|
LOL Ghostbusters Remake Now Officially Not a Flop quote:This past weekend the controversial reboot of Ghostbusters finally brought in more money than it cost to make, topping $158 million in total worldwide box office receipts, putting to rest any notions that it would be a flop by not making back its $144 million budget. quote:When all is said and done at the box office Ghostbusters will maybe not have gotten back every single buck spent making it or selling it in ticket sales, but it will have successfully breathed life into an old property that is making money on everything from fruit juice to children’s books to Halloween cost-OMG THAT IS ADORABLE! It re-affirmed Melissa McCarthy and Paul Fieg as major box office draws, launched Kate McKinnon as everyone’s new favorite comedic actress, and even taking into the mantrum that happens in online movie user ratings, most people enjoyed the film. In short, by every reasonable definition of success, Ghostbusters is one. Period. The end. I've been the guy going "Eh, it might make its money back, just wait and see how it goes" all along but even I think this article is dumb. This bit was particularly dumb: quote:Sony is interested in Ghostbusters as a brand, much the way Disney was interested in Star Wars as a brand when they bought the rights for $4 billion from George Lucas even though The Force Awakens brought in only half that in ticket sales. Nobody with any sense would call The Force Awakens a failure, knowing that renewing the film series was basically a license to print money in the form of spin-off media, toys and more. Yeahhhhh GB16 isn't comparable to TFA.
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 11:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
Oh no, it only brought in TWO BILLION DOLLLARS Jesus CHRIST what a dumb thing to write. Still, I agree with its premise: that Sony has relaunched Ghostbusters, the film isn't a flop will be profitable eventually, and the future is bright for the franchise. Toys, cartoons, future sequels and other teams. The film could have been much better, and it's really exposed Feig's limitations as a director, but it also could have been waaay worse, and I had fun with it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 11:59
|
|
|
I usually enjoy SMG's posting so it's a bit sad to see him go off the rails on this ridiculous tirade just for the sake of being contrary.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 12:07
|
|
|
Retarded_Clown_ posted:Honestly? Good. I actually applaud Sony for trying to promote social change any way they can, even if they have to bend the rules a bit or take less-than-honorable roads to do so. Whatever works. Like I always say: think of the children. Specifically, young girls who are interested in STEM field. If this film causes the Alberta Einsteins and Carla Sagans of the world to be inspired to work at their microscopes and bunsen burners just a bit longer into the night, then I'm all for it. Whatever measures are taken by the studio. The means justify the ends IMHO. Anyway...were there any original, memorable lines in this movie? What were some phrases or conversations that can be considered classic and quotable?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:20
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:Anyway...were there any original, memorable lines in this movie? What were some phrases or conversations that can be considered classic and quotable? I didn't like the movie, so I might have a bias, but the dialog seemed especially anti-quotable due to off the cuff nature.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
It's true, this film has no quip.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:39
|
|
|
WELL THAT'S WHAT I HEARD
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:39
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:WELL THAT'S WHAT I HEARD Apropos, I don't think that line is ADR.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
Jonas Albrecht posted:I didn't like the movie, so I might have a bias, but the dialog seemed especially anti-quotable due to off the cuff nature. Nonsense, here's a list of all the amazing, most quotable lines: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1289401/trivia?tab=qt&ref_=tt_trv_qu/ Such as Erin Gilbert: What year is it? Jillian Holtzmann: It's 2040. Our president is a plant! and Patty Tolan: [as a ghost leaves on the subway] I guess he's going to Queens - he's going to be the third scariest thing on that train.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
Jillian Holtzmann: [Holstering her proton thrower] Forgot about my new toys. Jillian Holtzmann: [Twin pistol-sized throwers emerge from her pack. She licks one] Let's go.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:Yes nothing says Science Technology Engineering and Math more than hiring a receptionist because he's hot and stupid and then drooling over him. I don't think you can really label something "classic" until people are still obsessing over it decades later, like Ghostbusters 1984. There were some bits that I like. I liked the bit where Wiig was flipping out after getting barfed on about how "GHOSTS ARE REAL! GHOSTS ARE REAL!" and it just segued directly into the youtube video of her doing that, which is now getting her fired from the university. I liked when nobody could come up with a reason life is worth living, so they were just half-heartedly tossing out, "Soup? Salad's good, too." Hemsworth stole the show in a lot of cases, which is kind of ironic. Kevin is meant to be a vapid idiot, but Hemsworth's delivery of the whole thing is so straight-faced and... genuine, I think? Like, you can tell that Kevin has no idea how ridiculous he is, and he leans into it super hard. He thinks he did a great job designing logos that are awful, he has shirtless headshots of himself with a saxophone and he wants to know which one looks more like a doctor, he says things like, "You know, an aquarium is