The New Ghostbusters - Part 10

[Ozbridge]

I believe the subject is not worth arguing any longer that what it has, but there seems to be a chasm between the score and the fresh/rotten submissions Seriously, would someone recommend a movie while grading it a 6.5/10? 'Cause that's what the average critic did, apparently. Grading the movie with a low score, but at the time of calling it fresh or rotten, choosing fresh, hints at fear of being called out as "hater".

The Conjuring 2: 80% - 6.6
Les Cowboys: 78% - 6.4
The Shallow: 76% - 6.5
Captain Fantastic: 75% - 6.8
BFG: 73% - 6.7
Ghostbusters: 73% - 6.5
Wiener dog - 73% - 6.3
Secret live of pets - 73% - 6.2
Central Intelligence: 67% - 5.7

I think if we compare Ghostbusters with other movies then 73% Tomatometer for a 6.5 movie is pretty reasonable.

 

[Shadow Moses]

Box office previews did note that the majority of crowd interested in seeing this were women over 25. So while I don't think that the huge misogynists really hurt the movie, there was some gender stuff involved

I mean that's kinda how it is, most movies starring a majority of women men don't see. Same thing goes for race or whatever.

Well it doesn't help when the first thing out of the movie was a pic with a banner saying girl power. Basically saying we don't need males. The movies even goes ut of its way to portray all males as idiots. So why should male flood to see the movie when it's clearly marketed at girls with strong emphasis on feminism? The feminism here isn't a 50/50 one either it's female domination rather than equality.

 

[TheCommissioner]

Well it doesn't help when the first thing out of the movie was a pic with a banner saying girl power. Basically saying we don't need males. The movies even goes ut of its way to portray all males as idiots. So why should male flood to see the movie when it's clearly marketed at girls with strong emphasis on feminism?

because most of us (men) who aren't insecure children know how to take a joke

 

[Kanon]

The Conjuring 2: 80% - 6.6
Les Cowboys: 78% - 6.4
The Shallow: 76% - 6.5
Captain Fantastic: 75% - 6.8
BFG: 73% - 6.7
Ghostbusters: 73% - 6.5
Wiener dog - 73% - 6.3
Secret live of pets - 73% - 6.2
Central Intelligence: 67% - 5.7

I think if we compare Ghostbusters with other movies then 73% Tomatometer for a 6.5 movie is pretty reasonable.

I stand corrected.

Still, labeling any critic as hater as an official stance from producers, director and cast was a thing, so thinking that critics could be afraid of that is a little more than wacky conspiracy theory (just regular conspiracy theory, wich is not much, but a little more that Disney paying critics wich has nothing behind other than our imagination)

 

[chaseter]

But leveling the playing field is not tearing down one gender to promote another. Males definitely have disproportionate representation in Hollywood. But its not as if roles for women are overtly stupid, discriminatory caricatures.

I've been reading up quite a bit on this since listening to that youtube review of the young lady who said that it went too far. As a single father, I am all for equality. I want my daughter to be able to find positive female role models where ever she can, especially in the media. But I don't want her to feel that being a strong woman means insulting and demeaning men. I don't want the media to give her the idea that the majority of men are buffoonish Neanderthals who are out to hold her down and marginalize her. I don't want her to grow up thinking that she is in an adversarial role with the other gender. That isn't how equality is brought about.

Just as I wouldn't want my daughter to laugh at racist jokes, I don't want her thinking jokes that knock a man, simply for being a man, are funny.

Good post and a great father :thumbsup

 

[Kyle]

From a few weeks ago, at Toys r us and Target

Spoiler

Those prices look like normal prices. What were they before? 30 right? I can't see anyone spending 30 dollars. Hell, I'm hard pressed to spend 30 dollars on any action figure. To me, that's crazy - it's in some cases a lot more expensive than a 3D blu ray and a lot more expensive than a blu ray. Put simply - originally one action figure was more expensive than owning a 3D copy of the film itself and a lot more expensive than any other version of the film when it hits shelves.

