|
veni veni veni posted:Go back and read the context of the conversation. Because you are trying to turn a very simple statement into a wrong/right thing. Someone said "it's like ghostbusters in that there was an internet talking head shitshow surrounding it" which is totally true. No one is defending anything, it's just a simple fact and you are arguing with yourself. I don't even totally disagree with you, but it's not relevant in the context of what was said. Not really, because what happened to Ghostbusters was substantially more organised and coordinated than a talking head poo poo show both in scale and intensity. It included a talking head poo poo show, and also included a dedicated harassment campaign, which Ghost in the Shell did not have. So the guy who said 'few movies have been the receptacle of this much hate' is ignoring a movie from barely a year ago that was the receptacle of far, far more. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Jul 31, 2017 |
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 13:30 |
|
|
You are ridiculous. I doubt anyone here even disagrees with you, but here you are trying argue semantics with walls of texts over a really basic and sensible statement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:You are ridiculous. I doubt anyone here even disagrees with you, but here you are trying argue semantics with walls of texts over a really basic and sensible statement. It's not semantics, and there's been no walls of text. To equate the two is broadly accurate, but also greatly misleading.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
No one said it was a 1:1 comparison. Both films were met with internet drama and judged by people before they even hit theaters. That is all that was said. No more, no less. You and one other person have tried to spin it into something else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Both films were met with internet drama and judged by people before they even hit theaters. This is also true of every film released since the beginning of the internet. Half of it is true of every film released since the beginning of film as a commercial enterprise. Like I said, broadly true, but also greatly misleading. This actually started because someone asked if any other films had been the subject of so much hate. And the answer is, emphatically 'yes' and 'much more' Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
lol if you still care about the bad new ghostbusters film to post about the injustice of it all
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:This is also true of every film released since the beginning of the internet. Half of it is true of every film released since the beginning of film as a commercial enterprise. Yup! that's why the Ghostbusters comparison came up in the first place! Now you are getting it. Now, who are you arguing with again?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Ghostbusters didn't get negative press, it got an organised hate campaign. Ghostbusters was a bad movie. Ghost in the shell was a bad movie. Womp womp 
Tenzarin fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Yup! that's why the Ghostbusters comparison came up in the first place! Now you are getting it. Now, who are you arguing with again? Because they share a broad similarity that indicates nothing? The idea that this film was some kind of particular lightning rod for hate, rather than indifference, is hilarious when we've had the films I mentioned as recently as last year. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 04:28 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
Ghost In the Shell was way more entertaining than the dreck of the new Ghostbusters film.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Comparing the critics of GITS with the alt right backlash to Ghostbusters is useful if you want to delegitimize the critics of the former.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Ghost In the Shell was way more entertaining than the dreck of the new Ghostbusters film. In turn, Albert Pyun's "Nemesis" was substantially better than Ghost in the Shell.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Because they share a broad similarity that indicates nothing? But it was a lightning rod for hate, for a bunch of reasons that have already been mentioned. That's why they got compared. yes one was more extreme than the other. You yelling at the clouds about the intricacies of the Ghostbusters debacle in tyool 2017 is on you though. We all suffered through it together and are aware of what happened. You yourself just acknowledged the only reason a comparison was made is that it was an even more extreme example of a movie being really controversial, and attracting a lot of hate. You seem to agree with that sentiment. So, I agree with you. What are you trying to accomplish here?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:But it was a lightning rod for hate, for a bunch of reasons that have already been mentioned. That's why they got compared. yes one was more extreme than the other. You yelling at the clouds about the intricacies of the Ghostbusters debacle in tyool 2017 is on you though. We all suffered through it together and are aware of what happened. You yourself just acknowledged the only reason a comparison was made is that it was an even more extreme example of a movie being really controversial, and attracting a lot of hate. You seem to agree with that sentiment. So, I agree with you. What are you trying to accomplish here? It's not really yelling about intricacies to notice the difference between a couple of angry thinkpieces compared to a full couple of years of a coordinated and concerted harrassment and bullying that included a leak of and actresses nudes. But positioning this movie as one that was especially hated is weird, given the multiple other examples I've provided. The overwhelming response was disinterest, before, during and after release. If the box office wasn't enough, A quick look at the IMDB ratings will tell you the rest. For a start, GiTS received less than two thirds as many votes. The most popular rating, accounting for a full fifth of the votes, was 7, the second most popular is 6, accounting for another fifth. 2% gave it a 1. By contrast, Ghostbusters has 17% of its votes as 1. That's what the ratings of a hated film look like. The people who hated GitS didn't even hate it enough to try to drive down its rating, something which takes as close to zero effort as possible. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 05:25
