|
It was great just for Plinkett screaming "gently caress YOU, FATSO!" at the wonton joke.RedSpider posted:Ghostbusters was a lovely movie, and mocking it never gets old. There are lovely movies that are over a quarter of a century old, and people still mock and dissect them. There's no good reason to exempt this one from any of that. King Vidiot posted:Yeah it's cause Paul Feig is a loving clown! I feel that much of Paul Feig's success came from people feeling sorry for him. Unrelated to anything, he also looks like basset hound in a suit and glasses.
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 09:10 |
|
|
Hey gurl, let's go watch movies in my creepy basement Don't mess with my bin, though! My plastic bin!
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
This vid is just making me want to watch the original again and I watch it fairly frequently already
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:08
|
|
|
Wait I only watched like ten minutes of Ghostbusters (2016) before giving up, does the movie actually do this thing where it pops out of the letterbox sometimes? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
It's amazing how terrible this movie is whenever they just show the movie, that it almost makes the review unwatchable. Also it scrambled my brain while writing this post.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
New Concept Hole posted:It's amazing how terrible this movie is whenever they just show the movie, that it almost makes the review unwatchable. Also it scrambled my brain while writing this post. The absolute nonstop talking is insane. Just let a moment breathe. The Plinkett edits with just the score playing made it look like a good movie I'd want to watch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
Honestly that was kind of masterful. An hour of criticism without once mentioning the gender swap and the social justice media frenzy that surrounded the film. It really was a take down of Sony studios more so than anything. The Plinkett humor was minimal and mature. Grade A performances from Rich and Jack. This thing justifies its existence quite nicely imo.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:23
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:Ripping on Bill Murray for not wanting to rehash a comedy again isn't really cool. There was no need for another GB after the first. Be happy he even made the second one. Complaining about no third film is just stupid. He was more mad about Bill Murray not doing a GB3 when Harold Ramis was still alive. Sounds like he was contractually obligated to do this one anyway. A GB3 with the original cast at least would have had a chance to be funny, bring back the old chemistry and all that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Someone buy her an account Yug already has an account?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Goo-busted myself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
I don't know how Sony stays in film business. They make some money back by whoring out their films as feature length product ads, but how much of that actually covers the loss when their movies flop?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:I don't know how Sony stays in film business. They make some money back by whoring out their films as feature length product ads, but how much of that actually covers the loss when their movies flop? Sony is most likely losing the 007 franchise as well. They'd probably be dead in the water if it weren't for Disney saving the day with the Spider-man deal. edit: That video was a savage take down of Paul Feig. All the problems with that movie really do fall on him. The cast is fine. They're talented. They did what he wanted, which was him letting them do what they wanted. It clearly didn't work. Jose Oquendo fucked around with this message at 03:48 on Aug 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
The no cokes during the papa johns part made me literally exclaim oh my goddd. gently caress capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
I like when Plinkett craps on complete crap movies that are head-to-toe terrible. See: Star Wars Prequels, TNG Movies. I guess this is more in-league with his reviews on Titanic or Avatar, where he acknoledges what the movie does right, then makes a complex argument that rounds out to a big commentary on the industry. (e.g. Titanic shot for the middle and that's what sells; Avatar mastered market research, 3D, and James Cameron Magic to trick people into liking the dumbest story possible) This one is just kinda... "Paul Feig's a hack". Paul Feig's method of ruining a movie doesn't really reverberate throughout modern movies like some of the other examples he's done. Whatever though it's fine, I loved it; but yeah, let's do those Matrix sequels or something. Also, I'm really sad that they don't have access to "grandma's house" anymore to film these.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
Sockser posted:Wait I only watched like ten minutes of Ghostbusters (2016) before giving up, havent seen the movie but I just assumed that stuff was in 3d
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
someone in this thread said paul feig is really just a scott thompson kids in the hall character who escaped film and achieved sentience somehow and i believe it
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
hes like a parody of directors
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Captain Lavender posted:complete crap movies that are head-to-toe terrible This is a completely accurate description of ghostbusters 2016
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
Maybe, I never saw it. I just remember a lot of, "Eh, it was fine" reactions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
