|
happyhippy posted:It was aired in the UK and Ireland back then. also in sweden
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 05:07 |
|
|
so is this the part where we reiterate points plinkett made in the review for pages and pages as if they were our original takes and not ones we'd all heard five minutes ago in the same youtube
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:41
|
|
|
Trumps Baby Hands posted:so is this the part where we reiterate points plinkett made in the review for pages and pages as if they were our original takes and not ones we'd all heard five minutes ago in the same youtube So much salt! This is why I love plinkett.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
i want to gargle rich evanses taint
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
The rich and jack skit was a thousand times funnier than anything in ghostbusters 2016
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
Mr. Plinkett complaining about convection ovens was a thousand times funnier than anything in Ghostbusters 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:50
|
|
|
It's not a great movie but I think that Seth Rogen stoner comedy This Is The End actually has more developed characters and more believable character conflict.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:52
|
|
|
There's a lot of super mad people upset they were so easily fooled by sony's pr team that ghostbusters 2016 was anything but a huge turd.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:52
|
|
|
TF2 HAT MINING RIG posted:It's not a great movie but I think that Seth Rogen stoner comedy This Is The End actually has more developed characters and more believable character conflict. The entire movie was saved by the bit with Channing Tatum and Danny McBride imo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 06:02
|
|
|
TF2 HAT MINING RIG posted:It's not a great movie but I think that Seth Rogen stoner comedy This Is The End actually has more developed characters and more believable character conflict. I liked it right up until the characters discovered they had a chance to get to heaven.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 06:13
|
|
|
The saturation being so hosed in GB2016 does a great job hiding those pesky crows feet and wrinkles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
really weird that they bothered to make a plinkett review for Ghostbusters 2016. The review was okay but i havent seen GB2016 and never cared about it either way. So whatever I guess. What are next? edited to add: Forgot to say that i loled at the edit of Ernie Hudson moving while Annie Potts was perfectly still
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:05
|
|
|
i don't know about you but i got the impression that the rlm guys really liked the original ghostbusters! like almost as much as some people liked the original star wars or indiana jones movies and, like those films, having a wet fart of a softrebootquel that was out of touch with the original made gb2016 a solid choice for a plinkett review i mean i know it's subtle yeah but at around the third time they called gb84 a perfect film with brilliant comedy, faultless timing and flawless writing i started to think 'i guess we're maybe right back in that old e: feig better get working on that letter hard counter fucked around with this message at 07:55 on Aug 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:29
|
|
|
That was an alright review I guess. Fun enough but it felt kinda unnecessary. Not sure if that's because I've never had any interest in GB2016 or because they already did an HitB and scientist man on it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
I enjoyed that review. I guess it was 'unnecessary' but RLM made a thing that was funny and that's kinda their whole deal so good on them. I hope Fiega gets links to this tweeted to him 10,000 times a day until he comments on it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:43
|
|
|
I disagree with their assessment of Fieg. He seems to be a Hollywood conman with the way he talks. Like when Rich does his bullshit pitch man voice, he sounds exactly like fieg. Also, diet praises everyone he works with. This also is called being a kiss rear end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:46
|
|
|
Snatch Duster posted:I disagree with their assessment of Fieg. He seems to be a Hollywood conman with the way he talks. Like when Rich does his bullshit pitch man voice, he sounds exactly like fieg. Also, diet praises everyone he works with. This also is called being a kiss rear end. Yeah, I don't think I've ever heard a movie commentary with badmouthing, it's usually 100% how great everybody was.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
All their poo poo is unnecessary It's just a bunch of dorks talking about moopies
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:53
|
|
|
TF2 HAT MINING RIG posted:Yeah, I don't think I've ever heard a movie commentary with badmouthing, it's usually 100% how great everybody was. However, Fieg says this about everyone all the time to everyone. Also, saying yea he was great then answering questions or changing the subject is pretty normal, but Fieg only praises people he works with. He never talks about anything else. The dude is the biggest brown noser ever and it's painfully obvious. I suspect he does this because you never know who is going to produce, write, or star in whatever in the future and maybe if kisses enough asses he'll keep getting work. Snatch Duster fucked around with this message at 07:58 on Aug 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:56
|
|
|
maybe he's just a real nice guy
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
Mike used the extended version of the movie to do the review which is unfair. There's a lot of stuff he's critiquing that isn't in the theatrical release. And it's an improv movie. I hate improv in movies, but they are a thing. If you want to say "Improv in movies is bad so this is bad" then that is fair. But instead he argues that improv is ok in Judd Apatow movies but not in Ghostbusters because it's a sci-fi comedy. Which really doesn't make sense. If he also wanted to argue none of the improv is funny that would be valid. But instead he's constantly complaining that they are improving at all. It seems clear that the real problem is he's a huge Ghostbusters fanboy who has a fixed idea of what a Ghostbusters movie should be (a tightly written comedy with deadpan humor) and sees this as sacrilegious because it did something totally different. If that's why he hates the movie, it's a valid opinion, but arguing that improv doesn't belong in a sci-fi comedy doesn't make sense. I'm not a big Ghostbusters fanboy so I was willing to say "Ok it's an improv movie, whatever" and judged it as that. And I don't think it's any worse than a lot of other modern comedies when you look at it like that. It's still not a good movie, but it's watchable at least and some of the jokes are funny.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:58