|
|
|
Allright man, I give up. You seem dead loving set on making this about something it's not about and there is no changing your mind. You aren't wrong. You are just absolutely tone deaf to what the discussion was actually about and that clearly isn't going to change.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 06:13
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Allright man, I give up. You seem dead loving set on making this about something it's not about and there is no changing your mind. You aren't wrong. You are just absolutely tone deaf to what the discussion was actually about and that clearly isn't going to change. What is it about? I'm talking about audience interest and reaction, and what I've seen is a film that people couldn't even find the energy to hate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
Most of the hate for this film is specifically from GitS fans. People who aren't invested in the source materially are probably apathetic at best, which is as it should be, since the film is just kind of meh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 06:36
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:What is it about? I'm talking about audience interest and reaction, and what I've seen is a film that people couldn't even find the energy to hate. You are forgetting how much people were freaking out over the casting then. It was all over the place for a short while. True, it never hit close to the level of GB, but it was pretty dominant in the news cycle for a bit. It wasn't indifference. GITS got almost nothing but terrible press before it was released. Then to top it off fans were super negative about it as well, but that was pretty secondary.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 06:47
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:You are forgetting how much people were freaking out over the casting then. It was all over the place for a short while. True, it never hit close to the level of GB, but it was pretty dominant in the news cycle for a bit. It wasn't indifference. GITS got almost nothing but terrible press before it was released. Then to top it off fans were super negative about it as well, but that was pretty secondary. I remember the reaction, but you have to massively over-state it to pretend that any significant chunk cared one way or the other. Yes, the small amount of interest it received was negative, but it was a small amount of interest. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 06:58 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 06:55
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Ghostbusters didn't get negative press, it got an organised hate campaign. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWROBiX1eSc
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
I'd rather not watch that. Or anything else involving RLM.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 07:29
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:I'd rather not watch that. Or anything else involving RLM. Probably because it dismantles your hilariously lovely argument.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 07:30
|
|
|
RedSpider posted:Probably because it dismantles your hilariously lovely argument. What do you think my argument is, and what do you think they say to dismantle it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 07:31
|
|
|
Id' honestly like to know what your argument is, because I have no loving clue. Like, you just didn't want the comparison made in the first place or what? Please tell me why you just made me relive every obnoxious moment of the GB bullshit, because I'm coming up short on why this is the hill you decided to die on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 07:40
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Id' honestly like to know what your argument is, because I have no loving clue. Like, you just didn't want the comparison made in the first place or what? Please tell me why you just made me relive every obnoxious moment of the GB bullshit, because I'm coming up short on why this is the hill you decided to die on. I've explained it about 6 times, but here we'll go again: Someone asserted that this film was a lightning rod for a whole bunch of hate. I disagree. I would say that, while it provoked a few angry reactions early on, the overwhelming reaction was indifference, and this is borne out by the box office results, critical reaction, imdb rating, cinemascore, etc. I have no idea what RedSpider is on about.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 07:43
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:I have no idea what RedSpider is on about. I'm forced to reuse my post about this issue from C-SPAM: Lumpy the Cook posted:So far I've seen celebrities, goons, every news site, thousands of verified twitter randos, and the dictionary take turns swinging at all these frothing mad misogynist nerds angry about the female Dr. Who, but... aside from 5 or 6 twitter trolls (two of which had their tweet deleted faster than I could view the replies) and this guy, I haven't actually seen any of these frothing mad misogynist nerds angry about the female Dr. Who. It's the press doing free marketing for big corporate properties now, since the black stormtrooper in Star Wars and female Ghostbusters. Because "internet trolls" is a wholly unquantifiable number and the people on Twitter or Youtube is like, millions upon millions, it's an inherently unquantifiable value of exactly how many people