|
Neurolimal posted:It gives me the same unease as when the new Star Trek films made Starfleet more militaristic Yeah, there sure were no military elements in The Wrath of Khan or The Undiscovered Country.
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
I just saw this film. Honestly I really love the breezy lighthearted tone of the film, it's nowhere near as good as the original, but it was heartily entertaining with solid chuckling all the way through the film. it's exactly the kind of 'creepy but not scary' goofy ghosts and the chris hemsworth's character was a lot funnier than I was expecting him to be. overall a solid film, nothing super spectacular but it's nice and definitely worth seeing for a nice time. Also, Holtzman is a really cool character. I also liked Patty (leslie) quite a bit, she easily had some of the funniest lines in the film. It has major faults though, there's too much explanatory talking, and the buildup to the final battle wasn't that great. the final boss was cool, but the wierdo who initiates all the bad stuff is nowhere near as interesting as the '84 wierdo. also, there's a lot of pacing issues and 'things happening' that kind of lessens the impact. The cameos were nice though. 7/10 Al-Saqr fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Jul 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I mean, it really really doesn't. I think you may have just seen the movie when you were young and stuff like that was scary inherently. Ghostbusters was a comedy movie and the ghosts were all very goofy looking with lots of cartoon sound effects and music. For god's sake the last boss ghost was a big marshmallow in a sailor suit. It was a very silly movie. It's more than that. Just look at how tight and claustrophobic the framing is in at the start of that library clip. It's about building tension and immediately diffusing it with goofy comedy. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_hNgGVDfNs. Also featuring my favorite gag from the film: Egon poking the old man to check if he's a ghost. If Feig were in charge of that shot he'd have McCarthy or someone else yelling "SORRY I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT BE A GHOST".
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Timby posted:Yeah, there sure were no military elements in The Wrath of Khan or The Undiscovered Country. There's a lot more leeway in those films, yeah. But in the series under Gene Roddenberry's vision we were supposed to be beyond the idea of having active milita's and having the top-of-the-line form of education be warfare and that sort of thing. I admit that it's kind of unfair to compare Abram's films to the series' instead of other films, but they're the first looks into this new universe so I consider it somewhat justified. Like I said in the post, this isn't a 100% bad thing because Abrams recognizes the difference and utilizes it. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Jul 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
I'm guessing there's no scene in the new film like Ray and Winston seriously talking about religion in the car?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Super Ninja Fish posted:I'm guessing there's no scene in the new film like Ray and Winston seriously talking about religion in the car? To my knowledge, no one comments on Jesus' style.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Super Ninja Fish posted:I'm guessing there's no scene in the new film like Ray and Winston seriously talking about religion in the car? Kristen Wiig's character telling the others about the ghost that haunted her when she was a kid is probably the scene that comes closest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:There's a lot more leeway in those films, yeah. But in the series under Gene Roddenberry's vision quote:You wanna know what my vision is? Dollar signs, money! I didn't build this ship to usher in a new era for humanity. You think I wanna see the stars? I don't even like to fly! I take trains! I built this ship so I could retire to some tropical island ... filled with ... naked women. That was Gene Roddenberry's vision.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I mean, it really really doesn't. I think you may have just seen the movie when you were young and stuff like that was scary inherently. Ghostbusters was a comedy movie and the ghosts were all very goofy looking with lots of cartoon sound effects and music. For god's sake the last boss ghost was a big marshmallow in a sailor suit. It was a very silly movie. Nobody is saying Ghostbuster isn't a comedy movie. What they are saying (or what I think they're saying, anyway) is that movie was directed more like a horror movie, and it plays itself mostly straight. Most of the comedy comes form how inherently funny the situations these characters get themselves into are, or the banter between the leads. It's a pretty dry movie other than slimer and the ghost blowjob. Maybe the music and poo poo sounds goofy to you because you don't watch a lot of 80s horror? As for the sound effects and poo poo, I can't think of anything 'goofy' about those w/r/t the ghosts either, other than slimer. The proton packs aren't really goofy sounding either, and even if they were those things are only turned on for a total of like 2minutes in the whole film. I mean, even just the brief scene where Dana finds Zuul in the fridge. That isn't played as comedy moment or whatever. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFZPhf5p-BU I say this as someone who saw the movies maybe once? when I was a little girl and have barely any memory of them from childhood. All of my love for Ghostbusters came in my adulthood. The first movie is incredibly tightly shot and edited imo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
