The New Ghostbusters - Part 9

[2002SpideyFan]

Iron Man 3 has a fresh rating on RT: "critics are right. Stupid comic book fanboys don't matter."

New Ghostbusters have a fresh rating on RT: "BOO, STUPAD CRITICS ARE WRONG. ONLY STUPAD PEOPLE LISTEN TO CRITACS!"

 

[DarthSkywalker]

And no, don't post the same image again with cursing blocked out.

Poor danoyse.

 

[Kyle]

I can get not liking her comedic sensibility, but it is not the same as a Kevin Hart/Melissa McCarthy type of situation.

With a good script McCarthy can be a great actress. See 'St. Vincent,' where she doesn't rely on the same kind of comedy she usually does and instead delivers an intriguing dramatic performance as a struggling mother in a difficult situation, I'd love to see more films and roles like 'St. Vincent' from her. I'd say she's like a past Adam Sandler - she has the kind of character she typically plays, but she's proven she can pull off dramatic roles as well.

 

[Matt]

They are the ones making noise. That is the point. We are complaining about what was said, not the people who don't speak and thus we have no idea what they think.


McCarthy has two comedies of the decade to her name, and her work on Gilmore Girls was very different then her usual comedy now. I get that she decided she wanted that paper, but that doesn't change her talent and when she has shown it. Hart I haven't seen him in anything that compares to Bridesmaids and Spy.

Wiig, I agree with you on.

Her work on the Gilmore Girls is scripted acting that any actress could do. It isn't HER comedy, it was a role.

I think calling Spy a "comedy of the decade" is inaccurate. Never-the-less, even if you enjoy it, you must admit the comedy is broad and essentially comes down to McCarthy saying "I'm fat, I'm loud, I'm clumsy! That's not how a spy should work!" Its almost identical to her work in The Heat ("I'm fat, I'm loud, I'm clumsy! That's not how a cop should work!") or her work in Tammy ("I'm fat, I'm loud, I'm clumsy! That's not how a robber should work!"). You get the point.

Bridesmaids, while she is certainly the breakout, I don't think she is the reason the movie is as funny as it is. Her comedy in that movie was "I fart and I'm fat."

This isn't revolutionary stuff. Its almost identical to Kevin Hart's work, which is essentially, "I'm black, I'm loud, I'm not good at basketball like a black man ought to be! How funny is that!?!"

They are both represent very broad humor.

Once again, none of that is an indictment on the quality of it. I will certainly agree that McCarthy's broad humor is better than Kevin Hart's. But it is the same comedic sensibility. The comparisons are not inherently unfair.

 

[Kanon]

I think the negativity is more grounded in terrible trailers coupled with the fact that the source material is a sacred relic of pop culture. It looked like Feig completely butchered a movie that is beloved and regarded as one of the best comedies of all time. Of course people were going to react negatively. I think very little is based in sexism. Its there, but not much.

People COULD have accepted a sequel to GB (for GA it would still would have been a hard pill to swallow), fans wanted a sequel. And they gave us a remake, which under the right circumstances would be the best possible thing. Except that a remake passing the torch was not only possible, but every obstacle was resolved (original cast coming back). Just a few tweaks to this production could have made the movie a passing of the torch sequel, with the same cast and almost same plot. But no, they choose to give people the finger doing a remake. That's why people react with hate.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

There is a big difference between being a bad actor and being in a bad movie. McCarthy has been plenty of bad movies. But she has done plenty of work that has shown her talents.

 

[Xrated48]

Wiig and McCarthy are not terrible actresses. To even imply it shows a ridiculous bias. One is responsible for arguably the finest comedy in the last 10 years, and the other was the star of the another contender. This was after years of fantastic service on SNL for Wiig. But of course to know that, you'd have to be familiar with the work of these two women.

Well I personally don't like them and I know other people who don't either so that has some effect on the hate for this film.

 

[Matt]

Iron Man 3 has a fresh rating pn RT: "critics are right. Stupid comic book fanboys don't matter."

New Ghostbusters have a fresh rating on RT: "BOO, STUPAD CRITICS ARE WRONG. ONLY STUPAD PEOPLE LISTEN TO CRITACS!"

Dude, we get the point go away.

With a good script McCarthy can be a great actress. See 'St. Vincent,' where she doesn't rely on the same kind of comedy she usually does and instead delivers an intriguing dramatic performance as a struggling mother in a difficult situation, I'd love to see more films and roles like 'St. Vincent' from her.

Maybe so. Maybe Kevin Hart could be talented with a better script. But both primarily stick to their comfort zones, so it is a rather moot point.

 

[danoyse]

Wiig and McCarthy are not terrible actresses. To even imply it shows a ridiculous bias. One is responsible for arguably the finest comedy in the last 10 years, and the other was the star of the another contender. This was after years of fantastic service on SNL for Wiig. But of course to know that, you'd have to be familiar with the work of these two women.