just a submarine for fish," he hates coffee but he keeps trying to drink it by accident because it's in front of him. I think it's also important to note that it was only Wiig's Gilbert who wanted to hire Kevin for his looks in the end. She was the one with the incredibly awkward crush, and you could tell that everybody else thought the whole thing was somewhere between kinda cute and incredibly sad. I was cracking up the first time Kevin spat his coffee back into the cup, and Gilbert instantly volunteered to drink it. I think you're right that GB2016 isn't as quotable as the original. Its jokes aren't really stand-alone monologues or quotes like a lot of the old stuff. They depend on a visual gag in the same scene, or are kind of physical comedy like when McKinnon is dancing around with blowtorches. You do occasionally get some of the old bits of dry humor in quips like, "We're all scientists here. And Patty." Anyway, as for encouraging women to go into STEM, I think it's not a huge stretch? The basic core of the ghostbusters narrative is using fringe science to battle the supernatural. I think that GB2016 lingered a lot on the gear, and on the iterative nature of inventing something. I think that, even though the ghostbusters are kind of bad at "being scientists," they still sell the idea that you can apply science and technology to achieve a personal dream. And I do think that it's important to factor in representation there. A lot of female scientists in fiction fill gendertypical roles like "laboratory mom", like they just took the female supporting character template and slapped a labcoat on it. Television is pretty notorious for this, I think, moreso than cinema. I think it's good to be able to move away from that. deadly_pudding fucked around with this message at 13:51 on Aug 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:49
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:It's true, this film has no quip. That's a shame, I was hoping they were on point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
I didn't like the film at all but this is the line/joke I remember liking the most and one I feel I would quote in future: Patty Tolan: [seeing a room filled with mannequins] Okay, room full of nightmares.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
The most of the weapons/inventive stuff on GB2106 felt more like a Q/007 weapons loadout scene. Along those lines, I sort of thought GB2016 felt sort of more like an Austin Powers comedy, like it was almost just a 4th-wall breaking comment from someone to cross that line. Because like Austin Powers, the entire film sort of exists in a universe where the quirk and comedy of everything is sort of elevated beyond normal to an almost cartoonish proportion. An honest question here, though: Is there anything in the film that is actually 'scarier than the original', like people were saying when the movie was first coming out? Which, granted, the original was not a 'nightmare maker' in terms of horror, but this film played it so safe with the horror aspect as to be a bit bland in that regard. But I sort of get it, and I can see one reason why this movie might have some legs for the next month at the box office. It's a relatively inoffensive action comedy you can drop all the kids off at while you do something else or see something else. You dont' have to worry about nightmares, you don't have to worry about excessive bad language, very scary monsters, most of the few adult elements are probably going to fly over the heads of young kids, and it's probably very asexual compared to GB1 (No BJ Ghosts, no Bubbled-covered Gozer, no horny Dana-Zuul, etc.) It'll be an easy film to throw on the ol' DVD player that the kids can watch on loop and you don't have to worry about the content all that much. Of course, maybe I'm just numb to that by this time in my life and the film is actually scary as hell and I don't get it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Annoying rear end remake of the theme song was by far the most objectionable thing in the movie. It's far from perfect but it made me laugh a lot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
My Domo Slimer came in the mail. I love it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
Okay, checking Box Office Mojo, the movie's now dipping into the $1-3 million intake, and that's thanks to Star Trek and Jason Bourne. By the time it's out of theaters and in stores, I'd have completely forgot it existed. Actually I went out to the country 3 days ago and it was out of my mind before someone brought it back up in conversation. That's how much it's impacted on me...I've been busy thinking about how good Suicide Squad might turn out. So this was a thing...I guess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
Junior Jr. posted:Okay, checking Box Office Mojo, the movie's now dipping into the $1-3 million intake, and that's thanks to Star Trek and Jason Bourne. By the time it's out of theaters and in stores, I'd have completely forgot it existed. Actually I went out to the country 3 days ago and it was out of my mind before someone brought it back up in conversation. That's how much it's impacted on me...I've been busy thinking about how good Suicide Squad might turn out. Well Suicide Squad is getting much much MUCH worse reviews than Ghostbusters, so... I'm so sorry
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
Suicide Squad will be trash.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
Suicide Squad is gonna be like the opposite of Ghostbusters, a complete turd of a film that had actually a pretty good trailer. The Will Smith interview about how gross Jared Leto is was pretty funny, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Unfortunately, but unsurprisingly, Suicide Squad was/is pretty bad. Pretty mild spoiler on character involvement/importance. I hope you weren't expecting all that much Joker or Harley after virtually every single media bit was about them!
