|
Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon were the stand-outs to me.My wife also commented that the editing bothered her. I have to imagine that losing to an animated film in its second week has got the studio bothered.
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:38 |
|
|
Maybe they shouldn't hire a guy who seems to want the movie to fail to cut the trailers next time.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
I enjoyed it. It's definitely not as good as the original (and the best descriptor of why I have heard is it's an example of "modern comedy." That doesn't mean it like obsessed with dick and fart jokes, just thst it is structured a very different way to comedies from other decades.) But it does understand that Ghostbusters worked because it was a horror movie viewed through the lense of comedy and action ,and it does that well. For me Hemsworth and McKinn are the best, I loved their characters. Melissia mcCarthy seems a bit subdued but she works. Wiig on the other hand is so subdued thst it's almost like she's not in the second half of the film. Leslie Jones isn't as bad as I feared, but her character seems to provide background exposition for stuff that's not hugely relevant. And I don't know why I loved it in the first film where they spoke about the building being built by an evil doctor after the first world war to rid Earth of humans but don't care about the lore in this Ghostbusters. Another thing that bothered me was despite all the characters being scientists, it really seemed like Eikmann did all the smart stuff. Like in the original team Egon did most of the work, but you figured that Ray and Pete and Zedmore helped. In this I just thought that Eikmann does all the science. But they are just minor gripes. It's a decent enough film, and I can easily see me watching it again on re-release. (If only to wash away the memory of watching it in an American cinema with slack jawed yokels who laughed at every line, or who applauded when Leslie Jones said anything. ) Oh, one last criticism, remixing the Ghostbusters theme tune? Awful, awful move. As for comic stuff, the trailer for Dr. Strange looked amazing in Imax. Particularly when he is falling through New York.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
The Question IRL posted:...or who applauded when Leslie Jones said anything.... Jesus the American cinema experience sounds loving terrible. The only time I can remember people applauding a movie for me was when I saw the Matrix Reloaded on a school trip (that was so bad the cinema asked the school not to come back, who would think that taking a bunch of hyper 15 year-olds to see a flashy action movie was a bad idea?)
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Shawn posted:Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon were the stand-outs to me.My wife also commented that the editing bothered her. I have to imagine that losing to an animated film in its second week has got the studio bothered. Not really. Animated movies this time of year do really well considering kids are on vacation and parents know that animated films are a safe bet to take kids. I think the studio will rather look at how much bank it makes without comparing it to an animated movie, especially one getting a lot of critical acclaim. Going to see Ghostbusters tonight. By all accounts I have heard that it is enjoyable without being exceptional, so sounds like a standard summer film for me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Maybe they shouldn't hire a guy who seems to want the movie to fail to cut the trailers next time. Honestly I think I may have liked it more than I would have because of the bad trailers. I went in expecting something really terrible and came out having seen something mediocre that I probably liked more than I should have. If it had good trailers then it probably would have set different expectations. If the third act hadn't turned into such an action clusterfuck I probably would have liked the film a lot more too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
I'm glad Ghostbusters exists, but I didn't think it was a particularly good film. Copypasted review: Felt like there was a reasonably enjoyable movie at the core, somewhere, deep down, wrapped in layers of an awful script and even worse editing. The characters were engaging because these actresses are engaging, especially when interacting with each other, but the actual writing for them felt like a great blank "Get From Point A To Point F" hodgepodge with very little thought put in. And there's this absurd moment -- I'm not gonna spoiler tag this -- where Kristen Wiig is trying to prevent her boss from seeing her computer monitor and she's, like, turning it around and slanting it and trying to discreetly cover it with paper or something, and at no point does she just friggin' turn the monitor off. It's just...no one actually thought this moment through. And I think that's emblematic of a lot of things here. I think this is a great treat for fairly young audiences and that's perhaps worth the effort in the end...but, man, what a dismal effort.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Maybe they shouldn't hire a guy who seems to want the movie to fail to cut the trailers next time. At the time I thought the goon who ranted at the initial 20 second teasers was being ridiculous, but now I agree, those trailers were bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:And there's this absurd moment -- I'm not gonna spoiler tag this -- where Kristen Wiig is trying to prevent her boss from seeing her computer monitor and she's, like, turning it around and slanting it and trying to discreetly cover it with paper or something, and at no point does she just friggin' turn the monitor off. It's just...no one actually thought this moment through. And I think that's emblematic of a lot of things here. Yeah, there's a number of moments like this the felt improv-y in the way where Feig just turned on the camera and said "Do something funny" and it's just a forced scene of a joke that's not needed. Also all the cameos were terrible, except for Ernie Hudson. I also wish the film could have gone five whole minutes at any point without going "Hey there audience, do you remember that old movie called Ghostsbusters? Wasn't that great?" because it was just too much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
