The New Ghostbusters - Part 10

Status
Not open for further replies.
Finally saw it as well. It just didn't really do anything for me. I appreciated they didn't do a rehash of Gozer and tried a new villain. But it was so flat. None of the characters had any real dimension except for McCarthy's character. Wiig was just annoying. McKinnon was funny but her entire character was just a one note schtick. Jones turned out better than the marketing had us believe, but I didn't get how one minute she wants to be a Ghostbuster and the next minute she's acting like the job was forced on her.

The cameos were awful, especially Murray's. And I'm not sure how the proton packs work. They just swing the ghosts around and destroy them? No need to trap them anymore?

And this is just because I live in NY, but it was obvious they didn't really film a lot of it here. In the original, the city felt as much a character in the movie as anyone else. I didn't get that feeling here as it was obvious it was shot somewhere else.

I watched it this weekend too because my wife got my daughter a GB costume for Halloween and was just curious. I completely agree with everything you said. The movie was just nothing to me and I really came in with an open mind.
 
Finally saw it as well. It just didn't really do anything for me. I appreciated they didn't do a rehash of Gozer and tried a new villain. But it was so flat. None of the characters had any real dimension except for McCarthy's character. Wiig was just annoying. McKinnon was funny but her entire character was just a one note schtick. Jones turned out better than the marketing had us believe, but I didn't get how one minute she wants to be a Ghostbuster and the next minute she's acting like the job was forced on her.

The cameos were awful, especially Murray's. And I'm not sure how the proton packs work. They just swing the ghosts around and destroy them? No need to trap them anymore?

And this is just because I live in NY, but it was obvious they didn't really film a lot of it here. In the original, the city felt as much a character in the movie as anyone else. I didn't get that feeling here as it was obvious it was shot somewhere else.

I will try to help answer on the pack. As shown in the first bust, it works like it did originally. However, in the final scenes, it isn't about trapping them because there are too many. They need to get to Rowan, so they use their extra weapons to their full power to temporarily disperse them. It's likely they would have reformed later. The idea is when they reversed the portal, all ghost energy spawned from it was pulled back in, so we never got to see them come back.

Yes, there is that line about killing the pilgrim, but I don't believe they were dead, and the pieces of the ghosts shown left behind would've still come back eventually when they re-energized.
 
I will admit I did like Holtzmann's scene with the proton guns. The score was pretty epic there.
 
My mind kept bouncing back and forth between "good scene" and facepalming itself.

I couldn't' help but think what guy's going to laugh at "safety lights are for dudes!" *high five*
 
So, I finally saw this, and it actually wasn't terrible. I even chucked a few times.

I just don't really get who they were trying to market this for. A chick flick can't recoup a budget like this. Men just aren't going to see this in large numbers. Boys aren't going to buy the toys. I just don't see how they thought this would be a success.
 
And no one's commenting how Feig's blaming the original move from the 80s for HIS failure. *sigh*.
 
I read the article and found the headline very misleading. The article reads if JJ Abrams commented on the similarities between episodes IV and VII and Singer on Superman Returns.
 
The headline was extremely misleading, but that's hardly a shocker.
 
Clickbait titles are all the rage nowadays.
 
That article really didn't read to me like he was blaming a 30 year old movie for his movie failing. It seemed more like he thought there were too many callbacks and the movie didn't stand as much on its own as it should have.
 
"We should have just done our own thing instead and not call it Ghostbusters" - that's what he should have said.
 
I don't understand how there's a certified fresh sticker from Rotten Tomatoes labeled on the DVD/BD, the movie was passable but not great and it was massacred by fans and critics.

Was there an alternate funnier director's cut of the film that we don't know of?
 
I don't understand how there's a certified fresh sticker from Rotten Tomatoes labeled on the DVD/BD, the movie was passable but not great and it was massacred by fans and critics.

Was there an alternate funnier director's cut of the film that we don't know of?

A bribe works miracles.
 
I think we can all move on from this now. It happened, it was what it was. We still have the original.

I think the good thing we can take away from this, is that we won't be forced to endure some dumb moronic Ghostbusters shared movie universe. At least for the time being.
 
I don't know why people are still even post here. This movie vanished like a fart in the wind. It's pretty petty to continue to **** on a movie that wasn't even a failure so much as by now all the hoopla aside, doesn't even seem to exist after the fact. It's like pissing on a corpse of someone who lived an invisible life except for doing one stupid thing that everyone is aware of. Everything just comes off purely mean spirited afterwards.
 
Last edited:
Just came to post the Honest Trailer but I was beaten to the punch.

I havent seen the movie itself and I'm not talking about the quality of the movie, but I loved it. I think it's one Screen Junkies' best ones
 
I finally watched this last night, and I was surprised by how much I hated it. I thought it was going to get a few laughs, by how much people were talking about it, and how the critics seemed to like it. I enjoyed the Roboccop remake a lot more than this, and I thought Robocop was terrible.

Oh well....
 
I don't understand how there's a certified fresh sticker from Rotten Tomatoes labeled on the DVD/BD, the movie was passable but not great and it was massacred by fans and critics.

Was there an alternate funnier director's cut of the film that we don't know of?

Yes, there is a much better version of this film. The test screening I saw was one of the first cuts. It was better. The theatrical cut was the product of studio tampering, test screening after test screening leading them to distill the movie down to its safest possible cut. There are so many different versions of each scene and some really funny stuff that got shuffled out for the watered down middle of the road material of the theatrical cut. The extended cut is marginally better, but with all the alternate and deleted material available on the blu-ray I am tempted to make my own edit.
 
[YT]_4LDlBCkA2g[/YT]

no comments hehe :woot:

It brought up a good point I couldn't put my finger on. All 4 leads were the comic relief. Ray, Egon, and Winston all had funny moments, but it was Venkman who was the comic relief.
 
It brought up a good point I couldn't put my finger on. All 4 leads were the comic relief. Ray, Egon, and Winston all had funny moments, but it was Venkman who was the comic relief.
I just Redbox this thing tonight. First time seeing it. Thought I would go ahead and check it out for myself. I couldn't agree more with this........everybody was trying to be funny instead of somebody playing it straight. The story was lackluster the characters were blah and the villain was lame. But this is what happens when you try to recreate a classic that was just a unique experience.

And did they totally rip the end from Poltergiest with that rope bit and hair change?
 
It brought up a good point I couldn't put my finger on. All 4 leads were the comic relief. Ray, Egon, and Winston all had funny moments, but it was Venkman who was the comic relief.

Yeah. That was a very, very good point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"