actually are stating these views, and simply living with the reality that on a planet with literal billions of people that of course there are going to be a handful with inane, delusional ideas like a black Stormtrooper ruins Star Wars (they're all clones of a dude with Maori blood, so lol) yet on platforms like Twitter or Youtube are given equal space to "OMG!!! NEW STAR WARS LOOK HYPE!!!!" and there's simply no way to really get your head around just how many Star Wars boycotters there are compared to the vast millions happy to see a new Star Wars movie, so it's easy to point out "Shocker! These Twitter Trolls Are PISSED About Black Star Wars!" and get people angry at some formless mass of people that have no real political or economic power. One can acquire social capital for "dunking" or "mic dropping" on said "trolls" and personally profits from displaying how so not racist they are, and everyone not in this formless mass gets to feel good that they're better than whomever is supposedly mad about a black guy in Star Wars. It's inherently masturbatory and empty, just as [url=" https://www.buzzfeed.com/alannabennett/cant-bring-us-down?utm_term=.buvAa9oDYY#.qjeMX5E7gg"]12 Ways You Can Support The New "Ghostbusters" Movie Against The Hate Campaign[/url] quote:
Literally spending your hard earned money on a lovely Paul Feig comedy is now a feminist act. Advertising is no longer about reccomending good products for people to spend hard earned money on, (okay, it never was to begin with) but now it's about giving people the feeling that they are being heroic and standing against some injustice by spending money on frivolous luxuries like movie tickets and children's toys. It's a nightmarish and inherently dystopian future where big corporate has completely absorbed revolutionary feminist thought for their own profits. There will always be mad misogynist failsons getting the spotlight, no matter how irrelevant they are, so "journalists" can pretend to be martyrs bringing about a more just society and big corporate can line their pockets even further.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 08:07
|
|
|
Taintrunner posted:I'm forced to reuse my post about this issue from C-SPAM: I have no idea how this relates to anything I said. It does relate to things that you might infer that I believe (I don't) but nothing I've actually said here. Regardless of what you think of the Ghostbuster's movie or the absurdity of consuming products to promote a cause, the harassment and bullying was not made up. Leslie Jones' nudes weren't leaked to drive up ticket sales. The astonishing vitriol in various comments sections wasn't made up either. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 08:20 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 08:11
|
|
|
I'm beginning to think Snowman_McK secretly jerks it to Leslie Jones nudes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 08:37
|
|
|
RedSpider posted:I'm beginning to think Snowman_McK secretly jerks it to Leslie Jones nudes. Yes, that's definitely a reasonable conclusion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 09:11
|
|
|
Watched this yesterday. It was fine. Not bad enough for me to be angry about it, not good enough for me wanting to see it ever again (it did make me want to rewatch the GitS Oshii movies and the first SAC though, which I consider a good thing). Judging from other Hollywood attempts, this could have been a lot worse. ps: Johanson was fine too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 12:49
|
|
|
Ghostbusters was a pretty lovely movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
Snak posted:Most of the hate for this film is specifically from GitS fans. People who aren't invested in the source materially are probably apathetic at best, which is as it should be, since the film is just kind of meh. I dislike most Ghost in the Shell media made prior to this movie and was a huge fan of the director's other movie, I think I pretty much was the target audience for GITS 2017.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
I just watched this on my TV and it was pleasant on my eyes and didn't ask anything of my brain. Well, thanks for reading my review.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
The film is basically an overunity device producing garbage HOT TAKES at a stultifying rate. Note how many people chime with how they didn't pay attention or shut it off after three minutes, but when an actual review is attempted.... starkebn posted:Tried to watch this yesterday and couldn't get all the way through. The only scene I thought was any good was when the Major found Kuze the first time. Every other scene aped something from previous media but had no idea what made those scenes any good. Why do so many scripts feel the need to explain everything through origin stories and explanations of everything? The original film starts basically "in media res" and apart from the non-dialogue body construction sequence during the titles there is no other exposition about the characters or the setting until we learn a little about the non cybered member of the team. We see the characters, immediately identify them through tropes and cliches and understand what's happening intrinsically. Case in point Batou's eyes. This makes me think of Patton Oswalt's diatribe about the Star Wars prequels. A lot of people don't give a poo poo about Darth Vader as a kid, they care about Darth Vader as shown in the original films. It's not always interesting to show how characters we like came to be how they are, we just like them how they are. The 95 film asked plenty of interesting questions without trying to shoehorn some pity-story about evil villain CEOs loving over the little people. ...you have stock nerd memes about the The Phantom Menace (a film that's nearly 20 years old, like how are you even pretending to still be cross at it) and 'origin stories' (a made-up term that refers exclusively to movies with Batman). This despite the fact that Ghost in the Shell 2017 is neither a prequel nor an origin story. And even then, he couldn't stay focussed on the screen for half an hour. What's unavoidable is that the film is a science fiction film but is being judged entirely in terms of its fidelity to a source material, & whether it nebulously retains 'the magic.' In other words, it is not being judged in terms of science-fiction - it's ideas. It is being judged as a franchise. You see "my friend Batou looks like he's supposed to!" You do not see anything about the cybernetic eye concept, and how the film approaches it differently from any other adaptation. Nerds have, in a way, killed sci-fi in exchange for gratification.