They both have Academy Award nominations for a comedy that grossed $169 million domestically. Plus they have a combined 13 Emmy nominations just for their SNL work alone.

But I have no idea why a studio would consider them for a big-budget comedy originally made famous by SNL people either.

I get not liking them. But to suggest they still need to be sold to the public as successful comediennes means you haven't been paying attention the last few years.

 

[danoyse]

Bridesmaids, while she is certainly the breakout, I don't think she is the reason the movie is as funny as it is. Her comedy in that movie was "I fart and I'm fat."

Not at all.

 

[Kyle]

Maybe so. Maybe Kevin Hart could be talented with a better script. But both primarily stick to their comfort zones, so it is a rather moot point.

To me Hart's a terrible example because has the guy ever even attempted to do a dramatic role? The better example is Adam Sandler when he was good because Adam Sandler never strayed from his comfort zone in regards to comedy (which is precisely what you're saying), but has proven that he can do dramatic roles as well (Big Daddy, Punch Drunk Love, Reign Over Me, Funny People, etc.). To my knowledge, Hart has never shown that he can pull off both.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Except this would reject the reaction when they announced they were making an all female Ghostbusters.

It's a gimmick

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Her work on the Gilmore Girls is scripted acting that any actress could do. It isn't HER comedy, it was a role.

I think calling Spy a "comedy of the decade" is inaccurate. Never-the-less, even if you enjoy it, you must admit the comedy is broad and essentially comes down to McCarthy saying "I'm fat, I'm loud, I'm clumsy! That's not how a spy should work!" Its almost identical to her work in The Heat ("I'm fat, I'm loud, I'm clumsy! That's not how a cop should work!") or her work in Tammy ("I'm fat, I'm loud, I'm clumsy! That's not how a robber should work!"). You get the point.

Bridesmaids, while she is certainly the breakout, I don't think she is the reason the movie is as funny as it is. Her comedy in that movie was "I fart and I'm fat."

This isn't revolutionary stuff. Its almost identical to Kevin Hart's work, which is essentially, "I'm black, I'm loud, I'm not good at basketball like a black man ought to be! How funny is that!?!"

They are both represent very broad humor.

Once again, none of that is an indictment on the quality of it. I will certainly agree that McCarthy's broad humor is better than Kevin Hart's. But it is the same comedic sensibility. The comparisons are not inherently unfair.

Wait, Gilmore Girls doesn't count because she acted to someone else's material... she is actress, I am talking about her as an actress.

Spy has plenty to it. It starts out as a trope, but goes beyond that. Her boss treats her like a trope, which is exactly how she subverts it. She doesn't start out loud (she gets a voice as the film goes on and she gets more confidence), and while she has some mishaps, see isn't clumsy. She is in fact the finest spy around. It is also incredibly hilarious and she is a big part of it.

She doesn't have to be the only reason Bridesmaids works for her to get credit for it. More importantly, there is more to the role then you imply. Again there is a bit more under the surface that they actually go into, that you are just ignoring to make your point here.

Of the top of my head I don't think Kevin Hart has anything like that too his name.

 

[danoyse]

It's a gimmick

Women are a fad.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

It's a gimmick

It's an ideology.

 

[Matt]

Not at all.

That's what I took away from it. I personally thought that the movie worked due to Kristen Wiig. Of course, I'm the guy who watches The Hangover and finds Bradley Cooper to be far funnier than Zach Galifianakis.

Personally, I think Galifianakis is a pretty good comparison to McCarthy. His best work is Bored to Death, which is completely against his type. But the majority of work that he has done is emulation of his role in The Hangover.

Good comedy must be ever evolving. Drama is easy. Good dramatic acting never changes. The conventions are always the same. Its why Peter O'Toole famously pointed out that comedy is harder than drama. It is why comedic actors burn bright and then fade away just as quickly. Will Ferrell was the biggest comedic draw in the country 5 years ago. He is now doing sequels and family movies. Adam Sandler was that way before him. If comedy does not evolve, it fades because the public gets sick of it. A joke that is repeated is only funny for so long, after all.

Enduring comedians, Bill Murray, Ricky Gervais, etc, are willing to completely start from scratch and find new sources of humor. I have yet to see that McCarthy is capable of doing that.

To me Hart's a terrible example because has the guy ever even attempted to do a dramatic role? The better example is Adam Sandler when he was good because Adam Sandler never strayed from his comfort zone in regards to comedy, but could do dramatic roles as well (Big Daddy, Punch Drunk Love, Reign Over Me, Funny People, etc.).

I think that is a fair analogy.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Well I personally don't like them and I know other people who don't either so that has some effect on the hate for this film.

You not liking them doesn't suddenly make them terrible. But of course overreaction isn't not uncommon here.

