movies/tv Who liked Ghostbusters 2016 like I did?

[TheMarkz0ne 962]

I am in the strong minority here. This movie wasn't amazing, it was simply fun, and there were moments where I cringed. If I were to name some problems with  this movie, it would be some humor being awkwardly forced. I did laugh during the movie at moderate times... But I was laughing at the stuff people didn't find funny. Another issue was the male character Kevin.... Chris Hemsworth is a great actor... But his character was cartoon levels of stupid to the point of irritation inducing madness. 

 

I never saw the original Ghostbusters. I always loved the song growing up in the 90s, but never watched the movie. I really think the whole hatred of the female Ghostbusters is the all female cast. Look people, we are mortal in this planet. I know Harold Ramis passing away was an incredible blow to the fans who always wanted a third Ghostbusters... But Bill Murray, Dan Akroyd and Ernie Hudson are old and it isn't going to happen anymore. Similar to how I had to accept I will never get a Star Wars movie with Luke Skywalker being the center focus(granted I hated the Force Awakens with the new characters).

 

It isn't the worst movie ever people. In my opinion, I would watch this again. The women who played the new ghostbusters had some chemistry and were good actresses...I think most the script was not well written, but were it works it works. There was effort put into this movie.. Even though I know Sony is an evil company, I can tell the cast and crew cared here. 

[Guest]

I had a feeling it would be "mediocre" and judging by what my friends are saying: it is just that. Very very very mediocre. However the male portrayal in the film is sexist beyond belief and does nothing to obliterate stereotypes, it merely reverses them in by far the dumbest way possible. Seeing clips of the film now and listening to friends tell me the script verbatim makes me realize the other flaws with the movie: the acting and writing. Many people are calling this McCarthy's worst performance, and the actresses just had no chemistry with each other.

 

Honestly after the recent death of Harold Ramis this kind of comes almost as an insult rather than a tribute. The film was marketed on the whole "girl power" thing and Paul Fieg tried to claim sexism when people didn't like it, which to me spelled out one thing: He had nothing. He knew his film wasn't anything special and that's what it turned out to be: absolutely nothing special. Not the worst thing in terms of reboots and films, but from what the reviews are saying: Nothing stand out worthy. It feels very phoned in, 

[TheMarkz0ne 962]

I had a feeling it would be "mediocre" and judging by what my friends are saying: it is just that. Very very very mediocre. However the male portrayal in the film is sexist beyond belief and does nothing to obliterate stereotypes, it merely reverses them in by far the dumbest way possible. Seeing clips of the film now and listening to friends tell me the script verbatim makes me realize the other flaws with the movie: the acting and writing. Many people are calling this McCarthy's worst performance, and the actresses just had no chemistry with each other.

 

Honestly after the recent death of Harold Ramis this kind of comes almost as an insult rather than a tribute. The film was marketed on the whole "girl power" thing and Paul Fieg tried to claim sexism when people didn't like it, which to me spelled out one thing: He had nothing. He knew his film wasn't anything special and that's what it turned out to be: absolutely nothing special. Not the worst thing in terms of reboots and films, but from what the reviews are saying: Nothing stand out worthy. It feels very phoned in, 

Who drew first blood though? I think the patriarchal crowd was the first to hate it based on it being 'all female'. I am willing to bet if this were a male cast WITHOUT Bill Murray and gang, people would be forgiving of the movie. I really think people don't want to  admit they hate women in actions roles. I do think powerful female roles has been creeping in Hollywood for too long.. But if a movie is decent I will give it credit for what it did. 

 

I didn't  see the male sexism. The character of Kevin was an obvious replacement of Rick Morranis's character. My favorite was the woman who played the female version of Egon.. She had the best performance in the movie.

Edited July 18, 2016 by TheMarkz0ne

[Guest]

 

 

Who drew first blood though? I think the patriarchal crowd was the first to hate it based on it being 'all female'.

 

I don't think it really matter who cast the first stone really. When you retaliate with the whole "anyone who hates this is sexist" you've played into it. The only winning move is not to play.

 

 

 

I am willing to bet if this were a male cast WITHOUT Bill Murray and gang, people would be forgiving of the movie.

 

Maybe... If it was still a good movie. Most reviews I've seen that criticize the film do so strictly on the quality of the film.

