jumped the gun, both reviews will probably pop up again at the top of the hour.

Dan

20 minutes until childhoods are ruined forever! Can't wait!

Guru Askew

The Daily Beast:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...st+Articles%29

Forbes:

https://t.co/yVgCmL2Jif

Indiewire:

http://www.indiewire.com/2016/07/gho...ig-1201704245/

TheMovieman

That's where I'm at. I've seen 3 movies so far this year: Deadpool, BvS and CA:CW. I'll probably go see Jason Bourne, Suicide Squad and Star Wars: Rogue One and that's it for the year (in theaters). I will, however, check out GB2016 when it comes out on Blu-ray.

Artman

While all reviews are essentially opinion pieces...these early ones are some of the most agenda driven I've read. And even than can they only amount to a middling grade...

Draven

C+ from EW. Seems like it's ok, not terrible, not great. Hardly the garbage fire that many were predicting. And looks like all the embargo criticism was completely wrong. What a shocker.

Match

Variety:

http://variety.com/2016/film/reviews...hy-1201810318/


Metacritic:
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/ghostbusters-2016

DaveyJoe

Everybody in this thread interpreting reviews as vindication.

Me007gold

Look at the title from the Uproxx review ""The New ‘Ghostbusters’ Will Make Misogynists Mad, Because It’s Pretty Darn Good"

That's more then enough to tell anybody that they aren't being the least bit honest.