|
It sounds like the same problems with Watson and Holmes - don't let these actors improvise so much. Give them something much more rigid and play to their strengths.
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 15:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:53 |
|
|
Vintersorg posted:It sounds like the same problems with Watson and Holmes - don't let these actors improvise so much. Give them something much more rigid and play to their strengths. I mean, improvisation was a key part of the first film's success, but the problem with the remake is that they didn't edit or just yell cut RLM had a great breakdown of how one joke could have been funny if they had just edited it instead of letting the full "riff" make it into the film
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 15:17
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I mean, improvisation was a key part of the first film's success, but the problem with the remake is that they didn't edit or just yell cut Yes, like the thing with Kevin’s glasses is funny, where he rubs his eye through them, and you realise they’re just fake. But then it gets called out by another character, and it just kills the joke dead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
yeah the movie is rife with jokes that would have been awesome if they had just been a little more concise with them like even the maligned scene with Melissa McCarthy screaming as she flies around shooting the proton pack would have been funny if there was a pause as soon as she landed and another character just goes "ok, my turn"
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 15:57
|
|
|
The haunted mannequin sequence in 2016 was probably the spookiest bit. I don't understabd why they develop a ghost trap then in the finale just resort to 'killing' ghosts, that's a major oversight of the whole paranormal exterminator 'busting makes me feel good' touchstone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
Reminded how before the 2016 movie, the comics had an arc where a con artist developed a knockoff of the Ghostbusters' tech that 'destroyed' ghosts (iirc pretty sure it just had them come back later powered up) and hired a bunch of women as publicity eye-candy to operate it before it all came back to bite them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 18:36
|
|
|
Bacon Terrorist posted:The haunted mannequin sequence in 2016 was probably the spookiest bit. It was one of the only times anyone in the film (Leslie Jones!) reacted accordingly to what was happening to her character. Ghost Leviathan posted:Reminded how ... the comics ... I honestly thought GB2016, against all odds and evidence, was somehow adapting the 88MPH story, but with female Ghostbusters. Which they kind of did. Kind of. If the Ghostbusters hadn't known Draverhaven even existed until murdering him. Which only further legitimizes his (um... The Bellhop's?) claims that people aren't worth saving...
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Reminded how before the 2016 movie, the comics had an arc where a con artist developed a knockoff of the Ghostbusters' tech that 'destroyed' ghosts (iirc pretty sure it just had them come back later powered up) and hired a bunch of women as publicity eye-candy to operate it before it all came back to bite them. Apparently they address the ATC team's equipment being able to do that in one of the IDW crossover comics that I haven't read.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I mean, improvisation was a key part of the first film's success This is one of those things that's become generally accepted to the point that people think Murray was freestyling through most of the movie, but it really isn't true. Lines were shifted here and there on the set (some of Louis' dialogue, for example, when he's doing his tour through his party was changed), but generally speaking, everything in the finished movie was in the final shooting script.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
I was just thinking about their reaction to getting the first call the get in the 84 movie, and their first trip down the pole... [edit: gently caress, how do you post youtube vids with a time stamp now? Skip ahead to 30 seconds...] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXMcbhn6Np0 Ray is super loving excited, even to the point of being spastic. He springs up and rushes to the pole first, then flails around like a goober on his way to the lockers. Peter is second. He moves quickly, but isn't really hustling. He reaches the pole just after ray in the first shot, but doesn't follow him down for a little while after. That's because, off screen, it is taking him a couple of seconds out the best way to go do the pole while bringing the dinner and chopsticks with him. Venkman isn't going to let the last of the petty cash get cold. Egon is tinkering at a spare neutrino wand over dinner, ever the scientist. He rises, comports himself and adjusts his tie, but the last shot shows him terrified while going down. From eating dinner to rolling out in Ecto 1. There are 3 shots there for a total of 20 seconds or so, but each actor packs a ton into their performance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Timby posted:This is one of those things that's become generally accepted to the point that people think Murray was freestyling through most of the movie, but it really isn't true. Lines were shifted here and there on the set (some of Louis' dialogue, for example, when he's doing his tour through his party was changed), but generally speaking, everything in the finished movie was in the final shooting script. They changed it up a bit in some takes (Egon and Venkman in the "four big ones, four thousand dollars" scene) but all the improv was worked out in rehearsals beforehand, and surprisingly it made the film more cohesive and... better?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:03
|
|
|
deoju posted:I was just thinking about their reaction to getting the first call the get in the 84 movie, and their first trip down the pole... I think this brings up another good point in comparison to GB2016. Other than Holtzmann, none of the ghostbusters are really defined “characters.” They all have the same voice and flip back between comic relief and straight man (so to speak) as the scene requires. OGGB has genuine characters which allows for a lot of small moments of comedy, as in the scene you illustrated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:40
|
|
|
And Holtzman isn't even a character, just a dancing cartoon that pulls faces
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 06:08
|
|
|
IMO there was one scene in GB2016 that had potential, and that's the subway scene when they're gonna piss laser on a ghost for some reason I can't remember, but the stream isn't strong enough. It had potential to be both a tense and funny scene. Sadly, like the whole rest of the movie, it's ruined both by baffling editing choices and the fact that none of the characters take the situation the least bit seriously. It's basically why the movie feels like it's a Scary Movie type parody of "the genre of Ghostbusters movies" (of which there were only two so it's a weirdly specific thing to parody). "The ghosts make slime, right? Wouldn't it be funny if they made buckets of it and someone got slime everywhere if you know what I mean" is also exactly the kind of joke we'd expect to see in "Ghostbusters Movie".