 

[Shadow Moses]

because most of us (men) who aren't insecure children know how to take a joke

Well the cinema interest stats clearly state otherwise.

 

[Ozbridge]

I stand corrected.

Still, labeling any critic as hater as an official stance from producers, director and cast was a thing, so thinking that critics could be afraid of that is a little more than wacky conspiracy theory (just regular conspiracy theory, wich is not much, but a little more that Disney paying critics wich has nothing behind other than our imagination)

I wasn't implying anything, I was just saying that 6.5/10 and 73% is pretty reasonable. I don't care about all the accusation or its validity.

Btw

The $46 million opening is solid for a comedy, but the movie’s $144 million production budget put Sony in need of a more impressive debut. Mr. Greenstein said he expects the movie to avoid any steep drop-offs in attendance in the weeks to come, repeating the pattern of other movies helmed by “Ghostbusters” director Paul Feig.
The original “Ghostbusters,” starring Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd, grossed a massive $229 million when it opened 32 years ago. Adjusted for inflation, it is the 34th highest-grossing movie of all time, according to Box Office Mojo. A sequel followed in 1989, with less impressive results.

Sony will move forward with plans to produce sequels to the rebooted franchise, said Mr. Greenstein. “We’ve restarted a successful brand for us,” he said.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/pets-keeps-its-top-spot-at-the-box-office-besting-ghostbusters-1468778822

 

[TheCommissioner]

A show of faith from Sony? maybe they are hoping it does well overseas and the Blu Ray release is strong (which by my guess, will be just before Halloween)

 

[GuestStar2004]

I think if they rebooted with 4 guys, lets say channing tatum was cast in ghostbusters like there was a rumour about a while ago, the internet would still hate this reboot, if it was 4 guys in those same trailers the internet would still hate it, its not that women are victims here its that they are in ghostbusters and it was always gonna be judged through nostalgic goggles no matter whether it was male or female and i think many fail to realise that and just see it as an insult to women that there was no instant love for it.

 

[Blade X]

If that's true then...

I guess GB was just one of those franchises that shouldve stayed dead. I think there was potential in rebooting/continuing the franchise but I guess other's don't feel the same

No, Ghostbusters is proof why a recognizable iconic property/franchise shouldn't be rebooted/remade with either a gender or racially bent cast. A franchise like this should have been either expanded or continued with either a new all female legacy GB team or a new GB legacy team made up of both men and women. If they wanted to do a remake/reboot, then they should have remade it and rebooted it with a younger all male GB team cast who are taking up the roles of Peter,Ray,Winston,and Egon. Despite what Hollywood might think or want to believe, the general movie going audience are not idiots or gender and racial blind when it comes to recognizable iconic characters and will see MOST (NOT ALL) gender and racial bending film/TV versions of major recognizable pop culture characters as either wrong or a parody. This is why movies like THE WILD WILD WEST,THE HONEYMOONERS,IRONSIDE,KOJAK,and THE LAST AIRBENDER all flopped/got canceled. You don't reinvent a recognizable and popular brand from the ground up, you update it and expand it.

 

[Kanon]

I wasn't implying anything, I was just saying that 6.5/10 and 73% is pretty reasonable. I don't care about all the accusation or its validity.

I know, it's that the rebutted fresh/score discrepancy was supporting a point about critics possibly scared of accusations of sexism, and that still stands.

 

[TheCommissioner]

I think if they rebooted with 4 guys, lets say channing tatum was cast in ghostbusters like there was a rumour about a while ago, the internet would still hate this reboot, if it was 4 guys in those same trailers the internet would still hate it, its not that women are victims here its that they are in ghostbusters and it was always gonna be judged through nostalgic goggles no matter whether it was male or female and i think many fail to realise that and just see it as an insult to women that there was no instant love for it.