It occurs to me that briefly, Slimer had the whole ecto-containment unit to himself for awhile. I wonder if he had a lot of ground rules in place once it started filling up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Just saw it this past week and highly enjoyed it, and I'm a die hard fan of the original since childhood. It definitely didn't ruin my childhood because (a) it was really fun, and (b) that's not how time works. It's not even close to the original in terms of tight writing and memorable lines, but I'd say it surpasses Ghostbusters 2 and it was a ton of fun throughout. I think my only gripe was that Chris Hemsworth was a little bit too comically stupid. Otherwise, the performances were great and I loved all the cameos. Too bad Rick Moranis has been retired for years, I would've loved a brief line or even a portrait on a wall or something like they did with the bust of Harold Ramis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Pre-death Slimer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
sticklefifer posted:Too bad Rick Moranis has been retired for years, I would've loved a brief line or even a portrait on a wall or something like they did with the bust of Harold Ramis. They did invite him back, but Moranis isn't a fan of remakes or reboots and had no real desire to be part of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Timby posted:They did invite him back, but Moranis isn't a fan of remakes or reboots and had no real desire to be part of it. Rick moranis has not been an actor since 1997 after his wife died of terrible cancer. He's a side character in brother bear because his kids asked him to be in a disney movie and beyond that he's had like one or two lines in a couple animated shorts his friends made. He has quit acting pretty much as much as any living actor has ever quit acting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Rick moranis has not been an actor since 1997 after his wife died of terrible cancer. He's a side character in brother bear because his kids asked him to be in a disney movie and beyond that he's had like one or two lines in a couple animated shorts his friends made. He has quit acting pretty much as much as any living actor has ever quit acting. My understanding is that now that his kids are grown up and he doesn't have to raise them, he's wanting to be more active in acting, but if you go away for any length of time casting people basically just assume you're dead or retired.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
sticklefifer posted:Just saw it this past week and highly enjoyed it, and I'm a die hard fan of the original since childhood. It definitely didn't ruin my childhood because (a) it was really fun, and (b) that's not how time works. That's true. I'm always trying to explain to the haters how it works. Let me use this example: Imagine four balls on the edge of a cliff. Say a direct copy of the ball nearest the cliff is sent to the back of the line of balls and takes the place of the first ball. The formerly first ball becomes the second, the second becomes the third, and the fourth falls off the cliff. Time works the same way. Try explaining that to the troglodyte ghostbros, though. It's like talking to a (befedora'd and particularly entitled) brick wall.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
Most of the responses and even professional reviews try to compare this directly to the original- like, regretting that Holtzmann isn't more like Venkman instead of being her own thing. I learned about formalism in my first year of college but apparently it's not widely taught.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Most of the responses and even professional reviews try to compare this directly to the original- like, regretting that Holtzmann isn't more like Venkman instead of being her own thing. I mean on the one hand Yeah, it's its own thing. On the other hand, it follows the very same story beat for beat with similar characters, so of course comparisons are valid and expected. That's why it's so interesting to compare how filmmaking and humour has changed in the last 30 years. Edit: drat I'd love to see a Ghostbusters movie by John Carpenter
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 04:42
|
|
|
dog days are over posted:You try saying no to those salty parabolas. In the book her response is something like, "You know how it is, 'once you pop...'!" I'm not sure which joke is worse. If I recall correctly at some point a Pringle dangles from her mouth while her jaw is dropped in fear. I think they were trying to replace the cigarette smoking in GB84 with Pringle eating in GB2016.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
Alan_Shore posted:That's why it's so interesting to compare how filmmaking and humour has changed in the last 30 years. Definitely. I just wish Sony wasn't in cinematic freefall right now, but I feel like it skews the comparison.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
Alan_Shore posted:I mean on the one hand Yeah, it's its own thing. On the other hand, it follows the very same story beat for beat with similar characters, so of course comparisons are valid and expected. Yeah, if anything I think the film would've been a lot stronger if they'd been more confident in doing their own thing. They really overdid it with the callbacks IMO.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 08:02
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Yeah, if anything I think the film would've been a lot stronger if they'd been more confident in doing their own thing. They really overdid it with the callbacks IMO. I figure that's what a sequel will be for. In this one, based on all the hype surrounding it they kind of had to say "Look, the old crop endorses it, see? Now we can move forward."
