Ghostbusters Salt - Pro, Anti, whatever.

[Jaimas]

Ghostbusters' laughs back at YouTube trolls in added scene

http://www.cnet.com/news/new-ghostbusters-cast-ad-lib-replies-to-youtube-trolls-in-movie/

I see we're trying that new trick where it's good to hold your audience in absolute giggling fucking contempt.

I wonder how that'll work for 'em.

 

[JU 199]

Let look at the damage. Ghostbusters is currently sitting at about 77% on rotten tomatoes. This is a fresh rating bolsered by many mixed reviews and many victory dance pieces like this one in the guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...s-female-reboot-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig

Yet for many – chiefly blowhard middle-aged fanboys – their names spelled the apocalypse and the whole project was damned. The memory of their childhood favourite was being destroyed, they argued, by some hare-brained revisionism. A campaign was mounted – successfully – to make the first trailer for the film the most disliked in YouTube history.

Such backlash was notably absent when Planet of the Apes was revamped by Tim Burton, then again by Rupert Wyatt. Likewise when Fede Alvarez dared to reimagine Evil Dead for a new generation. For what incensed Ghostbusters fanatics, it seemed, was Feig’s idea to reverse the genders of the ghostbusting quartet – a decision whose politics his film tackles bluntly and frequently, without sacrificing laughs for sermonising.

The nods are pointed, and there’s no doubting who’s in the cross-hairs. Our main villain, a sad-looking loner on a mission to “cleanse the world” by letting ghosts loose on Manhattan via a device that amplifies paranormal activity, lambasts the heroines for shooting “like girls”. Our first major laugh involves a specifically female anatomical issue. In one remarkably on-the-button scene, McCarthy’s character takes offence to a comment left under a YouTube video of the women facing off against an especially angry demon. It reads: “Ain’t no bitches gonna hunt no ghosts.” It’s almost inevitable that, in the climatic brawl, the quartet aim their plasma blasters squarely at a giant male ghost’s crotch.

The fanboys are right: we are a long way from Reitman’s original. How far is worth highlighting: after all, that first film opened with a strikingly pervy Bill Murray conning his way into a late-night date with a young female pupil. The second gave Sigourney Weaver nothing at all to do but worry about her baby’s safety.

This isn't the only review structured like that. Many are. The film has taken a backseat to the authors perception of sexist manchilderen who need a good slap.

Meanwhile on r/ghostbusters, the films decent reviews are being met with a blind eye if not out right hostility.

Spoiler: 'EVIDENCE': 'All the reviewers are SJW shills'

 

[CatParty]

lol nerds

 

[AnOminous]

This isn't the only review structured like that. Many are. The film has taken a backseat to the authors perception of sexist manchilderen who need a good slap.

Silly me, I thought the purpose of a movie review was to tell you about a movie, not about how mad you are at some nerds on the Internet. I guess this is some postmodern thing.

 

[JU 199]

Silly me, I thought the purpose of a movie review was to tell you about a movie,

No its about shaming misogynists.

Since his version of Ghostbusters was announced in 2014, the sentiments of bad will being bashed into internet comment sections has been unprecedented — the first trailer even gained the dubious distinction of being the most disliked trailer on YouTube. It couldn’t be simply because the film has the temerity to feature four women as its ghostbusting quartet, could it? Not in 2016?

This gender-focused trolling is something the movie plays on. Our new team of Ghostbusters post video evidence of one of the first ghosts they encounter, and the disbelieving comments (“Ain’t no bitches gonna hunt no ghosts”) mirror the real life ones the filmmaking team were besieged with. When Melissa McCarthy’s Abby Yates tells Kristen Wiig’s Erin Gilbert, “You shouldn’t be reading this stuff, it’s just a list of what crazy people write in the middle of the night online,” it’s difficult to disagree. That they manage to wring a knowing chuckle out of the situation is a testament to them. If the film’s funny and successful, they’ll have the last laugh.