I would agree that is a part of it, I think some wanted a direct continuation (which I originally thought, but as time went on, seemed less viable)

but I think going with an all-female cast definitely added "insult to injury" to the neckbeard crowd out there, they project onto Ghostbusters as much as they do with superheroes, and having that taken away sends them into shaking their cheeto stained fists at the sky

 

[TheCommissioner]

No, Ghostbusters is proof why a recognizable iconic property/franchise shouldn't be rebooted/remade with either a gender or racially bent cast. A franchise like this should have been either expanded or continued with either a new all female legacy GB team or a new GB legacy team made up of both men and women. If they wanted to do a remake/reboot, then they should have remade it and rebooted it with a younger all male GB team cast who are taking up the roles of Peter,Ray,Winston,and Egon. Despite what Hollywood might think or want to believe, the general movie going audience are not idiots or gender and racial blind when it comes to recognizable iconic characters and will see MOST (NOT ALL) gender and racial bending film/TV versions of major recognizable pop culture characters as either wrong or a parody. This is why movies like THE WILD WILD WEST,THE HONEYMOONERS,IRONSIDE,KOJAK,and THE LAST AIRBENDER all flopped/got canceled. You don't reinvent a recognizable and popular brand from the ground up, you update it and expand it.

so all straight white dudes all the time for you to project on and be worthy of your dollar

got it

I will write that down

 

[GuestStar2004]

I agree that this movie should have been in the same universe, its just a huge cheat to nostalgia that it isn't.

 

[Kanon]

Those prices look like normal prices. What were they before? 30 right? I can't see anyone spending 30 dollars. Hell, I'm hard pressed to spend 30 dollars on any action figure. To me, that's crazy - it's in some cases a lot more expensive than a 3D blu ray and a lot more expensive than a blu ray. Put simply - originally one action figure was more expensive than owning a 3D copy of the film itself and a lot more expensive than any other version of the film when it hits shelves.

In the picture you can see the action figure at 13.99, and the original price of 19.99

None of the toys pictured are $30 toys. All the prices are cut down from $20 to $17, from $17 to $12, from $15 to $10 and as mentioned the Holtzmann action figure from $20 to $14

 

[Sithborg]

I am disappointed that the film is performing terribly, as I enjoyed the heck out of it. The casting, design/locations, and dialogue were great.

Feig just had his biggest opening weekend ever. Even if this film has a smaller multiplier than his previous movies, it could still do very, very well. And based at how my audience reacted, I think it will have pretty good WOM. Which it seems to be building, with the lack of drop from the Thur + Fri numbers to Sat numbers.

Anyway, just saw it. Loved it. The climax did have some problems sure, but everything leading up to it I felt was awesome. The trailers and TV spots did a pretty bad job about showing the movie and some of the characters, in particular Patty. Her loud schtick is much, much less than what the promotions would imply. And all this talk of "man hate" seems to come from either people paranoid about this kind of stuff or desperate for clicks. Seriously, it seems to have been blown way out of proportion.

I do find that the focus on being more researchers than exterminators is going to be a hard change for many to swallow. I honestly don't mind the change. It is something different.

Also, more Sigourney Weaver in the sequel, please.

 

[chaseter]

So, it I get this right......in this COMEDY......there are multiple people portrayed as - stupid, obnoxious, sexist, incompetent morons.....or in other words.....this COMEDY is like every other COMEDY made, but people are mad at this one.

Were you around for the Bryce Dallas Howard is a childless, cold business woman that wears high heels Jurassic World deconstruction last year? Which funny enough, was her idea. But, that caused a huge stink and misogyny was thrown around. Misogyny is bad. BUT. Misandry is good apparently. No one is allowed to pipe up to man hating.

This is a comedy, sure. Jurassic World was just a summer popcorn action flick. That's not an excuse. The most recent James Bond for example regressed Moneypenny from a strong female lead with action chops to a lowly desk secretary there for men to use when needed. That's not right. She was great in Skyfall. Even M was badass. Can I just say well Bond is just a dumb action flick so it's ok?