I never saw the original films (only thing from that franchise I've seen are some episodes of extreme ghostbusters as a kid) and I thought the movie was alright. Wasn't really a laugh out loud movie, but it wasn't terrible either. I did feel confused by all the scenes with the older actors that I guess were cameos from the original. Kinda felt like an overload of Stan Lee cameo moments.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:It's just...no one actually thought this moment through. You are hilariously wrong here because the absolute #1 way to make your boss notice your computer screen is to turn it off when they come to look at it. Like the mere fact you actually think "shut off a computer screen to make sure nobody sees it" is a thing implies to me you've never worked in an office ever. I've actually done the "lightly turn my screen away" thing because unless someone is actually looking at your screen they're probably not really looking at your screen. Turn off your monitor and suddenly they want to know what you don't want them to see.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
X-O posted:Yeah, there's a number of moments like this the felt improv-y in the way where Feig just turned on the camera and said "Do something funny" and it's just a forced scene of a joke that's not needed. Murray's at least fit into the narrative fine, Akroyd's was the only one that really felt forced.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
The Question IRL posted:Oh, one last criticism, remixing the Ghostbusters theme tune? Awful, awful move. The Ghostbusters theme was plagiarized, so that might have influenced going with a remix.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:The Ghostbusters theme was plagiarized, so that might have influenced going with a remix. They use the original theme too tho'. It's just genuinely a really crap remix.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I have no idea who to trust about this new Ghostbusters movie. Lots of people saying it's really bad, other people saying it's super great. Ever since I learned people in CD like to say the Star Wars Prequels are good movies I just can't trust anyone's opinions anymore. The pacing is rough and it's not Ghostbusters 1984 are really the worst things I can say about it. I laughed out loud at parts even and I normally don't do that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:You are hilariously wrong here because the absolute #1 way to make your boss notice your computer screen is to turn it off when they come to look at it. Like the mere fact you actually think "shut off a computer screen to make sure nobody sees it" is a thing implies to me you've never worked in an office ever. Both of your answers are wrong because you are supposed to casually press windows-d.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 23:15
|
|
The Question IRL posted:Oh, one last criticism, remixing the Ghostbusters theme tune? Awful, awful move. You son of a bitch, how dare you talk smack about Run DMC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYrQmLuoCL4
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:I think Bendis was trying to imply that the Void always existed, and the Sentry was the fake identity. Its hard to tell because his writing went to poo poo around that time. Bendis sucking is a pretty solid explanation. Wow, the Killing Joke trailer on the BvS disk makes it look like hot garbage. twistedmentat fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Jul 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
X-O posted:Also all the cameos were terrible, except for Ernie Hudson. I also wish the film could have gone five whole minutes at any point without going "Hey there audience, do you remember that old movie called Ghostsbusters? Wasn't that great?" because it was just too much. It feels like remakes more and more feel the need to make unnecessary homages to the previous film, as if the reaction to all the complaints of remakes is, "Well, we respect those movies a lot, let's show JUST HOW MUCH we do." I'm thinking mainly of Star Trek Into Darkness where it seemed every other line was an unnecessary homage to the point of obscuring a halfway okay story.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
I've heard Ghostbusters is best when its being its own thing, that it's weakest stuff is when it's trying to homage the original.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
The third act action doesn't really work but I thought a lot of it was very funny.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
MrAristocrates posted:The third act action doesn't really work but I thought a lot of it was very funny. The action in general doesn't work. Like the original the best stuff is when nothing is really happening. twistedmentat posted:I've heard Ghostbusters is best when its being its own thing, that it's weakest stuff is when it's trying to homage the original. Yes to the second part, not so much to the first. There's a ton of weak original stuff in it, mostly the entire third act as mentioned above.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
When you do a film that's mostly improv on-set it's a total crapshoot as to whether it was going to work. Jon Favreau was able to pull that off in Iron Man when it could have been a total disaster. The general consensus I'm seeing for this film is that it's more misses than hits.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:When you do a film that's mostly improv on-set it's a total crapshoot as to whether it was going to work. Jon Favreau was able to pull that off in Iron Man when it could have been a total disaster. The general consensus I'm seeing for this film is that it's more misses than hits. It's pretty funny IMO, it just has structural problems and the cameos/references get annoying. Worth watching for sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I think you're mentally substituting the grayscale edit I linked to earlier for BvS: You need your loving eyes and/or monitor calibrated blud. I actually am colourblind, and even i can see the colour.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 09:25
|
|
|
Humbug Scoolbus posted:The pacing is rough and it's not Ghostbusters 1984 are really the worst things I can say about it. I laughed out loud at parts even and I normally don't do that. The pacing was my only problem with it. There were cuts where it seems like days should have passed, but it feel like there's only been a few minutes between one scene and the next.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 12:36
|
|
|
The third act of Ghostbusters is definately a problem but there were enough laughs in the first two that overall I thought it was a good movie. I'm glad people here gave it a chance and aren't completely making GBS threads on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
It would have been nice if instead of giving Chris Hemsworth 30 minutes of screen time doing an over the top dumb shtick that was so cartoonish it became unfunny, they instead gave that focus to Melissa McCarthy and developed her character into something other than just "wants wantons."
