|
CelticPredator posted:They didn’t turn it into anything. It’s another movie. I think that's fair, even if they copied some beats from the original. Still a pile of poo poo though.
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 07:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 06:45 |
|
|
Ahem 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 08:34
|
|
|
Just badly ripping off The Mask anyway, and even that movie had a reason for the musical number.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 10:31
|
|
|
You don't need a reason for having Chris Hemsworth do a musical number.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 13:08
|
|
|
There wasn't even a musical number in the movie, they just showed clips of it in the credits. That's quality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
Ehud posted:It will be in a small town. The cast will be adolescents who remind you of the stranger things kids. One of them will be related to Dan Akroyd. They’ll work with “uncle Ray” to repair some of the old equipment and fight a local paranormal threat with busted up gear that only works half the time. So does this mean the original crew retired and that the franchise rights alone didn't make them rich beyond their wildest dreams? Otherwise said small town would know who to call. M... maybe Egon died during a ghostbust and the rest of them were so utterly crushed by his death that they gave up. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
The new Ghostbusters will promote equality by showing that a terrible Ghostbusters remake can star either sex
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2019 01:26
|
|
|
evobatman posted:There wasn't even a musical number in the movie, they just showed clips of it in the credits. I have vague recollections that they showed tiny snippets of that scene in trailers and there was a really negative reaction against the idea of a musical dance number so I guess someone at Sony made the decision to cut that scene from the movie, but then someone decided to include it during the credits anyway. And then when the extended version of the film came out they reinstated the dance number back into the film and it turned out to only be 30 seconds long.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2019 06:08
|
|
|
Leslie Jones is pissed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2019 07:47
|
|
|
I saw! I can sympathize, and she had the best character, but I don't think we need another movie with those characters
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2019 08:20
|
|
|
She has every right to be mad. Imagine starring in a beloved comedy and then having the studio remake it and recast it so it was terrible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2019 16:02
|
|
|
The Fuzzy Hulk posted:She has every right to be mad. Imagine starring in a beloved comedy and then having the studio remake it and recast it so it was terrible. Zing!
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2019 20:00
|
|
|
evobatman posted:There wasn't even a musical number in the movie, they just showed clips of it in the credits. Plus the bear-trap-looking thing they showed off in the trailers turned out to be no more than post-credits sequel bait (along with the shots of the firehouse and upgraded containment unit at the end). Obviously, someone over there thought that name recognition plus SJW pandering would guarantee massive profits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2019 23:40
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:SJW pandering would guarantee massive profits. Ok.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 01:18
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:Putting women in a movie is pandering. In and of itself, no. Playing the diversity card instead of focusing on making a quality movie, on the other hand...
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 03:30
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:In and of itself, no. wait, do you legit believe that they hedged all of their bets on having an all-woman team?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 03:52
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:In and of itself, no. Thanks for playing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 04:01
|
|
|
GB 2 is surely leagues above the reboot. Like it's not even close
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 08:07
|
|
|
Here’s hoping for 2020 cameos:
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 10:57
|
|
|
Alan_Shore posted:GB 2 is surely leagues above the reboot. Like it's not even close
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 12:01
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:I love GB2 too, but if you show them both to somebody who didn't see GB2 as a kid, the bias in your statement falls apart a bit. Hmm, I dunno. I agree that Both GB2 and GB2016 are "forgettable summer tentpole movies" rather than masterpieces. But GB2 has some a load of clever jokes and lines that I only appreciate as an adult. It has plenty of quotable lines. So my enjoyment of that film isn't purely down to childhood nostalgia.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 15:59
|
|
|
GB2 is marginally scarier than GB1.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:GB2 is marginally scarier than GB1. Winston saw some poo poo that'll turn you even whiter than that other poo poo!