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
I mean Suicide Squad might impact you in the way that an awful, lovely film can make legitimately angry and question everything?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:Unfortunately, but unsurprisingly, Suicide Squad was/is pretty bad. I actually consider this mostly good news because the promotions way overdid JOKER JOKER JOKER THE STUDIO LOGOS ARE LAUGHING AND CRAZY HAHAHA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
It was just fun to have a movie where women are pals and slobby and don't show their tits and asses all the time and have action scenes and wear flats
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:09
|
|
dog days are over posted:It was just fun to have a movie where women are pals and slobby and don't show their tits and asses all the time and have action scenes and wear flats This was my girlfriend's take on it. There are so many bad comedies with guys being slubby, gross, etc, why can't there be some with women?
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
dog days are over posted:It was just fun to have a movie where women are pals and slobby and don't show their tits and asses all the time and have action scenes and wear flats But they can imply suggestive lesbian themes between two characters and lick pistols like it's not something phallic, so that makes it a-ok! Armyman25 posted:This was my girlfriend's take on it. There are so many bad comedies with guys being slubby, gross, etc, why can't there be some with women? Same, except they don't get to share the pain like guys do because apparently they make over $100 million, so that must be more diverse right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Junior Jr. posted:But they can imply suggestive lesbian themes between two characters and lick pistols like it's not something phallic, so that makes it a-ok! Some women are gay and they really enjoyed this, Holtzmann is their darling at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
dog days are over posted:It was just fun to have a movie where women are pals and slobby and don't show their tits and asses all the time and have action scenes and wear flats I don't think anyone here has any problems with that; if you like the film, dont let CineD drama make you feel bad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Junior Jr. posted:But they can imply suggestive lesbian themes between two characters uhh, what are you implying here? That someone can't be a lesbian without it being suggestive or purposely titillating (on the same level as T&A)? This is dangerously close to real and harmful stereotypes about homosexuality so I am curious what you are getting at here exactly
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:34
|
|
Junior Jr. posted:But they can imply suggestive lesbian themes between two characters and lick pistols like it's not something phallic, so that makes it a-ok! Are you getting angry over this movie?
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:uhh, what are you implying here? That someone can't be a lesbian without it being suggestive or purposely titillating (on the same level as T&A)? This is dangerously close to real and harmful stereotypes about homosexuality so I am curious what you are getting at here exactly I believe his hangup is more with-regards-to the idea that they are unsexualized schlubs. I dont have a problem with Holtzmann (in fact, separated from the acting, I think she's the best new idea they had for this movie), but I can see how someone interested in schlubs would take issue with her. It's like if Zeddmore had instead been David Bowie or Klaus Nomi (if he had lived long enough to do so). I will agree that it strays dangerously close to problematic views, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It's like if Zeddmore had instead been David Bowie or Klaus Nomi (if he had lived long enough to do so). Goddammit, now I really wanna see the Bowie+Nomi ghost hunting movie that will never be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I believe his hangup is more with-regards-to the idea that they are unsexualized schlubs. McKinnon seems like a decent actress but her character was too over-the-top. I'm cool with Doc Brown-like characters and having some flair in their personality, but holy poo poo they had to tone it down. I get that this movie was a giant live-action cartoon, but it really could do with a reality check.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Retarded_Clown_ posted:Honestly? Good. I actually applaud Sony for trying to promote social change any way they can, even if they have to bend the rules a bit or take less-than-honorable roads to do so. Whatever works. Like I always say: think of the children. Specifcialy, young girls who are interested in STEM field. If this film causes the Alberta Einsteins and Carla Sagans of the world to be inspired to work at their microscopes and bundsen burners just a bit longer into the night, then I'm all for it. Whatever measures are taken by the studio. The means justify the ends IMHO. Source your quotes, please.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
I feel like, as a lesbian, I need to speak up on finding Holtzmann incredibly unappealing. If only because her character has reached sense8 levels of 'if you're gay you have to like it' with several people I've talked to. I like McKinnon. Not the least bit attracted to her, though, and less so in this movie. Her performance was awful to me as well, which is a shame because I usually find her hilarious. She made a not so good movie into an annoyingly bad movie, for me. Oh well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
bloodysabbath posted:Source your quotes, please. It's absolutely amazing how many CineD posters fail to appreciate a gimmick poster, particularly when y'all have SMG. E: VVV Exactly this. I was laughing so hard when he got to the car accident part. WampaLord fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Aug 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
The Retarded Clown GB16 review is the funniest Ghosbusters thing since the original Ghostbusters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
It was a goddamn masterpiece.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:The Retarded Clown GB16 review is the funniest Ghosbusters thing since the original Ghostbusters. needed more queef jokes 4/10
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
For as 'here are the original GBs!" that the cameos in the film were, and about how much of the film they made up, they should have just given them bigger roles. Murray as the mayor or concert call guy. Sigourney Weaver as the debunker or mayor or mayor's aide. Hudson could have been one of the Feds. Aykroyd's cameo was okay. Get rid of the toast at the end and have Holtzman tipping her glass to a photo a younger version of herself with her mentor or father: Ramis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 22:08
|
|