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:maybe he's just a real nice guy Lol no one in Hollywood is a real nice guy loving lmao.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:Mike used the extended version of the movie to do the review which is kinda unfair. There's a lot of stuff he's critiquing that isn't in the theatrical release. Naw dude. He just bullet pointed why the movie sucked, which was heavily due to improv and Fieg being visionless fraud.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
Yug posted:There's a lot of super mad people upset they were so easily fooled by sony's pr team that ghostbusters 2016 was anything but a huge turd. It would be nice if at least a couple of them would admit that they were emotionally manipulated into crusading for a lovely movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:02
|
|
|
That was good, interesting and funny but I'd rather it would have been a more memorable lovely movie with how long a wait there is between Plinkett reviews. I don't think anyone has even thought of Ghosbusters 2016 once that year ended. I still want Matrix sequels reviews.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:03
|
|
|
Snatch Duster posted:Lol no one in Hollywood is a real nice guy loving lmao. Keanu Reeves is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:04
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:Mike used the extended version of the movie to do the review which is unfair. There's a lot of stuff he's critiquing that isn't in the theatrical release. I didn't think he painted a very rosy picture of Apatow movies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:05
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:Mike used the extended version of the movie to do the review which is unfair. There's a lot of stuff he's critiquing that isn't in the theatrical release. Is this CineD?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:06
|
|
|
Jonas Albrecht posted:Keanu Reeves is. He's a literal vampire.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:06
|
|
|
Snatch Duster posted:He's a literal vampire. Seeing that this is Hollywood that is a compliment if he doesn't sparkle in sun light.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:Mike used the extended version of the movie to do the review which is unfair. There's a lot of stuff he's critiquing that isn't in the theatrical release. No it's loving terrible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:33
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:Mike used the extended version of the movie to do the review which is unfair. There's a lot of stuff he's critiquing that isn't in the theatrical release. i agree with some of this, except for the watchable part, nothing can save gb2016 as is mike seemed to be using tight writing as a synonym for good writing, which is just good by definition, and it's definitely better than the bad, visionless improv we were getting in gb2016, the improv in gb2016 was so bad there isn't a single kind of movie it would work in because it was itself devoid of humor, directionless and only extended running time - you can't put that poo poo as is in an apatow movie or whatever and have it suddenly be good there, all these HACK FRAUDS proved when they edited out all the pointless banter from their own cut was that the cringey ad libbing was absolutely at fault in gb2016 and, by extension, feig was too since he accepted all these takes for his final cut - i'm sure if gb2016 had just stuck to whatever dumb script feig originally wrote the film would have still been awful despite having a more tightly plotted narrative, i'm willing to bet the script itself was always a mess and needed comedians to save it on set if the improv in gb2016 had actually been good, like if each actor had a clear idea of who they were playing, what the intent of each scene was and a director who actually knows what funny is (like apatow sometimes, when he's at his best anyway) so they could re-shoot something when things aren't working there would have been a film there, past this we're just stuck with mike's complaints that gb2016 didn't match the original's vibe of schlubby deadpan exterminators who are kinda sketchy and might just be in it for the quick money - it should be okay for reboots to be a little different if we're gonna be stuck with endless trash for the next other than that it was a solid plinkett review
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:49
|
|
|
Everyone in Hollywood does the whole "Oh my god it's such an honor to work with [every single other person in Hollywood] they're such an amazing talented blah loving blah" but there are a few people who take it do a new, higher level of transparent, obvious bullshit. Fegi and Andrew Garfield are the worst offenders that I can think of right now. Occasionally someone will be honest and it's always refreshing and great to hear. Will Smith, like 15 years later, finally got to poo poo on Wild West a bit, because it was 15 years old and he's Will Smith, what are you gonna do about it? Patton Oswalt's famous stories about shooting Blade 3, starring
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:57
|
|
|
Snatch Duster posted:He's a literal vampire. Yeah but unlike all other vampires, he's not making that everyone else's problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:07
|
|
|
Nah, I think he has a good point about not improv-ing sci-fi. You can improv around material about relationships because you can draw on your own experiences. It's easy enough to do a scene where Larry David is mad at the guy in front of him in line and Cheryl Hines is annoyed with Larry for it. It's harder to say "OK Melissa give me five minutes of takes on what you would say to the ghost of a nerdy guy who's trying to destroy the city." I thought the film was alright, but it basically coasted on the charm of the actors. I think Mike was intentionally missing the joke of the tour at the beginning.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:08
|
|
|
That tour scene just makes me sad that Zach Woods was in that horrible movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:11
|
|
|
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. Counterpoint: Bill Murray hasn't been worth a poo poo for nearly thirty years.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:18
|
|
|
Shinjobi posted:Counterpoint: Bill Murray hasn't been worth a poo poo for nearly thirty years. gently caress off. 🙊
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:19
|
|
|
I think it's really hard to mix special effects and comedy and improv is well known to be 90% awful deleted scenes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 05:07 |
|
|
Now that I think about it, I'm a little surprised they didn't mention Rich's take on the film, which is that they're literally shooting the ghostbusters logo in the balls at the end, and that sums up their opinion of the original movies, fans of the original movies, and the franchise as a whole.PostNouveau posted:I think Mike was intentionally missing the joke of the tour at the beginning. There was a joke?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:20
|
|