"Ghostbusters" Director Faces Backlash after Promising to "Hand Movie Back to Fans"

Status
Not open for further replies.
DukenukemX said:
I like how they make it about women in Ghostbusters is the reason why people hate it. Many men like women in their entertainment, usually with a cute face and big boobs. Learn to market better. But the 2016 version was awful. Every bit of it was not entertaining or interesting.
Click to expand...

Yep - but that's just them making excuses. The simple fact is that it could have had the original cast in it minus an obvious member and it would have still been a terrible movie because... it's a terrible movie. It might have been somewhat better, but then the cast would have been carrying it...
 
I watched the 2016 Ghostbusters movie (hey, I got it for free) and to be honest it wasn't bad... but it wasn't good either. A lot of the jokes (if you can call them jokes) were very much forced, ham-fisted into the movie to try and make it funny; I got news for you, they weren't funny. The best jokes are the jokes that come naturally, like many of the jokes in the original two Ghostbuster movies. Many of Bill Murray's jokes just came off naturally, not forced like the jokes were in the 2016 version. News flash Hollywood, if you have to force the jokes then they're not going to be funny.

It was very much one of those movies that one would say "Meh" to. I would never have spent any money on the movie and the fact that service I signed up was giving the movie away for free should tell you something. I don't care if the movie cost $2 in the bargain bin, it would have been $2 too much.
 
Hollywood previous few decades:

We should be able to make movies the fans want to see no matter what the content is and damn special interest groups!

Hollywood now:

We should only be making movies that cater to the special interest groups we have today!
 
trparky said:
I watched the 2016 Ghostbusters movie (hey, I got it for free) and to be honest it wasn't bad... but it wasn't good either. A lot of the jokes (if you can call them jokes) were very much forced, ham-fisted into the movie to try and make it funny; I got news for you, they weren't funny. The best jokes are the jokes that come naturally, like many of the jokes in the original two Ghostbuster movies. Many of Bill Murray's jokes just came off naturally, not forced like the jokes were in the 2016 version. News flash Hollywood, if you have to force the jokes then they're not going to be funny.

It was very much one of those movies that one would say "Meh" to. I would never have spent any money on the movie and the fact that service I signed up was giving the movie away for free should tell you something. I don't care if the movie cost $2 in the bargain bin, it would have been $2 too much.
Click to expand...

News flash. The movie wasn't free if you had to sign up with service to get it. Lol.
 
The service was that one service that if you link your various other services together to it all content bought on one service is now accessible on the other services. For instance, if I bought a movie on Amazon (because it was cheaper than elsewhere) it would then be accessible to me on iTunes and the other services that I have linked to it.

Edit
It's called Movies Anywhere.
 
NoOther said:
Hollywood previous few decades:

We should be able to make movies the fans want to see no matter what the content is and damn special interest groups!

Hollywood now:

We should only be making movies that cater to the special interest groups we have today!
Click to expand...

Best believe Kubrick is rolling over in his grave.

.... Darren Aronofsky and Christopher Nolan are the best we've got now....
 
SeymourGore said:
I dunno, I read it as the director assuring fans that it won't be like his earlier movie, "Juno" - which has a very different comedic feel than Ghostbusters. Not as a snipe at the 2016 Ghostbusters. Another poster mentioned that the 2016 Ghostbusters had a 'Scooby Doo'-like feel and I never thought of it that way, but it fits perfectly. The original Ghostbusters was more dark comedy, similar vein to Gremlins.

Still, I have a feeling this movie is going to be crushed into the ground by Hollywood politics.
Click to expand...

Well said with the Gremlins point. That is what I think many people, especially the people behind the 2016 movie forgot about the first movie, less so the second. The first movie wasn't an out right comedy, it had MANY comedic elements, it was more realistic horror (ish) that happened to have funny parts. In the second they certainly went more camp with it. And in the 2016 version, they went out of their way to shove jokes and gags into EVERY scene, and aimed to try and be funny first and have a good movie second. As another correlation it almost reminds me of Evil Dead, the first movie was absolutely supposed to be a straight horror movie. But because of the crazy small budget, and Bruce Campbell, it had many funny moments, they weren't trying to be funny it just had those moments. Evil Dead 2 they went more camp, and then in Army of Darkness it was just straight camp. All that said I don't think i WANT a new Ghostbusters movie. I know they said it will star teens, so I am assuming the kids of the OG Ghostbusters but I don't know after this many years maybe just leave well enough alone.
 
liffie420 said:
All that said I don't think i WANT a new Ghostbusters movie. I know they said it will star teens, so I am assuming the kids of the OG Ghostbusters but I don't know after this many years maybe just leave well enough alone.
Click to expand...