Okay i'm gonna be blunt, that review felt really uninspired and almost like they made it as a business decision after the reaction to the Transformers video. I liked it well enough, but I can't imagine ever rewatching it. SpiderHyphenMan fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Aug 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
Mike said Freaks and Geeks was bad, gently caress him IMO
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
SpiderHyphenMan posted:Okay i'm gonna be blunt, that review felt really uninspired and almost like they made it as a business decision after the reaction to the Transformers video. It wasn't very funny. And the educational aspect was minimal. The Phantom Menace review was so great because it was funny all the way through and was a great mini intro to film course.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:16
|
|
|
I thought they would go into Amy Pascal more. Showing how she is pure pure death to any film she sees or touches.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
violent sex idiot posted:someone in this thread said paul feig is really just a scott thompson kids in the hall character who escaped film and achieved sentience somehow and i believe it How well known is Kids in the Hall outside of Canada?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:How well known is Kids in the Hall outside of Canada? It got played on Comedy Central all the time when I was growing up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
Probably pretty well with American people who were between 12-24 in the early 90s, and had cable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:30
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:How well known is Kids in the Hall outside of Canada? It was aired in the UK and Ireland back then. So 'well known' like cultish.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
Also if you're into sketch comedy in general you've almost certainly heard of them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
I'm crushing your face
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
Dipping Areas
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
I always thought I knew Feig from somewhere but I didn't, but he's absolutely a Scott Thompson character that's leapt into reality. There's a physical resemblance and he acts and talks exactly how I'd imagine Scott Thompson would play the friendly and nice but absolutely talentless director in some kids in the hall sketch about a disaster of a movie but gosh isn't the director nice? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQLKC3UVrvc Here's more current older Scott Thompson dressed up and boy there's a resemblance both in speech and mannerisms. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 04:45 on Aug 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:I'm crushing your face jesus christ
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
I cannot believe how long that conversation about the soiling went. I thought of watching ghostbusters 2016 before watching this but I think I made the right call here
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
The opening PT Barnum joke really was a "we got two hours of this poo poo left" moment
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Hemingway To Go! posted:I cannot believe how long that conversation about the soiling went. That really is the most glaring problem in the movie. Ed Begley Jr telling everyone that guy poo poo himself is funny. Saying it 20 times in 20 different ways? Not funny.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
They filmed five hours of improv for the interview with Hemsworth? How long was this actual scene in the movie? It's almost reaching Adam Sandler levels of "pay me money to have fun and I'll give you a dump at the end"
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
Judd Apatow-style "riff on everything" comedy works really well when the story behind the comedy is about relationships between people. Love, friendship, sex, etc. It doesn't work well when you have some clearly defined external antagonist, and it makes no tonal sense when you're trying to build up some "fate of the world" thread and telling 5 minutes of improv jokes at the same time. I don't normally like reviews that are just "Why wasn't [new thing] like [old thing]?", but he got that part of it right. Having everyone just bounce puns off when none of your characters even seem to like each other just doesn't make a lot of sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
"I had to allow my cast to take control of the movie" is the new "IT'S SO DENSE" or some other lucasism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:It wasn't very funny. And the educational aspect was minimal. The Phantom Menace review was so great because it was funny all the way through and was a great mini intro to film course. lol so much salt
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 09:10 |
|
|
You can absolutely improv a science fiction or fantasy thing, I've seen it done hilariously. Guess what, they gave scenes time to breathe and aren't talking non-stop with every line being a desperate demand for attention. But there's a big difference in expectations between going to see a live improv group and what should be a big budget polished blockbuster. Curb your Enthusiasm was heavily heavily improvised but the tone and humour of the show works well for that. And once again, it's fine to have moments where no one is talking, where a scene plays out without dialog to build up for the punchline, which can once again not involve talking, it can be as simple as a facial expression. Mike nailed ghost busters saying it's like 2 kids in the back of a car. I went on a road trip with my friend's 2 little girls, 6 and 10, great kids but you know how kids get when they are excited and really want to impress an adult and get their attention and it's just non-stop even if they don't have anything to say
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:08
|
|