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:They really overdid it with the callbacks IMO. Definitely. It got really annoying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 09:38
|
|
|
dog days are over posted:Definitely. It got really annoying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 11:12
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Most of the responses and even professional reviews try to compare this directly to the original- like, regretting that Holtzmann isn't more like Venkman instead of being her own thing. Holtzmann was super loving funny in this film, probably one of the best things about it. TBH I went in expecting horrible things because of that youtube video by the guy who was really angry about the dick shot, but it turns out that dude was mentally ill.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:which tweets did you find funnier, the ones that compared her to Harambe the gorilla or the ones where people just went for it and used racial slurs? Maybe it was the creepazoid who sent her a semen drenched picture of her own face, hilarious All of the above.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
I'm torn. I think the cast had great chemistry and I think a lot of the visual design was fantastic -- I love the look of the new equipment. It still somehow felt like the highest-budgeted SNL skit ever, with no serious elements, completely ridiculous characters, winking nods crammed in everywhere, and jokes flung around just hoping some of them would land.. A lot of them DID land: I thought the movie was really funny, but it looked and felt like a Ghostbusters parody instead of an actual licensed Ghostbusters movie. I guess I just like my comedies played a bit straighter. I feel like the cast brought a lot to the film, but could have done so much more if everyone and everything wasn't so campy all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
I liked it! It was fun times. The climactic action sequence didn't really do it for me though-- I felt like I didn't understand why they weren't shooting at the big ghost, since shooting it seemed to hurt it. I mean I get that they wanted to close the portal, but I felt like it wasn't communicated very well. Kevin is perfect but Holtzmann is perfecter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
10 minutes in, and the first joke in the movie is a pussy fart gag. The whole movie had a strange tone: the women vs men misandry (every male in the movie is a negative character) pulled it down and the lack of any romantic subplot or relationship imperative made it feel like a live action cartoon.Alan_Shore posted:I mean on the one hand Yeah, it's its own thing. On the other hand, it follows the very same story beat for beat with similar characters, so of course comparisons are valid and expected. I'd like to see an extended review or compare/contrast of Ghostbusters, Evolution, Pixels, and Ghostbusters 2016. They all tell the same story, but only the original holds up. tetrapyloctomy posted:I'm torn. I think the cast had great chemistry and I think a lot of the visual design was fantastic -- I love the look of the new equipment. It still somehow felt like the highest-budgeted SNL skit ever, with no serious elements, completely ridiculous characters, winking nods crammed in everywhere, and jokes flung around just hoping some of them would land.. A lot of them DID land: I thought the movie was really funny, but it looked and felt like a Ghostbusters parody instead of an actual licensed Ghostbusters movie. I guess I just like my comedies played a bit straighter. I feel like the cast brought a lot to the film, but could have done so much more if everyone and everything wasn't so campy all the time. Kristen Wiig's character really stood out as one that bounced around like a ball in a pinball game. Sometimes serious, sometimes 3 Stooges level goofy slapstick and completely inconsistent from scene to scene. And inserting Dan Akroyd in for one scene felt a lot like Judd Hirsch showing up as a taxi driver in Sharknado 2. While it worked with the over-the-top wackiness of that movie in this one it just felt wrong, and was a completely wasted opportunity. Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Jul 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
This movie was really cool and good but I would have liked to see more dancing Chris Hemsworth. You know, for science.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
The first joke in the movie is the Tour Guide being a huge racist. Or saying racist things. I can't remember honestly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
