movies/tv New Ghostbusters Movie

[Roughshod 719]

And apparently it is evil and offensive to be unattractive and fat.

Well it's not enough to get me to buy a movie ticket. I'm not going to see a movie I think is redundant and poorly written because an actor doesn't fit the conventional standard of attractiveness, big deal.

 

That pun wasn't entirely intended.

 

A gender swap of the main cast with the same racial make-up of three whites and one black is half-way in my view. Especially when one of them is a stereotype. This is 2016.

Even if you made the cast as sexually, racially and demographically diverse I other areas as much as possible, guess what? It not going to make people want to see it. In fact it will probably have the opposite effect because it will have been made painfully obvious that you are using this films name as a tool for promoting your own agenda and political beliefs. Which might be okay if it was done subtly and tastefully with some relevance to the story but not as a shameless cash grab and appeal to a select audience.

 

Yes it's 2016. I'm glad you have a calendar. Perhaps you should try updating your social perspective beyond the realms of tribalism and tokenism.

[Black Sabbath 2,486]

Well it's not enough to get me to buy a movie ticket. I'm not going to see a movie I think is redundant and poorly written because an actor doesn't fit the conventional standard of attractiveness, big deal.

Could you please show me the part of my post were I said that the movie having "unattractive" and fat actors should be enough to make people go and see the movie?  

Edited March 6, 2016 by Yamet

[Roughshod 719]

To be fair, Yamet has a point here. People are jumping up and down shouting that "This was just made in order to please SJW" with the only proof of that being that the characters are women.

https://www.thewrap.com/paul-feig-ghostbusters-spoilers-gender-equal-pay-sequels/

 

The director is clearly trying to send a message with the choices he's made. Some of his points about pay inequality I do agree with, but to say that there is no appeal here towards marketing to people with similar gender based political views(or encourage such views) is disingenuous or simply very naive.

 

Could you please show me the part of my post were I said that the movie having "unattractive" and fat should be enough to make people go and see the movie?

 

Missing the point. If being fat and unattractive is not evil and offensive then why should it be good and unoffensive? If you're really above making judgments about such things then it should be irrelevant. It doesn't impact my decision either way.

[Black Sabbath 2,486]

Missing the point. If being fat and unattractive is not evil and offensive then why should it be good and unoffensive? If you're really above making judgments about such things then it should be irrelevant. It doesn't impact my decision either way.

And this is relevant to my original post because...? 

[Guest]

To be fair, Yamet has a point here. People are jumping up and down shouting that "This was just made in order to please SJW" with the only proof of that being that the characters are women.

 

And the director playing the misogyny card on Twitter and the advertising being clearly targeted towards women and not Ghostbusters fans.

 

 

 

Apparently you're one of them. Your motivation is clearly based on sex identity just in way you view as opposite of the one you condemn. To me that's hypocritical and a completely inane reason to want to see a film(or make one as the case may be).

 

I sort of agree... If your only reason for being interested in a film is the gender of the cast, you're basically kind of re-enforcing sexism by saying that gender matters that much to you and that making something female suddenly makes it that much more interesting. 

[Gestum 2,493]

director is blasting legit fan complaints as misogynistic

 Doesn't this just that the director does not handle criticism well?

 

here's been more proof such as having one photo of a group of women spouting girl power in response to criticism of having an all female cast.

You mean the photo that Melissa Mccarthy retweeted? Because that's the only picture  that I can find that resembles that description? 

 

 

, but to say that there is no appeal here towards marketing to people with similar gender based political views(or encourage such views) is disingenuous or simply very naive.

 Well, I don't denie the fact that it appeals to the SJW crowd or that it may be marketed to that crowd. I'm simply saying that a movie with a all women cast doesn't necessary exists solely as  a "feminism pleaser" or that the only reason for why a movie with a all women cast being made is pc culture.

 

 

 

And the director playing the misogyny card on Twitter and the advertising being clearly targeted towards women and not Ghostbusters fans.

 The "misogyny card" thing only proves that the director is an asshole. And the fact that the ads target women don't really prove anything (other then the fact that the movie is marketed to women),   Edited March 6, 2016 by Gestum

[Nuke87654 1,849]

 

 Doesn't this just that the director does not handle criticism well?

 

You mean the photo that Melissa Mccarthy retweeted? Because that's the only picture  that I can find that resembles that description? 

 

 

 Well, I don't denie the fact that it appeals to the SJW crowd or that it may be marketed to that crowd. I'm simply saying that a movie with a all women cast doesn't necessary exists solely as  a "feminism pleaser" or that the only reason for why a movie with a all women cast being made is pc culture.

 

That, but it's also affected if said director is pulling the usual misogyny card on anyone criticizing him for casting women into his role for the sake of it as it shows off his mindset being one similar to one who is part of the social justice crowd. Also the photo promoting girl power just screams to me they're trying to cater to the feminist crowd which only further supports my belief that's what he intends to do with this film.