Uhhh I was under the impression it was the original cast minus the deceased Egon....????
 
Welcome to Snowflakia, population
:Just about the whole internet.

Someone says something bad about something another group likes and that other group gets offended and starts attacking the first group
 
some accusing Reitman of being sexist and suggesting the reboot was dishonest to the franchise due to the lack of male leads
Click to expand...

Ok, I'll outright say it. The reboot was Dishonest to the franchise. Go ahead, call me sexist..I really don't give a fuck. I call it dishonest because it was nothing more than a forced attempt at SJW pandering and nothing more. The movie was political, it wasn't attempting to be a good movie it was attempting to force feed an agenda. I don't give a crap that the new ghostbusters were male or female, it is "HOW" they went about it that I have a problem with. Perhaps next time just make a good movie, cast the right people for the job and don't spend all your advertising time telling me if I don't like it, it is only because I'm sexist. Perhaps if you focus on making a good movie that is true to the roots and gives the proper nod to where it came from, it might not be so poorly received.
 
focbde said:
The 2016 movie has fans?
Click to expand...
I never even watched it, trailer looked like shit.
DukenukemX said:
I like how they make it about women in Ghostbusters is the reason why people hate it. Many men like women in their entertainment, usually with a cute face and big boobs. Learn to market better. But the 2016 version was awful. Every bit of it was not entertaining or interesting.

I guarantee you they'll put a female in the new Ghostbusters and it'll work. Ghostbusters 2016 was not the first time we saw a female Ghostbuster, it was Extreme Ghostbusters where we saw our first female Ghostbuster and that show was well received by fans. The wheelchair guy was dumb but the show worked cause it was well written and well made. It didn't divorce the original Ghostbusters and did a good job respecting them.

They should, and they should put a single female Ghostbuster who is funny and mock the 2016 version at some point.
Click to expand...
196778_dolly.jpg
:)
I remember see a few of the Extreme GBers, what early 90s IIRC, for some reason I thought the guy in the WC was Ray .
SeymourGore said:
Pretty sure all of us that grew up during that time frame had that dream where we helped Janine out of the ghostbuster suit.
Click to expand...
tumblr_pf6i56Uej41qedb29o1_400.gif
ecktt said:
Why does everything have to be about some SJW crap?!
Click to expand...
Because, sadly that's the type of world it became, overly soft people needing hugs and can't cope in a world of reality.
pendragon1 said:
Oh glorious cosplay girls
Click to expand...

Krenum said:
Nope. I'll take Annie Potts, even if she is 66.
Click to expand...
No need to be picky, ever since Pokemon, you can collect them all.
 

Attachments

  • dolly.jpg
    dolly.jpg
    25.4 KB · Views: 0
NoOther said:
Hollywood previous few decades:

We should be able to make movies the fans want to see no matter what the content is and damn special interest groups!

Hollywood now:

We should only be making movies that cater to the special interest groups we have today!
Click to expand...
No kidding. I was watching "Blazing Saddles" the other day on Netflix, and I couldn't help being amazed that it was still available. There's no way you could make that movie today; which is too bad because it is one of the funniest ever made. Come to think of it, pretty much the movies on my top 10 funniest could not be made today. I suppose that explains why I don't watch comedies anymore - they aren't funny.
 
Smashing Young Man said:
Shit like this is just baiting. I'm sorry, but [H] really pisses me off when they post stories like this to the Front Page section. How in the blue Hell are you supposed to make any sort of reply to this without getting political? If you do, Paul will come down on you like a ton of bricks.

It's cruel I tell ya.
Click to expand...

If only there was a section dedicated to politics where one could discuss such things. Let me think....
 
Everything I've heard has pointed to this movie being amazing. Him bashing 2016 abit is fine. He can even apologize for politics I get it. But what really matters is what they put to film. If this continues down the path they are talking about then this may be the greatest Ghostbusters movie yet. Which would be quite shocking.
 
potency said:
I'm not challenging your authority or whatnot, but I don't think you're addressing what he was saying.
Click to expand...

I'll do this one last time since people seem to have a hard time understanding this.

Do you post Video Card questions in the FS/FT forums? No. You post them in the Video Card forum or you get nicked for breaking rule 13 ((13) POST to the forum that is most appropriate for the topic being presented. Threads incorrectly placed will be moved or locked.)

If you want to talk about politics or give a political take on something it goes in the Soapbox or you get nicked for breaking rule 1 ((1) Absolutely NO FLAMING, NAME CALLING OR PERSONAL ATTACKS, NO TROLLING. Mutual respect and civilized conversation is the required norm, this includes personal attacks in signatures. NO POLITICAL DISCUSSION OUTSIDE OF THE SOAPBOX SUBFORUM.)