endolithic posted:This movie was really cool and good but I would have liked to see more dancing Chris Hemsworth. You know, for science. Has anyone put together a list of all the callbacks to other movies? I've seen the Exorcist and Jaws cited and for me, Kevin filled the same role as Ulla in the orginal The Producers. Both barely spoke English, got the job for being stereotypically hot and dumb, danced in the movie...but at least she knew how to pick up a phone that was ringing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WcXPRQZK7E CelticPredator posted:The first joke in the movie is the Tour Guide being a huge racist. Or saying racist things. I can't remember honestly. Yeah I don't remember laughing at that either. Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 15:41 on Jul 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:The first joke in the movie is the Tour Guide being a huge racist. Or saying racist things. I can't remember honestly. The anti-Irish fence joke. I thought it was funny but in a very 30 Rock/Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt kind of a way. Very Tina Fey. Again, I was torn; I found a lot of the gags and jokes funny, but lacking balance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:The first joke in the movie is the Tour Guide being a huge racist. Or saying racist things. I can't remember honestly. He was describing the history of the house which was owned by comically racist past people (anti-Irish fence, PT Barnum deciding to enslave elephants, etc)
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
My point was the queef joke is fairly far into the movie in terms of lowbrow jokes
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Well this was a nice surprise. Thought it looked just alright but actually ended up really enjoying it. Just great all round and I think it did a good job of callbacks without being too obnoxious. I am pretty forgiving of films not being great though so probably I tend to rate them a little high. Definitely had a different feel from the original though Holtzman was the best. And then Kevin. That loving bit with the sandwich at the end was brilliant. Also the bad guy gets shot in the dick and that is always appreciated in a film.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:10 minutes in, and the first joke in the movie is a pussy fart gag. The whole movie had a strange tone: the women vs men misandry (every male in the movie is a negative character) pulled it down and the lack of any romantic subplot or relationship imperative made it feel like a live action cartoon. Apart from the first sentence being objectively wrong, haha you think misandry is a thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Apart from the first sentence being objectively wrong, haha you think misandry is a thing. I don't consider it like, a common occurrence or subconscious one like Misogyny, but it's definitely been a popular extreme online. It's overall harmless but it gets pretty eyeroll-ish at times. I'm not sure if I'd call it misandry, but the film definitely has a strange "what if the roles were reversed and men were considered incompetent and stupid??" tone to it which, like RLM said, is strange to apply to Ghostbusters of all franchises (which featured a competent no-bullshit secretary and Sigourney Weaver, progressive action star). Like Jack Packard said "it would be like if someone hit you and went 'gently caress You!' so you then hit someone else and go 'gently caress You!' " Maybe Feig would have been better off making a gender-swapped film adaptation of Leisure Suit Larry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Weaver was not doing the action star bit in either Ghostbusters movie. She gave a good performance but Dana is a fairly passive character. It didn't seem like Kevin being a ditz was a slap at the original or anything. It's just that Chris Hemsworth plays dumb really well. I just didn't detect any kind of meanness or "anti-male" component to it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Apart from the first sentence being objectively wrong, quote:haha you think misandry is a thing. Charles Dance is overbearing and insulting to Wiig's character. Ed Begley and Zach Woods play bumbling frightened goofs. Kevin is a moron who was hired for his looks only. When there's a loud noise he covers his eyes. And somehow he doesn't even know how to answer a telephone. The main villain is a creepy weirdo loner. The mayor is a condescending rear end in a top hat. The food delivery guy is a moron. (Why she keeps ordering from the same place that she doesn't like, I don't understand). The 2 male Homeland Security agents are completely useless. Bill Murray as a goofy skeptic looks like he would rather be anywhere else and he goads one of the GBs into releasing a ghost. And to finish off the biggest ghost they have to 'loosen his grip' by blasting him in the genitals. Yes, the 4 leads in this reboot shoot the avatar of the logo from the original movie in the nuts. Was that too subtle?! What I don't understand is how anyone can watch this movie and not see it as a vehicle for man-hating. I mean there isn't even one typical romantic or relationship subplot that one would expect (eg between Erin and Kevin), because that would have taken some of the sting out of the anti-male subtext of this story. Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Jul 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 19:50
|
|