[Metemponychosis 1,258]

Key Sharkz third post on page 2 gives greater evidence to support that it is trying to cater to that crowd considering the director is blasting legit fan complaints as misogynistic and there's been more proof such as having one photo of a group of women spouting girl power in response to criticism of having an all female cast.

Isn't that cute? If the movie does well, it's because they are great at making movies. If it bombs... Patriarchy.

[Guest]

Isn't that cute? If the movie does well, it's because they are great at making movies. If it bombs... Patriarchy.

The best defense ever, it'll make it so that no matter what happens they can blame the failure of the film on someone else.

[Gestum 2,493]

 

 

That, but it's also affected if said director is pulling the usual misogyny card on anyone criticizing him for casting women into his role for the sake of it as it shows off his mindset being one similar to one who is part of the social justice crowd.

 Again, can't this just be his way to shut down any criticism against the movie? And I would like to see the context in which he used the "misogyny card".

 

 

Also the photo promoting girl power just screams to me they're trying to cater to the feminist crowd which only further supports my belief that's what he intends to do with this film.

You do know that the photo was promoting Ellen DeGeneres’ clothing campaign with Gap, right? 

[Nuke87654 1,849]

 Again, can't this just be his way to shut down any criticism against the movie? And I would like to see the context in which he used the "misogyny card".

 

 

You do know that the photo was promoting Ellen DeGeneres’ clothing campaign with Gap, right? 

 

 

According to Key Sharkz, whom I trust very much, they were in response to fans who offered points of criticism for the direction the film seems to be going to which he responds with the usual 'misogyny' card whenever they're backed into an uncomfortable corner.

 

Does every film or so go and promote Ellen Degeneres clothing campaign? No and the fact that he and the rest of the production staff was willing to join in would suggest he approves and supports her, which would include the promotion of feminism considering the photo in question.

Edited March 6, 2016 by Nuke87654

[Guest]

At the end of the day, more time needs to pass, but I think all that will do is show us more reasons why this film is going to bomb. So far I have seen nothing but reasons not to like it, but I will assume that there is a possibility it could still somehow be good. I am hoping this is all just coincidence and that the trailer was just poorly made, but I am not holding onto that very hard.

[Gestum 2,493]

 

 

According to Key Sharkz, whom I trust very much, they were in response to fans who offered points of criticism for the direction the film

Well, I'm going to want to see those points of criticism before I'll make anymore statements on those tweets.

 

 

 

Does every film or so go and promote Ellen Degeneres clothing campaign?

 Well no, but it's not something that's necessary bad. 

 

 

 

and the fact that he and the rest of the production staff was willing to join in would suggest he approves and supports her, which would include the promotion of feminism considering the photo in question.

And how is this in anyway bad?

[Miles 2,512]

I mostly agree with @Key Sharkz' opinion, but I think at the simplest level, Storm says it all:

 

This film is something I didn't want to see at first but since it's a Scooby-Doo-ish lulz, I'ma watch it for sure... 

 

I would watch this movie just for the lulz.  I mean, if you think about it as a parody rather than a remake, you'll have a much easier time enjoying it.  

~ Miles

[Solid 1,327]

I'm all in for a diverse all female cast if done in a natural and fluent manner (such as mlp:fim), but in this case it feels really forced, almost like a desperate attempt to put together something to address race and gender stereotypes.

Edited March 6, 2016 by Solid

[Nuke87654 1,849]

Well, I'm going to want to see those points of criticism before I'll make anymore statements on those tweets.

 

 

Well no, but it's not something that's necessary bad.

 

 

And how is this in anyway bad?

 

While I'll put the tweet comments on hold, I'll explain why introducing femenism and promoting it over what made Ghostbusters great, a cast of characters that had great comedic chemistry with each other along with an awesome theme and use of special effects is bad. The fact we have heard or seen nothing to indicate what kind of plot it would have, the trailer not exactly painting the new movie in a good light, and how they seem far more concerned with brownnosing the femenist crowd and politics, I'm especially terrified that it will result in a terrible movie that panders to the wrong crowd that will kill whatever potential a reboot of the Ghostbuster's franchise would have while we have those folks complaining at how it failed cause of some so called patriarchy in excuse to their terrible decisions.

Edited March 7, 2016 by Nuke87654

[Limeblossom 482]

They're raping our childhood memories.

 

All those female characters are nothing but token characters and the humor is forced to the core. They're just using the Ghostbusters brand for their failed promotion. And the director is nothing but a SJW asshole .

 

 

If that happens I am betting it's because critics are afraid of doing their jobs and panning the movie like it deserves because they fear feminists will attack them.

But they won't be save for Milo. He's gonna rip and tear them apart.