 

[bluejake01]

Well it doesn't help when the first thing out of the movie was a pic with a banner saying girl power. Basically saying we don't need males. The movies even goes ut of its way to portray all males as idiots. So why should male flood to see the movie when it's clearly marketed at girls with strong emphasis on feminism? The feminism here isn't a 50/50 one either it's female domination rather than equality.

That's utter ********! Spoken like a truly fragile person.

 

[jmc]

I think its a bigger minority than most think, or are willing to admit to themselves

Or, some people are wanting to exaggerate how big that minority is and not admit to themselves that maybe the backlash was due to other circumstances. I point to the reedited fan trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IDXpOX0Cp0

Over 1.3m views, 21,000 likes, a mere 1,400 dislikes. If this minority was as big as some of you think it is the dislike ratio would be far greater on this video, but it's not, why? Because it's a better trailer. The marketing for this film was nothing short of disastrous for a property that was beloved by so many. No, sexists were not the reason for this films crappy box office, the marketing team at Sony failed in its job, and then tried to shift the blame to someone else.

 

[bluejake01]

Were you around for the Bryce Dallas Howard is a childless, cold business woman that wears high heels Jurassic World deconstruction last year? Which funny enough, was her idea. But, that caused a huge stink and misogyny was thrown around. Misogyny is bad. BUT. Misandry is good apparently. No one is allowed to pipe up to man hating.

This is a comedy, sure. Jurassic World was just a summer popcorn action flick. That's not an excuse. The most recent James Bond for example regressed Moneypenny from a strong female lead with action chops to a lowly desk secretary there for men to use when needed. That's not right. She was great in Skyfall. Even M was badass. Can I just say well Bond is just a dumb action flick so it's ok?

Misandry doesn't injure men in the same way that continuing traditional gender roles and attitudes injures women. It's okay boys, you aren't going to be subjected to the same kind of harmful oppression that women have been. At the end of the day you will still be on the same side of the power dynamic in the over culture.

So fragile...so scared.

 

[Xrated48]

because most of us (men) who aren't insecure children know how to take a joke

That's because it's not a joke, Paul Feig came out and blamed geeks everywhere when most people who would have saw this film are geeks in the first place. Geeks are predominantly made up of men so to insult over half the people who were going to see the film is not good marketing strategy. Not saying that women are not geeks too but there are less compared to men and I'm sure even women felt insulted by Feig comments too.

 

[bluejake01]

That's because it's not a joke, Paul Feig came out and blamed geeks everywhere when most people who would have saw this film are geeks in the first place. Geeks are predominantly made up of men so to insult over half the people who were going to see the film is not good marketing strategy. Not saying that women are not geeks too but there are less compared to men and I'm sure even women felt insulted by Feig comments too.

He was only calling out the ones that were misogynistic. if the shoe didn't fit, they shouldn't have assumed it was directed at them.

 

[Xrated48]

He was only calling out the ones that were misogynistic. if the shoe didn't fit, they shouldn't have assumed it was directed at them.

No he was calling out all nerds.

 

[C. Lee]

Were you around for the Bryce Dallas Howard is a childless, cold business woman that wears high heels Jurassic World deconstruction last year? Which funny enough, was her idea. But, that caused a huge stink and misogyny was thrown around. Misogyny is bad. BUT. Misandry is good apparently. No one is allowed to pipe up to man hating.

This is a comedy, sure. Jurassic World was just a summer popcorn action flick. That's not an excuse. The most recent James Bond for example regressed Moneypenny from a strong female lead with action chops to a lowly desk secretary there for men to use when needed. That's not right. She was great in Skyfall. Even M was badass. Can I just say well Bond is just a dumb action flick so it's ok?

I did not keep up with anything for Jurassic World.

I don't put Bond movies on same level as comedies unless talking about the 60's CASINO ROYAL where David Niven was James Bond.

Every Comedy I have ever seen has people being portrayed as stupid, inept, etc. It is absolutely nothing new.