 

 

 

I really think people don't want to  admit they hate women in actions roles. I do think powerful female roles has been creeping in Hollywood for too long.. But if a movie is decent I will give it credit for what it did. 

 

To be honest, I see this as more of enforcing a negative stereotype of female action roles. Fieg went out of his way to make sure to pick middle aged women, and dress them as non-sexually as he could which basically is saying women can't be sexy AND smart. But look at all the male action movies? All the men are sex machines and clever enough to get out of any situation. I think this is actually a step backwards and reinforcing the whole "sexy is bad" ideal.

 

 

 

I didn't  see the male sexism. The character of Kevin was an obvious replacement of Rick Morranis's character.

 

Differencei was Rock Morranis wasn't there just to make the female cast look smarter by comparison. He was there just to make the GHOSTBUSTERS look smarter. There isn't a single intelligent male in this film. The women are the only logical people in this film. All the men are nothing but tools for them to look better by comparison.

 

I don't think this was the greatest sin in film, but it definitely is a film I think we're all going to bury and forget about.

[TheMarkz0ne 962]

I don't think it really matter who cast the first stone really. When you retaliate with the whole "anyone who hates this is sexist" you've played into it. The only winning move is not to play.

 

 

 

 

Maybe... If it was still a good movie. Most reviews I've seen that criticize the film do so strictly on the quality of the film.

 

 

 

 

To be honest, I see this as more of enforcing a negative stereotype of female action roles. Fieg went out of his way to make sure to pick middle aged women, and dress them as non-sexually as he could which basically is saying women can't be sexy AND smart. But look at all the male action movies? All the men are sex machines and clever enough to get out of any situation. I think this is actually a step backwards and reinforcing the whole "sexy is bad" ideal.

 

 

 

 

Differencei was Rock Morranis wasn't there just to make the female cast look smarter by comparison. He was there just to make the GHOSTBUSTERS look smarter. There isn't a single intelligent male in this film. The women are the only logical people in this film. All the men are nothing but tools for them to look better by comparison.

 

I don't think this was the greatest sin in film, but it definitely is a film I think we're all going to bury and forget about.

All the males were dumb? The male villain seemed above competent in my book. I hated Rey from Force Awakens.. So that is definitive proof that I am not all "female characters=instantly good." 

[Guest]

All the males were dumb? The male villain seemed above competent in my book. I hated Rey from Force Awakens.. So that is definitive proof that I am not all "female characters=instantly good." 

I don't think you are someone who believes female = good, but even the villain in the film is forgettable and rather meh. I mean to each their own though. From what I've seen from the film, I can't really say this is the work of people who "gave it their all", but that's just my opinion. I would have loved for a female ghostbuster team, but it looks like Fieg just wasn't the director to pull it off.

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 42,208]

In terms of critics, the movie is apparently a good time for what it is, which I guess is good news. Everyone else I am hearing the film is right in the middle. Not bad, but not really good either. I won't be seeing it myself unless I can get the movie really cheap on blu-ray or something. The horrendous marketing and agenda crap really put me off of the movie.

[GeekySonic 1,153]

Nope. I thought it looked horrible, my friends thought it looked horrible, everyone I know that went to see it thought it was horrible, almost every review I watched on YouTube concluded that it was horrible.

 

Final verdict: Money is tight, so why waste it?

[White 190]

It was ok, not very good, but not that bad either. Gosh, you guys are so melodramatic.

[LHfunk 422]

I think I've found the root of the problem: people are expecting the movie to have a good everything.  For me, the movie was great. It was entertaining and funny. Entertainment wise, I give it a 9/10. Overall quality wise, it's more of a 6/10. When people watch a movie, I'm guessing most are expecting the overall quality to be good in order to enjoy the film. I expect to be entertained. If I'm entertained sufficiently, I'll like the movie. There are exceptions (Star Wars, recent Disney films), but usually, as long as it's entertaining and problems aren't too obvious, I'll like it. Others appear expect everything of the movie. There are some differences between me and most people though: I'm easily amused, and I don't know much about actors or stereotypes. I feel like this just allows me to enjoy movies more.

[Flittery Heart 48]

I thought it was really good! Definitely lived up to the commericals. :3

[GenderIsAnIllusion 2,178]

No....and not only because its a movie thats being used as a political tool to justify calling people sexist for not liking it.

 

It was a PAINFULLY unfunny movie for me...... It relies almost exclusively on toilet humour.