[Singe 2,111]

At worst, this movie will just be PIXELS with ghosts.

 

A movie based on The Extreme Ghostbusters would have been better.

Edited March 6, 2016 by Singe

[SilverStarApple 849]

The best defense ever, it'll make it so that no matter what happens they can blame the failure of the film on someone else.

It's like the guy knew ahead of time that this movie was going to fail, so he half-assed things as much as possible while preparing his throat for how loudly and often he'd be yelling "You mysogynistic pig!" when the girls weren't around to do this for him.

At worst, this movie will just be PIXELS with ghosts.

 

A movie based on The Extreme Ghostbusters would have been better.

Pixels was a screenplay somebody wrote at the age of nine.

 

This is an intentional, deliberate attack on a major part of american culture, nerd culture, and pop culture, carried out by feministing feminists that deciding to come in and feminist everything up for everyone involved. Good old feminists, showing everyone what feministing feminism is all about.

 

Then again, everyone here knows critics will only have the guts to call a film like this crap if everyone else is doing that. And even then, they'll treat it with kid gloves and politically-skewed glasses: "This film could have been amazing, due to the amazing talents of x director and y characters. But sometimes, all the talent in the world can't save a bad movie franchise. Especially when its old, meanie-pants fans are too blinded by nostalgia to accept new things or the strength of modern women. Times r changin, baby! I admire the strong independent women in this film for being actresses in a film despite the abuse they got from the illumimanti. Mmmmmmen like this hated the mary sue from star wars 7, too! Oh, and Ballbusters- I mean, Ghostbusters With Women: We Spit On Your Childhood Edition only sucked because they had to emulate the style of the old movies while not completely ripping them off. A daunting task none could do! Not even someone as talented as x, who we all know paid me to write this."

I mostly agree with @Key Sharkz' opinion, but I think at the simplest level, Storm says it all:

 

 

I would watch this movie just for the lulz. I mean, if you think about it as a parody rather than a remake, you'll have a much easier time enjoying it.

 

~ Miles

*With silent determination, pulls a Luffy VS Tenryuubito on your face*

 

No.

 

You cannot simply say "It's just a parody, maaan!" and use that as a shield to deflect criticism. That is not how parody works. A parody is an insightful critique of a series, not a failed attempt at imitating it! Spaceballs was an amazing parody. Epic Movie was a disgusting failure. Real comedy is far more advanced than a talentless idiot sluggishly and reluctantly taking center stage, throwing balls into the air, letting them fall around him, and glaring at the audience as he says "Ta daaaa. I'm breaking the fourth wall. And I'm a crappy juggler. I know this, I'm aware of this, and I'm making no effort at all. As you can clearly see. Don't I just suck? *throws another ball into the air. It lands on the floor, offstage* Why try, when you can instead laugh at how pathetic I am, and how pathetic you are for watching me?", regardless of what many popular fimfiction stories would have you believe. Shakespear was definitely on to something when he stated that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

[Miles 2,512]

@@SilverStarApple,

Whoa nelly!  I was stating that secondary to having stated that I actually agreed to the OP.  

Plus, I honestly don't care what you think about how the term parody should be used, or what Shakespeare thinks about satire!    

This is media discussion, not the debate pit.

~ Miles

[Nuke87654 1,849]

Well the new international trailer only made me not want to look at this movie even more. Chris is pretty much there for eye candy, which is not sexist of course, and there will be racism and sexism jokes which expouse what this film wishes to cater to.

Edited March 10, 2016 by Nuke87654

[Attack of the Pwns 894]

Here's my issue with it- I'm fine with the idea of an all-female cast, but get ladies that are ACTUALLY FUNNY, not actresses who's only skills are that they are female and can kinda-sorta act. Honestly, female cast or not, this movie really shouldn't have been made. I mean, Ghostbusters has been an inactive franchise (movie-wise) for decades, and unlike Star Wars no one was asking for this one. Murray, Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson had just the right chemistry as a group of actors to do this film, and IMO the only way it could have worked out better would have been in Belushi would have lived long enough to be in the film. I don't think any sort of remake, male or female cast, will ever live up to the original. They should have just left it well enough alone.

[PyroMotional-Pony 9]

Since when are the ghostbusters serious?(Talking about seriousness, at the beginning of the trailer, with the slow song, the way they presented the actions from the classical ghostbusters and the ghostbuster`s symbol graffitied on the subway, it seemed as it would be a serious movie) Besides, the female ghostbusters have already been presented in the comics.

[Mr. Mime 7]

Made for Feminists, Made by Feminists.

[Singe 2,111]

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/ghostbusters-characters-detailed-bill-murray-wanted-for-non-peter-venkman-role-20150127

 

So here is what could be the human antagonist element.

Edited March 13, 2016 by Singe