They both have Academy Award nominations for a comedy that grossed $169 million domestically. Plus they have a combined 13 Emmy nominations just for their SNL work alone.

But I have no idea why a studio would consider them for a big-budget comedy originally made famous by SNL people either.

I get not liking them. But to suggest they still need to be sold to the public as successful comediennes means you haven't been paying attention the last few years.

t:

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It's a gimmick

There is zero sexism in this thread.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Wow, I was right. It looks like this might do better than expected.

Depends if the damage has already been done, i suspect it probably has, it may make a little bit more because of the reviews but I think there will still be people watching the trailers or clips who won't give his a chance.

The marketing for this movie hasnt been particularly friendly to anyone who grew up with ghostbusters, but we will see.

 

[BoredGuy]

I didn't have a particular issue with it being a "gimmick"
But, as some seem to forget, Wiig and McCarthy were announced pretty much as soon as it was announced it would be all-female

So if someone thinks the actresses aren't funny (as 'opinions' dictate we're allowed) then they had every right to dislike the idea of the film from the start.

It'd be like if Force Awakens had cast Vanessa Hudgens as Rey, Shia Lebouf as Poe, and Sean Diddy Combs as Finn
While maybe you couldn't say 100% guaranteed that "This movie WILL suck" because nothing had been shown yet, you could still have a pretty good idea that the end product won't be anything you're going to like

Casting says a lot about a director, and for many, this cast said "he has no idea how to make a good Ghostbusters film"

 

[Kanon]

Except this would reject the reaction when they announced they were making an all female Ghostbusters.

I think any announcement in the vein of "we are making a _____ remake with an all-________ cast" would get at least roll eyes. It's a weird thing to do. Why would you start with such a premise if not to prompt reactions of weirdness from people? (as opposed of announcing a remake, and then casting all women 'cause they are the best for the roles)

 

[Xrated48]

You not liking them doesn't suddenly make them terrible. But of course overreaction isn't not uncommon here.




t:

It's not overreaction plenty of people do not find Melissa McCarthy or Lesile Jones funny at all.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

That's what I took away from it. I personally thought that the movie worked due to Kristen Wiig. Of course, I'm the guy who watches The Hangover and finds Bradley Cooper to be far funnier than Zach Galifianakis.

Personally, I think Galifianakis is a pretty good comparison to McCarthy. His best work is Bored to Death, which is completely against his type. But the majority of work that he has done is emulation of his role in The Hangover.

Good comedy must be ever evolving. Drama is easy. Good dramatic acting never changes. The conventions are always the same. Its why Peter O'Toole famously pointed out that comedy is harder than drama. It is why comedic actors burn bright and then fade away just as quickly. Will Ferrell was the biggest comedic draw in the country 5 years ago. He is now doing sequels and family movies. Adam Sandler was that way before him. If comedy does not evolve, it fades because the public gets sick of it. A joke that is repeated is only funny for so long, after all.

Enduring comedians, Bill Murray, Ricky Gervais, etc, are willing to completely start from scratch and find new sources of humor. I have yet to see that McCarthy is capable of doing that.



I think that is a fair analogy.

Wiig and Byrne are what Bridesmaids work for me, with the help of an IT Crowd alum. Byrne is also the reason Neighbors worked for me and she was fantastic is Spy as well. Her comedic talents are underrated imo.

 

[Matt]

Wait, Gilmore Girls doesn't count because she acted to someone else's material... she is actress, I am talking about her as an actress.

No, I am saying it is a different type of comedy. It was not one catered to her style. It was a role that she auditioned and was cast for. That differs from a movie that is based around her, that she is central in building, scripting, forming, etc. Its an apples and oranges comparison.

Spy has plenty to it. It starts out as a trope, but goes beyond that. Her boss treats her like a trope, which is exactly how she subverts it. She doesn't start out loud (she gets a voice as the film goes on and she gets more confidence), and while she has some mishaps, see isn't clumsy. She is in fact the finest spy around. It is also incredibly hilarious and she is a big part of it.

She doesn't have to be the only reason Bridesmaids works for her to get credit for it. More importantly, there is more to the role then you imply. Again there is a bit more under the surface that they actually go into, that you are just ignoring to make your point here.

Of the top of my head I don't think Kevin Hart has anything like that too his name.

I don't see Spy as a subversion at all. I see it as an attempt to lampshade a bit, but not a full on subversion. When I think of subversion I think of something like Neighbors 2, which while admittedly average to mediocre, at least tried to truly subvert the genre and had something relevant to say. I don't think her role in Spy or Biridesmaid did.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think any announcement in the vein of "we are making a _____ remake with an all-________ cast" would get at least roll eyes. It's a weird thing to do. Why would you start with such a premise if not to prompt reactions of weirdness from people? (as opposed of announcing a remake, and then casting all women 'cause they are the best for the roles)

The strength of this reaction was very different. It was louder and more angry then anything I had seen for such a property.