It is very simple, follow the rules and post in the correct forum. If you can't do that, then don't post whatever content you were about to post in that thread.
 
Both Paul Fieg and Melissa McCarthy have expressed support for both Reitman and the movie. This whole "story" is nothing more than some hack-job journalist peddling clickbait to their audience of idiots that will overreact to everything.
 
I wish they would have stopped at the first one. It is a great movie.
I didn't like the second one that much. I remember seeing it when I was a teenager and not having a desire to watch it again.
The 3rd version? Hmm...pass.
The new reboot? Might check it out...
 
Paul_Johnson said:
I'll do this one last time since people seem to have a hard time understanding this.

Do you post Video Card questions in the FS/FT forums? No. You post them in the Video Card forum or you get nicked for breaking rule 13 ((13) POST to the forum that is most appropriate for the topic being presented. Threads incorrectly placed will be moved or locked.)

If you want to talk about politics or give a political take on something it goes in the Soapbox or you get nicked for breaking rule 1 ((1) Absolutely NO FLAMING, NAME CALLING OR PERSONAL ATTACKS, NO TROLLING. Mutual respect and civilized conversation is the required norm, this includes personal attacks in signatures. NO POLITICAL DISCUSSION OUTSIDE OF THE SOAPBOX SUBFORUM.)

It is very simple, follow the rules and post in the correct forum. If you can't do that, then don't post whatever content you were about to post in that thread.
Click to expand...


I honestly I don't see how his specific post is related to any of that.
 
potency said:
I honestly I don't see how his specific post is related to any of that.
Click to expand...

All I can tell you then is that you should carefully review the rules you agreed to when you registered. If you have any further questions by all means ask, but they are not topical for this thread.
 
I wanna see it, not another atrocity. for those crying about it. they were supposed to make the third with all the original cast. but murray flaked a few times and Egon did not make it.


this is one of my favorite movies, seen it hundreds of times.
 
PaulP said:
No kidding. I was watching "Blazing Saddles" the other day on Netflix, and I couldn't help being amazed that it was still available. There's no way you could make that movie today; which is too bad because it is one of the funniest ever made. Come to think of it, pretty much the movies on my top 10 funniest could not be made today. I suppose that explains why I don't watch comedies anymore - they aren't funny.
Click to expand...

Yep... pretty much the only comedy you can get in movies today are Disney butt jokes or just plain cringey stupidity like the Lego Movies.
 
PaulP said:
Blazing Saddles
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, that's DEFINITELY a movie that would never be able to be made today even though the movie made fun of both sides. Come to think about it, the best comedies are comedies that make fun and offend both sides. Equal opportunity offender, nobody walks away un-offended.

I swear the only reason why Jeff Dunham can do and say what he says in his comedy skits is because he makes it as if the puppet says it, not him. If he actually said the stuff (and not made it look as if the puppet said it) he'd be strung up at dawn.
 
It is a bit odd to have a reboot movie 30 years after the originals (never mind if it was good or not) but soon after that another sequel that ignores the reboot....

So would sorta be like Shatner doing a new Star Trek movie as Kirk (and I'd say what's left of the original cast... who's still alive? Chekov? Uhura?) and completely pretending the reboots, TNG etc never happened. Except there wouldn't be any SJW uproar over that because.. you know, nerds. That may be a bad example, please don't roast me ST purists.
 
Well this new movie should make the sexists that didn't like the 2016 reboot solely because of the cast happy.
 
horrorshow said:
Uhhh I was under the impression it was the original cast minus the deceased Egon....????
Click to expand...
There is still little information out, but I want to say I heard it was going to follow a younger group, possibly the children of the OG cast. My completely unsupported theory based on the what 20 second teaser that shows nothing but the back of Ecto 1 is this. Basically the kids, or one of them who later gets the others, of the OG crew stumble upon the old Ecto 1 in a barn along with some of the old equipment. Starts experimenting on the old Proton Packs, turns out the OG crew retired after GB 2 since there wasn't any more ghost activity. So the kids start experimenting on the equipment and as if on cue more ghosts show up then yeah whatever happens.
 
I really don't have a problem with movies being rebooted with female casts. However the last ghostbusters was terrible and everyone knows it even the people that made it.

It looked more like a direct to video scooby-do reboot then a ghostbusters movie.

Yes I hope Reitman returns to the more realistic warmer feeling movie making of his father. If anyone should be annoyed it's him after seeing Paul Feig turn one of his fathers most beloved works into ScoobyDo 14. I defended the female casting and I still think it could have been genius... and if they had have just added a CGI dog they would have got away with it too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top