 

The CGI, while very good, did not at all fit this movie well at all. The ghosts ended up looking like elaborate street lamps, instead of something a person is supposed to be scared of.

 

Its another cheap reboot/remake.... seriously getting tired of reboots.... especially when the only major change, aside from aesthetic, was that instead of guys as the main characters, there are girls. If that's all that's needed to convince movie producers to make reboots, someone for the love of all that is holy better make a reboot of Magic Mike with girl strippers instead of guy ones. (That was a joke)

 

And like I mentioned, its a political movie, made solely to appease feminazis, and if you don't like it, damn it you a sexist sh**lord whom need to check his privilege.

[Plageius 263]

The metacritic score is high, it's gotten critical acclaim, so yea, I'd say it must be ok. 

Edited July 25, 2016 by Arctic Monkeys FTW

[Celli 4,356]

I don't plan to see it, but from the trailer, I don't think I'd want to, looks to me like poorly done humor. Also Melissa McCarthy keeps popping up in a lot of movies lately and frankly she's not a good actress. I saw Tammy with my mother last year and that was terrible. The movie was unfunny, and I cringed a lot during some of the scenes, particularly the one where she robs a Burger King with a paper bag on her head and hand. It was extremely awkward to watch.

 

The metacritic score is high, it's gotten critical acclaim, so yea, I'd say it must be ok. 

Metacritic is the worst place to get feedback on a movie. The user reviews are a joke that should not be taken seriously and honestly, metacritic would be better off without. People will give games and movies 0s and 1s, when in reality they probably deserve a 5 or 6, and on the other end, people score things with 10s, and they honestly don't deserve them. Nothing in media is good enough to deserve a perfect 10. Seriously, take a close look at a lot of the reviews on that site.

[Dark Horse 12,976]

Funny, for all of the negativity surrounding this movie long before it's release, I've heard almost nothing about it since then. It seems to have completely gone off the radar for all who just bashed on it like it would be the worst remake since Clash of the Titans. It kind of just makes me even more curious about it, honestly. Hadn't really intended to see it, but when it finally does come out on DVD I may pick it up and see for myself. At least it's good to know it is not universally accepted as a write-off.

[Plageius 263]

I don't plan to see it, but from the trailer, I don't think I'd want to, looks to me like poorly done humor. Also Melissa McCarthy keeps popping up in a lot of movies lately and frankly she's not a good actress. I saw Tammy with my mother last year and that was terrible. The movie was unfunny, and I cringed a lot during some of the scenes, particularly the one where she robs a Burger King with a paper bag on her head and hand. It was extremely awkward to watch.

 

Metacritic is the worst place to get feedback on a movie. The user reviews are a joke that should not be taken seriously and honestly, metacritic would be better off without. People will give games and movies 0s and 1s, when in reality they probably deserve a 5 or 6, and on the other end, people score things with 10s, and they honestly don't deserve them. Nothing in media is good enough to deserve a perfect 10. Seriously, take a close look at a lot of the reviews on that site.

I meant the legitimate critic scores.

[Celli 4,356]

 

 

I meant the legitimate critic scores.

You said critical acclaim. An average of 60 is not critical acclaim, it is average, passable, not bad, but not good.  

[Plageius 263]

You said critical acclaim. An average of 60 is not critical acclaim, it is average, passable, not bad, but not good.  

Oh. It was higher last time I checked.

[Lotus002 130]

The movie itself was rather cringy, and not really funny to watch (which was the director's main intention), but the motives and development behind it are FAR more worse than this forgettable flick can be.

 

 

Look at Shoe's video on it; she explains it far better (and funnier!) than I ever would. The original movies themselves weren't even focused on the humor, this movie's just an excuse for Sony to just grab as much money as possible to stay relevant, and then using the all-female cast as a "shield" of sorts to hide the fact the movie's really shitty, and label everyone that doesn't like it as a "misogynist". 

[Emiko Gale 200]

I have yet to watch it...I hope to watch it...But I like the premise.

[Ankha 35]

I for one quite liked it. The female roles were refreshing, and the chemistry was arguably better than the original cast.

[\/ 651]

Meh/10 would pass up again.

[Golden Star 149]

I would score it a 5/10. It had some major problems but I thought it wasn't that bad, and certainly better than its pre-release reputation suggested.

[Emiko Gale 200]

I watched it two nights ago and I adored it! Then again I never watched the original ghost busters.