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
I''ve literally never seen a movie whose criticism or discussion of its quality was so thoroughly poisoned before release as Ghostbusters 2016. On both sides, too, the manchildren who threw a temper tantrum that a movie dared have girls in it and I'm getting stuff like people I follow on twitter unironically saying that if you hate it you must be a man because all women they know love it. It's crazy, the insane level of tribalism that has developed around the film and people throwing around Rotten Tomatoes and Metcritic scores both for and against and how basically all reviews are worthless in this case since they're all written and framed in the context of the crazy war over it. Even the BvS stuff, which was a fiasco, was basically just a very loud minority insisting on a conspiracy that somehow had swallowed everyone else into thinking a good movie was bad, but this Ghostbusters poo poo...I don't even know if the movie's good or not, I literally can't tell amidst all the noise and whining and smug superiority.
NieR Occomata fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Jul 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
Haven't seen it yet but women on my Twitter seem to genuinely love Kate McKinnon's character, so it has at least that going for it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
I saw it with my 11 year old sister and she loved it, as did basically every kid in the theater. So it has that going for it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:I saw it with my 11 year old sister and she loved it, as did basically every kid in the theater. So it has that going for it. Kids know the Ghostbusters are cool af When do we get a new cartoon? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
site posted:Haven't seen it yet but women on my Twitter seem to genuinely love Kate McKinnon's character, so it has at least that going for it. Yeah the only thing I've seen that's been positive pretty much across-the-board barring the scumbags who made this into a war in the first place has been the praise for McKinnon's work in the film.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
site posted:Kids know the Ghostbusters are cool af Early 2018.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
I hope they completely change the ladies for the cartoon but leave their names the same.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:I''ve literally never seen a movie whose criticism or discussion of its quality was so thoroughly poisoned before release as Ghostbusters 2016. On both sides, too, the manchildren who threw a temper tantrum that a movie dared have girls in it and I'm getting stuff like people I follow on twitter unironically saying that if you hate it you must be a man because all women they know love it. It's crazy, the insane level of tribalism that has developed around the film and people throwing around Rotten Tomatoes and Metcritic scores both for and against and how basically all reviews are worthless in this case since they're all written and framed in the context of the crazy war over it. Even the BvS stuff, which was a fiasco, was basically just a very loud minority insisting on a conspiracy that somehow had swallowed everyone else into thinking a good movie was bad, but this Ghostbusters poo poo...I don't even know if the movie's good or not, I literally can't tell amidst all the noise and whining and smug superiority. Thanks, Obama.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:My favorite part of the story is that almost all the angst that made the Marvel characters stand out from their 2-dimensional DC counterparts in the early days is due to the absence of Sentry from the world. It's like, oh, if Superman was in Marvel, Peter Parker's luck wouldn't have been quite so lovely, the Hulk wouldn't have been quite so feared, etc. I thought that was an interesting bit of meta-text. Yeah that was pretty neat, and because of that I think The Nail is an excellent companion piece. If adding Superman to the Marvel universe makes everything nicer and more stable, then removing him from the DC universe...
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
Travis343 posted:I hope they completely change the ladies for the cartoon but leave their names the same. It'd be inequality if they didn't, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Maybe they shouldn't hire a guy who seems to want the movie to fail to cut the trailers next time. No poo poo. I loved the movie and left angry that the trailers made it seem to be a note for note rehash of the original. Goddamn, I loved the new Ghostbusters, I'm going to see it again next week with friends.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:38 |
|
|
Ghostbusters is a solid B. Great performances by McKinnon, Jones, and Hemsworth bogged down by bad directing, maybe the worst editing I've ever seen in a major film release (they use the SAME FOOTAGE for taking the packs out of the car, the obvious cut dance sequence), and a really do-nothing script (literally no one gets a character arc, there's no heart in this movie, and that third arc... man...). McKinnon, Jones, and Hemsworth being funny make it at the very least enjoyable to watch, but it's not, by definition, a good film. Oh, and also Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy are there. I'm not sure who they were playing. It seems like they just wandered on set and started doing things and the director said "YES! THAT!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 17:23
|
|