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 16:08
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:GB2 is marginally scarier than GB1. It’s arguably the weirder of the two, which gives it some merit, just because you get stuff like Peter MacNichol dressing up like a ghost witch, or the entirety of the Scoleri Bros. sequence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 16:12
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Winston saw some poo poo that'll turn you even whiter than that other poo poo! Oh but I woo! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 16:14
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:Oh but I woo! That's one of the more impressive effects sequences in the entire film, just because of the complexity. First they had to shoot the plate of MacNicol walking down the hall, shifting his head from right to left and back. Then they had to shoot someone walking down the hall with a flashlight, making sure the light's shine on the wall and movements were exactly tracked to match MacNicol's. And then finally the effects team had to animate the eyebeams to match everything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 16:22
|
|
|
Oh yeah GB2 is way weirder and scarier than 1. Definitely scarier than the reboot which isn't scary at all I think (of course it's hard to separate nostalgia from genuine criticism). I was just thinking, it's weird in GB1 that they never bust the library ghost. That's such a classic and obvious beat in a movie, like any other movie would have the Ghostbusters coming back to the library in the montage for payback, but.... Nope. Ghostbusters does a lot of "right" things wrong, but does everything perfectly. It's quite a unique film
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 16:24
|
|
|
Timby posted:That's one of the more impressive effects sequences in the entire film, just because of the complexity. First they had to shoot the plate of MacNicol walking down the hall, shifting his head from right to left and back. Then they had to shoot someone walking down the hall with a flashlight, making sure the light's shine on the wall and movements were exactly tracked to match MacNicol's. And then finally the effects team had to animate the eyebeams to match everything. Huh, I figured they just had him hooked up with a pair of bright lights like those hands-free light glasses. Interesting. Also, how did you find that out? There's very little out there on the making of GB2.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 16:28
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:Also, how did you find that out? There's very little out there on the making of GB2. Cinefex did an extensive writeup on the film's VFX back in late 1989. I have the issue in a box somewhere in my extra bedroom.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 16:39
|
|
|
A major problem with fandom and franchise thinking is that your frame of reference is reduced to like, in this case, three films and a videogame. We end up in this weird situation where people speculate about whether it's even possible to make a good film about a team of exorcists. It was only done once, in 1984! It's impossible to recapture that magical lightning... There are an absolute shitload of movies about exorcists, including those of the 'parascientific' variety. You've probably seen a few of them. The 2012 spanish film Emergo is the best ghostbuster film, and it's not part of the franchise. Ghostbusters itself makes reference to films like The Exorcist, The Entity, Poltergeist, and so-forth. What Ghostbusters brought to the genre isn't magic. It was just the naked, crass commericalism of the exorcists that was played for 'meta' laughs. The reason you can't have a direct sequel is that the ending of the 1984 is pretty much a break in the fourth wall, where they announce that it's all a movie. The jingle kicks in, and we cut to credits before anyone can note the inevitable consequence - that you end up with for-profit franchise churches bearing the ghost logo cropping up worldwide, facing competition in this new marketplace where psychological problems are zapped away. The sequel to ghostbusters effectively can't be a ghost story, because ghosts - meaning these scrunchy-faced little neon muppet fuckers - are 'solved'. The sequel can only be about how the high wears off, and catching ghosts is no longer an effective distraction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
Timby posted:That's one of the more impressive effects sequences in the entire film, just because of the complexity. First they had to shoot the plate of MacNicol walking down the hall, shifting his head from right to left and back. Then they had to shoot someone walking down the hall with a flashlight, making sure the light's shine on the wall and movements were exactly tracked to match MacNicol's. And then finally the effects team had to animate the eyebeams to match everything. That kind of shot'll cost you $2 million today
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 20:46
|
|
|
Put little lights on his eyes ffs
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
For what it's worth my nephew is was like 6 when GB2016 came out and liked it a lot. The older movies didn't hold his interest so much. I just hope when GB2020 comes out he gets mad that it's not "his Ghostbusters" That would be sweet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 21:47
|
|
|
6 yr old prefers screaming to actual jokes aimed at adults. Well wrap it up this debates over
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 23:03
|
|
|
Bacon Terrorist posted:Leslie Jones is pissed. She's an overgrown child who's still bitter about her lovely Ghostbusters film sucking harder than a trailer trash hoe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 01:37
|
|
|
I'd prefer if Sony would just stop taking additional swings at the money tree and let Ghostbusters be, but Leslie Jones melting down as though she has any claim at all over the property is nice little signpost on the highway to Bad Ideasville
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
Slutitution posted:She's an overgrown child who's still bitter about her lovely Ghostbusters film sucking harder than a trailer trash hoe. This is a cool, normal brain post. Anyway, I wonder what the sequel prospects were when GB2016 was in production. The movie ends with a halfassed stinger, but given how taped-together the script was, I wonder if there was even a genuinely sketched out plan for where to go next.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 02:05
|
|
|
Fart City posted:This is a cool, normal brain post. We all know the answer to this
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
Fart City posted:This is a cool, normal brain post. I'm sure, just like every interaction scene in the script, they just thought they'd figure it out when they got there. Improv the whole sequel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 06:45 |
|
|
Slutitution posted:She's an overgrown child who's still bitter about her lovely Ghostbusters film sucking harder than a trailer trash hoe. Go back to your maga meeting
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 02:22
|
|