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 14:37
|
|
|
fist4jesus posted:Compared to today. There are new movies every week. A few gems, mostly poo poo though. Will the gems be remembered 20 years from now? I doubt it. In thirty years we'll have American Heroic TV where it's all superhero movies and shows all of the time, like the Western channels of old.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 16:17
|
|
|
Mooey Cow posted:"The ghosts make slime, right? Wouldn't it be funny if they made buckets of it and someone got slime everywhere if you know what I mean" is also exactly the kind of joke we'd expect to see in "Ghostbusters Movie". In the first movie they note that the otherworldly gate "swings both ways" before they cross the streams and cover the city in white goop, and in Ghostbusters II the gang crashes Venkman's date while still dripping with the slime from below the city, and Venkman quips "Boys, you're scaring the straights." The jokes have already been made?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2019 10:11
|
|
|
The former example is far more on the nose then the latter examples though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2019 16:48
|
|
|
mmmmalo posted:In the first movie they note that the otherworldly gate "swings both ways" before they cross the streams and cover the city in white goop, and in Ghostbusters II the gang crashes Venkman's date while still dripping with the slime from below the city, and Venkman quips "Boys, you're scaring the straights." The jokes have already been made? It's more taking small things from a movie (like Venkman getting slimed) and pushing them to extreme lengths to bring attention to them, and punctuating silly jokes that gives the movie the feel of a parody. There's even that weird scene where they go on Youtube and are like "oh no they hate our movie", so the movie even manages to parody itself. Also a side note, but Venkman isn't using that term to mean "heterosexuals" in that quip, but simply "normies". But also, that scene too was kind of parodied in GB2016, when she bursts into that restaurant all crazy eyed, comparing the mayor to the mayor in "Jaws" and pulls on furniture as she's being dragged out of there. It's not to the same degree as some of the other things, but has a sense of familiarity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
July 10th 2020 is the release date, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2019 18:08
|
|
|
Punctuating serious moments with silly jokes still doesn't seem outside the norm for Ghostbusters to me, but I agree that the wink-wink nudge-nudge references to familiar gags probably contribute to the parody vibes. Ghostbusters II even felt a bit like a parody in that sense, at times I wasn't aware that "straight" had the "normie" meaning; it's fallen out of use, at least among people I know. "Straight" as "not-homosexual" has been in use since at least the 1940's though (apparently derived from the "not-ostracized" usage), so it's a least plausible that Venkman was making a gay joke. Especially since Venkman asking Dana on a dinner date was juxtaposed with Ray and Egon bouncing dinner plans off of each other at the lab, and the fall into the slime river was bookended by the guys telling each other to take their clothes off
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 00:15
|
|
|
Mm no
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 07:01
|
|
|
The movies are chock full of sex jokes, is it so surprising that some of the jokes are kinda gay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 09:11
|
|
|
its surprising that the ones you specifically mentioned come across as gay jokes
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 09:16
|
|
|
I guess it can't be helped if you find that cluster unconvincing, but it seems consistent with how the movie ends after a bunch of dudes hose each other down with feel-good slime and hug it out. Even after they exit the sewer, the point was that as they disrobed they removed some the feel-bad slime/violent compulsions and were able to get along again, at which point they rush into the Venkman's dinner for the 'straights' joke. Like they're playing with the ambiguity in "loving your fellow man" or something
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 09:41
|
|
|
mmmmalo posted:the movie ends after a bunch of dudes hose each other down with feel-good slime and hug it out. This is incorrect. The only two who get hosed down are Ray and the assistant dude. While we're on the topic of Ray getting possessed, it feels like there's a bunch of stuff missing there. Like, was there a whole subplot about Ray falling under Vigo's sway that got axed?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 09:55
|
|
|
Jonas Albrecht posted:This is incorrect. The only two who get hosed down are Ray and the assistant dude. Fair enough, still kinda gay I have a hunch on the second thing. The opening scene has Dana walking her baby past a bunch of angry, aggressive New Yorkers, and in response to all this, the baby carriage just kind of rolls itself into the street. Idk if the baby's supposed to be an honest-to-God psychic or what, but I think the point is that the baby trying to escape all the anger? Like it is sensitive to what it hears and growing up with all the bad vibes will make it evil, hence being susceptible to possession by Vigo, hence the fake-out where the first ghost-busting gig turns out to be a children's birthday party. The kids are 'haunted' with unhappiness. The movie jokes about Ray getting excited about danger and calling their equipment toys, so I think he's susceptible to possession by Vigo because the movie's calling him a big kid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 10:14
|
|
|
GB2 was on tv last night and I watched it, I think a lot was cut based on the end credits which has a lot of footage not used in the film itself. The straights thing I never read as 'lol you guys look gay' more as in Egon is the straight man of the team, the people in the restaurant are straight because these slimy hijinks would offend their sensibilities. That's why the restaurant is so high class, to juxtapose with the others arriving. My wife has only seen GB2 once before last night and thinks it is far inferior to the original, so GB2 probably holds up better if you saw it as a kid. She also didn't rate 2016 for what it's worth.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 10:17
|
|
|
mmmmalo posted:Fair enough, still kinda gay All your hunches are bad. I vant you to know this
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 10:25
|
|
|
What haunts the baby then, before he even gets to Vigo? The movie is openly about how New York City is overflowing with bad vibes exacerbated by the slime river. The opening scene's progression of unhappy New Yorker's culminates in Dana's baby almost committing suicide via traffic. Later, the baby walks out the window and stands on the edge of the balcony, invoking a classic image of suicide before the museum guys swoops in and carries him off to Vigo. It seems consistent with the movie's themes to say the baby is just 'haunted' by misery, like the rest of New York. A suicidal baby is kind of a stupid concept but it strikes me as the best explanation
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 10:39
|
|
|
What in the hell is this conversation?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 10:48
|
|
|
mmmmalo posted:What haunts the baby then, before he even gets to Vigo? The movie is openly about how New York City is overflowing with bad vibes exacerbated by the slime river. The opening scene's progression of unhappy New Yorker's culminates in Dana's baby almost committing suicide via traffic. Later, the baby walks out the window and stands on the edge of the balcony, invoking a classic image of suicide before the museum guys swoops in and carries him off to Vigo. It seems consistent with the movie's themes to say the baby is just 'haunted' by misery, like the rest of New York. Any parent will tell you that all babies are suicidal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 10:52
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Any parent will tell you that all babies are suicidal. Honestly I wonder if that's part of the joke. Like the first movie turned Dana being kind of horny into a haunting (the exploding eggs as a ovaries joke that foreshadows the sultry 'gatekeeper' spirit), so if we evaluate the sequel from her POV instead of the baby's, it would make sense if her anxieties about her baby seeming to expose itself to danger just kind of like... merged with her own observations about discontented people in New York, creating this sense that her baby is possessed by an evil that compels it to endanger itself. But the scene where the slime tries to grab them from the bathtub makes more sense to me as some paranormal experience of a baby that hates baths than an anxiety of Dana's, so I'm inclined to think the baby is legit suicidal without being filtered through Dana's paranoia
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 11:17
|
|
|
guys this movie is oozing with sex and you just don’t see it when Janosz is covered in slime (which is meant to be semen) he sings “They will come from behind...” which is a reference to gay anal sex. also that the Statue of Liberty comes to life after four men cover her in slime (Semen). This symbolizes the empowerment of women as a result of the sexual revolution.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 12:12
|
|
|
Disagree. The slime is pink, clearly a reference to pink slime used to make Chicken McNuggets. It's only by charging that pink slime with positive energy (in this case, nostalgia for McDonald's) that they're able to defeat Vigo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 12:19
|
|
|
mmmmalo posted:Honestly I wonder if that's part of the joke. Like the first movie turned Dana being kind of horny into a haunting (the exploding eggs as a ovaries joke that foreshadows the sultry 'gatekeeper' spirit), so if we evaluate the sequel from her POV instead of the baby's, it would make sense if her anxieties about her baby seeming to expose itself to danger just kind of like... merged with her own observations about discontented people in New York, creating this sense that her baby is possessed by an evil that compels it to endanger itself. Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable. You are a poor poster, mmmmalo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
Kevyn posted:Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable. You are a poor poster, mmmmalo. LMAO
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 15:26
|
|
|
Okay, I can't post images but look at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icMLt8HLL9I&t=42s The slow zoom on the eggs emphasizes their position right next to the bag of Stay Puft Marshmallows. The point isn't just to foreshadow the eventual Stay Puft Marshmallow Man showdown, but to note that the eggs themselves are connected to the marshmallows, somehow. My initial reading was that the marshmallows /are/ essentially eggs. So when the gatekeeper finally unites with the keymaster (which really is a straight-forward sex joke, Zuul isn't exactly subtle with Venkman), and the form assumed by the product of that union is a giant marshmallow, it seems to me like the final boss is a titanic baby. (Kind of conflating the egg with the chick that hatches) There's still some truth to the above, but after some thought, I prefer this alternative: the scene is preceded by Dana rejecting Tully's aggressive advances. If you view the kitchen scene as a dramatization of Dana's response to Tully's desperation, the juxtaposition on the counter could suggest that haunted marshmallows are trying (and failing) to be born through Dana's (chicken) eggs. The suggestion of a spirit that wants to be born kind of assigns a will to Tully's balls, which are bulging with eagerness to get into Dana's pants. In this sense, the birth of the Marshmallow Man after the gatekeeper (Dana) finds a keymaster (Tully) is a successful realization of the scenario presented in the initial haunting. The concept of being haunted by an entity that wishes to incarnate is being exploited for sex jokes. mmmmalo fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Jan 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 19:36
|
|
|
mmmmalo posted:What haunts the baby then, before he even gets to Vigo? The movie is openly about how New York City is overflowing with bad vibes exacerbated by the slime river. The opening scene's progression of unhappy New Yorker's culminates in Dana's baby almost committing suicide via traffic. Later, the baby walks out the window and stands on the edge of the balcony, invoking a classic image of suicide before the museum guys swoops in and carries him off to Vigo. It seems consistent with the movie's themes to say the baby is just 'haunted' by misery, like the rest of New York. Doesn't Dana push the stroller through a puddle of ooze, covering the wheels in the stuff? Pretty sure that's how the stroller gets possessed and maybe Viggo has some kind of psychic link to all of the ooze and just keyed on the kid when the stroller came in contact with the ooze.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 20:02
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:Doesn't Dana push the stroller through a puddle of ooze, covering the wheels in the stuff? Pretty sure that's how the stroller gets possessed and maybe Viggo has some kind of psychic link to all of the ooze and just keyed on the kid when the stroller came in contact with the ooze. You're right! I had forgotten about that. But I don't think you need to bring Vigo in. The slime is "psycho-reactive", it moves in response to emotions, like with the toaster experiments. So even without the baby being psychic, the carriage could be moved by the baby's own unhappiness. (Or else the slime itself is responding to all the anger in New York, without the baby's mediation)
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 20:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:53 |
|
|
mmmmalo posted:(Or else the slime itself is responding to all the anger in New York, without the baby's mediation) Good lord Holmes, you've cracked the case! Dana pushes the carriage past a bunch of really angry people immediately after wheeling it through the slime. Also the carriage definitely wasn't trying to commit suicide, it was actively dodging all those cars. The only reason that Dana catches up to it was that it it stopped to avoid getting hit by a bus. mmmmalo posted:You're right! I had forgotten about that. Maybe try watching the scenes instead of relying on your spotty memory? Pretty much every scene is up on youtube in some format.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2019 21:00
|
|