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:How are they not comparable? I think a big difference between Asian American complaints about whitewashing vs other racism/sexism complaints is that at least those movies try to appeal or pander to those communities and make them more visible. And that's not a bad thing, especially if you get that community. New Ghostbusters definitely tried to pander to women however ham fistedly. Gits didn't pander to Asian Americans. It couldn't even cast and Asian lead. It's like Black Americans get Luke Cage. We got Loras Tyrrell as Iron Fist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:a lot of text Most important thing first, Batou wasn't good because he was faithful to the original, he was good because it was an endearing and pretty charismatic performance that was written relatively well and I want him to be my friend. There's really not been a lot of "not faithful to the original" type criticism that hasn't been pretty well justified (eg pointing out how certain scenes they directly remade miss what made the original scenes so good) Also, discussion of fidelity is bound to happen and shouldn't be discouraged when you're talking about a remake. It's not that people want a shot for shot remake, it's that they want they want something that captures the same feelings and themes of the original, or something that takes it in an interesting and new direction. The film has some interesting and good parts, but ultimately doesn't capture the feel of the original, or take it far enough in an interesting new direction. But yeah the "I watched 3 minutes of this movie and shut it off so I could go dunk on it for an internet forum" reviews are really lame.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2017 00:39
|
|
|
tweet my meat posted:There's really not been a lot of "not faithful to the original" type criticism that hasn't been pretty well justified (eg pointing out how certain scenes they directly remade miss what made the original scenes so good). The trouble is that what you've put in parentheses is pretentious nonsense. Your premise is that there is set target that "they" intended to hit: "they" intended to 'remake the goodness' by copying images - effectively endeavouring to steal the essence of the 'original' Ghost In The Shell. [Note: the 1995 film is not the original Ghost In The Shell.] In your view, the fact that this film is very different from the other (over two decades ago) is an accident - and that's easily disproven when you speak concretely. The brutal beating of the suspect, in 1995, is presented with a cool zen indifference that foreshadows Motoko's transcendence (the image of Corgi's spontaneously-mangled hand is repeated when the Puppetmaster gains control of Batou's arm at the end of the film. Motoko clearly aspires to shed her body and become like the puppetmaster so that she can harm 'scum' more effectively). In 2017, the same plot is presented as horrific - Mira is furious (this attack is personal for her), the violence is gratuitous, and the Zack Snyder speed-ramping signifies a false sense of clarity. The difference is clearly deliberate; Batou in 2017 has to run in and stop Mira from 'going too far'. The 2017 film is against police brutality, where the 1995 film is not. It's in the script. But then, at the same time that you complain about difference, you complain that each similarity denies you access to a desired novelty: quote:[I] want something that captures the same feelings and themes of the original, or something that takes it in an interesting and new direction. A film with the same content that adds new plot points is called a sequel (in your case, a very conservative sequel about the continuing adventures of Motoko and Batou (even though there already is a sequel to the 1995 film, and several TV series)). The point of a remake (on the other hand) is to retain the basic plot while changing the themes so much that the film no longer resembles its predecessor(s). As I've noted earlier, Ghost In The Shell 2017 successfully changes the narrative so that Motoko no longer becomes an antichrist figure, when that was THE narrative of the 1995 film. Instead we have an entirely opposite narrative about Kuze as a terrifying sort of proto-Christ figure. So, when we break it down, your claim is that remakes are categorically bad - so bad that the filmmakers could only have made one by accident. They must have been trying to make a sequel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2soHxEN79c This is doing the rounds since yesterday. I hate this kind of eloquent critique that nonetheless completely misses the point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2017 07:27
|
|
GoldenGun posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2soHxEN79c Hah, it's sure a lot of words to say 'I like the anime and it did everything Good but this one did everything Bad'.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2017 07:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 13:30 |
|
|
GoldenGun posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2soHxEN79c That and Rossatron are the worst of the worst of that style. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6TyaMKPzn0 This one is pretty to the point and has my favorite joke in all of the shittalking Ghost in the Shell and it's pretty early on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2017 07:57
|
|