Still, the film works for the most part, and even though the laughs notably dry up as the CGI spectacular kicks into gear, its feelgood vibes will most likely have already won you over. The online haters didn’t have unparalleled insight about a film they hadn’t seen, then. Who’d have thought it?

An effectively spooky opening gives way to a film that’s fun, funny and full of energy. It’s almost as if it never mattered that the four main characters were women. Strange that.

Also here's some salt on the films IMDB page

As far as the end result... ...the film completely fell flat across the board. I have nothing against the four leads. I more or less blame the writers, director and the studios choice of direction for the new Ghostbusters.

The acting is some of the most stiff and cookie cutter I have ever seen. There were times when it really sounded like they were reading their lines. The actors did NOT mesh well at all and their interaction with all of the blue and green screen effects was lifeless and clueless.

I was just lost with the approach on their attempted humor. I mean, it's bad. I don't know what panel sat around the table reading the script and laughed at it, but I hope they never do again.

The effects were horrible. Every time, which was A LOT, they used a green screen, I found myself taken away from the movie.

The film constantly contradicts it's own established continuity. One minute they can't kill the ghosts, only contain them, the next, they can. Just ridiculous.

They even added a segment to the movie early on that shows the four girls poking fun at all of the hate for the film. I just don't think the studio gets it.

More mocking of the very people they expect to pay top dollar for their product.

Despite all of the sexist remarks towards the movie, the movie itself is EXTREMELY sexist against men and borderline racist. All men are portrayed as fools in the movie and in order to kill the final villain they have to shoot him in the crotch.

It almost seems the team behind the film knew how stereotypical and sexist their movie was, so they capitalized on the sexism against the film in order to hide that.

I honestly recommend wearing a padded glove when you watch this, IF you watch this. I have never face-palmed so many times during a movie in my life. I would not suggest this film to anyone except maybe children under ten years old and even then, it would simply be for a cartooned 3D experience.

I wish I could find positives because I dislike being so negative about a film. I understand completely the amount of work that goes into something like this. Chris Hemsworth was probably the best part of this believe or not. I could see him leading a team of his own Ghostbusters in another version if written correctly.

But I can't help but quote Jurassic Park concerning the very idea of this film.

The filmmakers "were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

I really did try to give this film a chance despite all of the negative hype. But, the film was not funny and does not stand on it's own. Honestly, the only thing that intrigued me was seeing the cameos from some of the original cast.

I will add that if you were thinking you had seen the majority of the movie throughout all of the trailers, various clips, TV spots, etc., you would have been thinking correctly. Sony used all of what they considered to be the best material in all of the promotional releases. Let that be your red flag considering how poor the trailers were.

If someone were to ask me if they should go see it, I would say, "No, but if you are curious, just wait for it to become available for Internet streaming."

I don't think people will walk away from this movie afraid of ghosts. I imagine they walk away afraid of the movie and more so, the people who thought it was wise to make it in the first place.

There is some irony here. Ghostbusters 2016 has literally become a ghost. It was dead on arrival.

 

[Hatoful Dandy]

Richard Roeper did not like this at all

How could so many talented, well-meaning artists, who clearly loved and respected the original, produce such a raggedy-looking, thuddingly unfunny, utterly unnecessary reboot?

For months, controversy has swirled around the new “Ghostbusters” movie. The trailer was reportedly the most hated in YouTube history, for what that’s worth (or not worth), which led to some pundits saying some of that hate was rooted in sexism.

Others said the fact the Leslie Jones character wasn’t a scientist and seemed to have a role that called for her to play into stereotypes smacked of racism.

Of course, people were voicing these opinions without having seen the entire movie. Well, I have seen it — and while I believe the concerns about racial stereotypes were overblown, “Ghostbusters” is one of the worst movies of the year for multiple other reasons, including:
Bad acting.

Uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music.

Cheesy special effects.

A forgettable villain.

