Ghostbusters Salt - Pro, Anti, whatever.

  • Thread starter Thread starter JU 199
  • Start date Start date
  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
Stress Sigh said:
Even if the movie itself isn't too bad I worry that the way they handled their PR was too concerned about cutting off their noses to spite their faces rather than really trying to reach out to the general movie going population.
Click to expand...
Which reeks of a lack of confidence to me. It looks more like damage control by preemptively decrying critics as misogynists rather than trying to market the movie.
 
RomanesEuntDomus said:
Which reeks of a lack of confidence to me. It looks more like damage control by preemptively decrying critics as misogynists rather than trying to market the movie.
Click to expand...

It's either that or a case of monkey see monkey do and this is mainstream media dipping their toes in the "Anita" style of PR where you set up a barrier of social justice causes to enamor naive teens and adultchildren while also deflecting legitimate criticism by claiming that anyone that has a problem with the movie has a problem with women, minorities, etc.
 
upload_2016-7-12_7-25-29.png

upload_2016-7-12_7-26-5.png
upload_2016-7-12_7-26-19.png
upload_2016-7-12_7-26-58.png
upload_2016-7-12_7-28-38.png

upload_2016-7-12_7-27-47.png
upload_2016-7-12_7-27-59.png
 
CatParty said:
why they have been doing that forever. there are no original ideas
Click to expand...

There is nothing new under sun. Also it's appealing to the cultural apathy we're suffering from the only new things we give a shit about are either social issues of tech while our culture is drowning in a quagmire of apathy and rose tinted nostalgia.
 
CatParty said:
why they have been doing that forever. there are no original ideas
Click to expand...
It's been years since I've seen a horror movie which qualifies as 'good', the only thing stopping Holywood being the biggest lolcow of them all is past glories and current profit.

Stress Sigh said:
There is nothing new under sun. Also it's appealing to the cultural apathy we're suffering from the only new things we give a shit about are either social issues of tech while our culture is drowning in a quagmire of apathy and rose tinted nostalgia.
Click to expand...

Tv's doing okay at the moment. Game of thrones doesn't really have any equivalent beforehand and shows like the Wire and breaking bad show all is not lost.
 
i love how i'm the only one finding salty reactions to the success of the movie as stated we should do in the op
 
The sad thing is we're quickly running head first into a tech revolution with VR and other marvels and it gives so much opportunity for social commentary and cultural insight but we rather play it safe and gush about nostalgic things most people gushing were never born to experience.
 
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...t-vanquishes-unbelievers-20160712-gq494o.html
Sassy feminist reboot vanquishes unbelievers.png


As someone who has long regretted Ivan Reitman's original 1984 Ghostbusters didn't capitalise more on Bill Murray's chemistry with Sigourney Weaver, I can only say that if Hollywood insists on reviving ephemera from past decades, switching round the genders may at least help keep things lively.

So, once again, a group of fringe scientists unite to save New York City from the threat of the supernatural, armed with their wits, a range of homemade gadgets and a healthy disrespect for the powers that be.

But where the first Ghostbusters was a boy movie through and through – with a fascinated boyish distaste for slime and the irrational – the new film is about as non-sexist as you could expect from Hollywood in 2016.

Gadget girls: Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon), Erin (Kristen Wiig) and Abby (Melissa McCarthy) at the Paranormal Studies Lab. Photo: Hopper Stone

While the dialogue doesn't labour the point, this is a film about women brought together by a shared intellectual passion, shrugging off the mostly male authority figures who try to put them in their place.

Romantic subplots are carefully omitted, giving viewers the freedom to imagine the characters' private lives however they want to – that is, apart from Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig) and her crush on the team's handsome airhead receptionist, gracefully played by Chris Hemsworth as an oblivious incarnation of male privilege.

Three of the four new Ghostbusters roughly map onto their 1984 counterparts. Melissa McCarthy has the anchoring science-buff role Dan Aykroyd had in Reitman's film, with Kate McKinnon taking over from Harold Ramis as the tech geek, and Leslie Jones in the Ernie Hudson role of the streetwise African-American who enters the story late and isn't a scientist (she's less marginalised than Hudson was, but I do wish that Feig and his co-writer Katie Dippold hadn't stuck quite so closely to their template).
Click to expand...
 
Stress Sigh said:
The sad thing is we're quickly running head first into a tech revolution with VR and other marvels and it gives so much opportunity for social commentary and cultural insight but we rather play it safe and gush about nostalgic things most people gushing were never born to experience.
Click to expand...


lol remember the wizard of oz remake?
 
CatParty said:
i love how i'm the only one finding salty reactions to the success of the movie as stated we should do in the op
Click to expand...

You should check out the r/ghostbusters sub reddit. It's a salt mine

salty1.png

download (1).png
 
Stress Sigh said:
Nobody does. History's tablet only has so much space and repeats rarely are written over the originals.
Click to expand...


oh really? it did kinda well for itself. the funny thing is that the 1939 remake of 1908, 1910, 1914, 1922, & 1933 films ironically found itself running head first into a tech revolution that gave so much opportunity for social commentary and cultural insight but they rather played it safe and gush about nostalgic things
 
CatParty said:
oh really? it did kinda well for itself. the funny thing is that the 1939 remake of 1908, 1910, 1914, 1922, & 1933 films ironically found itself running head first into a tech revolution that gave so much opportunity for social commentary and cultural insight but they rather played it safe and gush about nostalgic things
Click to expand...

I thought you were talking about that one a couple of years back by Disney.
 
But back on the topic of the new Ghostbusters has anyone here seen it? I'm trying to keep an open mind but the behavior of the creators is making me apprehensive.
 
CatParty said:
i love how i'm the only one finding salty reactions to the success of the movie as stated we should do in the op
Click to expand...

I dunno, I found the fact that like 20 outlets went and treated a shitpost on Reddit like it was an actual thing to be roughly as funny. But in the interests of equal time, let's see if I can find something particularly autistic to share.


Less than a minute... Thank you, Tumblr.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom