|
They made another total recall? huh
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 03:21 |
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Ghosbusters (2016) is over, there won't be a sequel, all the merchandise is in landfills, can we please stop arguing about it and just forget it ever existed like Robocop (2014) and Total Recall (2012) and The Thing (2011)
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
Look at all of those funny pictures posted recently they sure are funny and pictures.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Interestingly of those four, I think Ghostbusters and Robocop had an at least marginal reason to exist, while the others didn't. The Thing 2011 might have been cool if they used all the neat effects that got made instead of scrapping them https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBzpT7VmSaU
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Interestingly of those four, I think Ghostbusters and Robocop had an at least marginal reason to exist, while the others didn't. They were all, "hey, let's remake a popular film from the 80s and make money off name recognition." That was the reason for all of them to exist. Robocop had a director who didn't realize he was supposed to make some quick cash-in garbage, so you can see several things in the movie that could've been new and unique and original, but they never went anywhere and instead Robocop just fought a bunch of ED-209s. Ghostbusters tried to create the appearance of doing something different with the genderswap cast gimmick, but it was never anything more than that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
Memento posted:Look at all of those funny pictures posted recently they sure are funny and pictures. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
El Burbo posted:The Thing 2011 might have been cool if they used all the neat effects that got made instead of scrapping them There's an extended version of that video with even creepier robotics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHhD4PD75zY
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
El Burbo posted:They made another total recall? huh Never saw it, but I heard they don't even go to Mars in it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
Wilford Cutlery posted:Never saw it, but I heard they don't even get their rear end to Mars in it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
There was also the total recall tv series on Showtime
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:32
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Ghosbusters (2016) is over, there won't be a sequel, all the merchandise is in landfills, can we please stop arguing about it and just forget it ever existed like Robocop (2014) and Total Recall (2012) and The Thing (2011) *listening to EVP recording* Abby - "Hey... who's Zuul?" Erin - "Nothing we need to worry about, now."
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
I liked the new Ghostbusters well enough. I just wish they had hired more attractive women.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:I liked the new Ghostbusters well enough. I just wish they had hired more attractive women.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
I enjoyed that they got to play around with a new character archetype, the ditzy hunky eye-candy brainless male secretary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
At the absolute least, Ghostbusters II can never be the worst sequel Dan Aykroyd has made to one of his old movies because Blues Brothers 2000 exists.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Ghosbusters (2016) is over, there won't be a sequel, all the merchandise is in landfills, can we please stop arguing about it and just forget it ever existed like Robocop (2014) and Total Recall (2012) and The Thing (2011) Sacrifices had to be made for Mad Max Fury Road.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
I don't really get why Ghostbusters 2 gets dogged so much, sure it was nowhere near as good as the first and it suffered from a lack of originality and effort, but on the other hand: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncGHiVKJh0Y
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
Kennel posted:Sacrifices had to be made for Mad Max Fury Road. Worth it
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
tactlessbastard posted:Worth it Agreed
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
Kennel posted:Sacrifices had to be made for Mad Max Fury Road. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Ghosbusters (2016) is over, there won't be a sequel, all the merchandise is in landfills, can we please stop arguing about it and just forget it ever existed like Robocop (2014) and Total Recall (2012) and The Thing (2011) Ghostbusters 2016 was a mediocre film with two decent acts and a terrible third. Also, Robocop 2014 was totally different from the 1987 version in terms of story, character, and themes. It just had some of the same names and generic concept. Kennel posted:Sacrifices had to be made for Mad Max Fury Road. Fury Road was just a sequel to a previous film, by the same director, not a reboot or prequel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 02:20
|
|
|
Fury Road would have been better if they used more CGI. Also should have had Max sleep with Furiosa.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Fury Road would have been better if they used more CGI. Also should have had Max sleep with Furiosa. He did, she was driving though and they didn't gently caress. And there was a shitton of CGI (mostly removing wires, and giant gently caress off Duststorms. And the Citadel)So now you can enjoy the movie for how it is. It did need the Interceptor to survive though 
MrJacobs has a new favorite as of 02:33 on Feb 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:I enjoyed that they got to play around with a new character archetype, the ditzy hunky eye-candy brainless male secretary. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
Panic! at Nabisco posted:Apparently a lot of people really, really didn't enjoy that That's my fetish.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:That's my fetish. People not enjoying ditzy beefcake?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
MrJacobs posted:It did need the Interceptor to survive though Subjunctive posted:That's my fetish.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
Panic! at Nabisco posted:Apparently a lot of people really, really didn't enjoy that It was dehumanizing. It made me feel like people only value me based on my appearance and that no matter how hard I work, it means nothing compared to whether or not people think I'm hot. How could women possibly understand that experience?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:It was dehumanizing. It made me feel like people only value me based on my appearance and that no matter how hard I work, it means nothing compared to whether or not people think I'm hot. Plus, the receptionist in GB wasn't ditzy at all.. MrJacobs posted:Ghostbusters 2016 was a mediocre film Mediocre by modern standards, and poo poo by any real standards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
it's hard to break out of being typecast
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:I liked the new Ghostbusters well enough. I just wish they had hired more attractive women. Kate McKinnon, yo. Chris Hemsworth actually got the biggest laugh out of anyone in my theater. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
To be fair She does have a giant mouth Edit: fug
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 03:43
|
|
|
This is just a normal house cat.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKPW_7hb2ek
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
I've never seen Ghostbusters (2016) but the drama it spawned of both SJWs (the bad kind, circa 2013 definition) and the MRA crowd using it as a proxy for their lovely opinions was very entertaining. The director constantly talking about it like it was a transformational work of art was also v. funny.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 04:23
|
|
|
 Hopefully this isn't too subtle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 03:21 |
|
|
Heaps of Sheeps posted:I've never seen Ghostbusters (2016) but the drama it spawned of both SJWs (the bad kind, circa 2013 definition) and the MRA crowd using it as a proxy for their lovely opinions was very entertaining. The director constantly talking about it like it was a transformational work of art was also v. funny. Don't forget that a Youtube movie reviewer was heavily poo poo on by various High dollar celebrities for saying that he would not be reviewing the movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 04:27
|
|