A terrible script.

http://chicago.suntimes.com/entertainment/ghostbusters-reboot-a-horrifying-mess/

 

[GV 998]

Let look at the damage. Ghostbusters is currently sitting at about 77% on rotten tomatoes. This is a fresh rating bolsered by many mixed reviews and many victory dance pieces like this one in the guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...s-female-reboot-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig
View attachment 114342




This isn't the only review structured like that. Many are. The film has taken a backseat to the authors perception of sexist manchilderen who need a good slap.

Meanwhile on r/ghostbusters, the films decent reviews are being met with a blind eye if not out right hostility.

View attachment 114344

Spoiler: 'EVIDENCE': 'All the reviewers are SJW shills'

View attachment 114346

View attachment 114345

I love that the one comparison brings up no one bitching about the Evil Dead remake but their bitching about Ghostbusters because gender-swap. Do these assholes not realize that the Evil Dead remake did the same thing. The "Ash" character in the remake was a woman. No one cared. I personally didn't like the remake because it wasn't funny (and "Evil Dead" has become more synonymous with being a horror/comedy due to it's two sequels) I get that it was remaking the first movie, which had next to no comedy, but still, I was hoping it would follow along the lines of what actually made the series a success.

I've said this before and I will say it again: Those of us who are anti-Ghostbusters don't want the remake because nobody asked for a remake. We wanted Ghostbusters 3. The whole gender-switch thing is a non-issue.

 

[Ruin]

Good to see some honesty among the smug feminist bloggers and paid shills.

 

[CatParty]

 

[AnOminous]

Good to see some honesty among the smug feminist bloggers and paid shills.

Roeper isn't one of those bloggers or paid shills. He's someone with a reputation to uphold and that isn't upheld by sending people to watch a piece of shit for cheap political points.

 

[MiloWuCollusion]

Roeper review was pretty awesome as how uncaring he was about gender political sperging when the film is not pretty good to begin with it.

 

[Gensdupays]

Silly me, I thought the purpose of a movie review was to tell you about a movie, not about how mad you are at some nerds on the Internet. I guess this is some postmodern thing.

An actual review of the film without Internet slapfights as the background for its rating is already a rarity. The Roeper review is one of the few that I've seen.

 

[RomanesEuntDomus]

It's been nothing but SJW's and neckbeards slinging poop at each other since it was announced.

And the one guy that goes "Nope, not gonna partake in this - not gonna watch the movie, I don't care to see it" is attacked like he had just strangled a puppy in live television.

 

[SteelPlatedHeart]

And yet the ratings seem to even out at about a 5.

 

[DZ 305]

And yet the ratings seem to even out at about a 5.

View attachment 114403 View attachment 114404

Why is a member of IMDB's staff allowed to rate movies? Seems like it could be considered a conflict of interest

http://www.hitfix.com/the-dartboard/ghostbusters-producer-the-franchise-will-be-endless

"It's going to be endless,” producer Amy Pascal told THR.com. “People are going to love this movie so much that they're going to demand more and more."

This is some Icarus level hubris right here

 

[CatParty]

Why is a member of IMDB's staff allowed to rate movies? Seems like it could be considered a conflict of interest

omg you think they got paid off?!?!?!

 

[AnOminous]

And yet the ratings seem to even out at about a 5.

View attachment 114403 View attachment 114404

It's almost like the people hysterically obsessed with this movie to the point of spamming ratings are pretty few (and include one imdb staff member), and most people just don't like the movie much.

Also:


Movie chosen at random for also not yet being released (Cafe Society). It's almost like more men rate movies than women on imdb. Conspiracy!

 

[Gensdupays]

And yet the ratings seem to even out at about a 5.

View attachment 114403 View attachment 114404

I think you might have just gotten the inverse were all of the protagonists male. Such is the spergy nature of Internet gender politics. Lots of ballot stuffing and screeching over shit no one really cares about.

 

[Quijibo69]

LOL What?

 

[Hatoful Dandy]

Paul Feig is clown shoes...literally.