|
I said come in! posted:Ghost in the Shell got destroyed by the white washing which turned out to really not be the case about the movie and is apart of the story, but good luck explaining that to people. The trailers sure as poo poo didn't explain that. Or anything else.
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
Bugblatter posted:Are we now complaining that the trailer didn't show the third act reveal? I don't even agree with his argument, but what? I was suggesting that the poor performance of the film at the box office is more likely due to a really lovely marketing campaign than the accusations of white washing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
Bugblatter posted:Oh, right. Gotcha. The whitewashing didn't help, and was a pretty good example of how not to handle complaints. There were a fair few various crewmembers saying they didn't see the big deal, and they were overwhelmingly white men. It was a refusal to engage with the idea that there was a problem, and this didn't change for months, right up to release, when a statement like 'look, we wanted to tell the story in such a way that spoke to as many people as possible, and Scarlett is able to speak to a lot of people, as she's demonstrated, being super-talented, yadda, yadda" Or, you could talk about how the concept of identity is fluid in the GITS universe, and how changes like that are part of the film's themes and narrative.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:But when people say exactly that in this thread people shout them down as JUSTIFYING RACIST WHITEWASHING. No, people get a hostile response when they pretend the problem doesn't exist. This thread is full of interesting discussions of race, identity and how those two relate to the film and other works in the franchise.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 07:14
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:It's probably been said somewhere upthread, but I don't think the whitewashing was even a quarter of the reason why the movie failed. For it to be an significant issue, your audience has to know they were originally a different race, and the protagonist in some anime isn't something your general audience knows in the first place. The whitewashing meant that fans of the original weren't evangelising and schilling for it willingly for months on end before it came out. Fandom is practically a component of marketing now (Disney has tapped into this exceptionally well) and GITS (and Airbender) did not have them on board. It didn't necessarily have a negative impact, but it removed a positive impact that association with a beloved nerd property tends to enjoy. Contrast it with how eager comic book fans are to explain all the lore and minutae behind the latest Marvel film. Panfilo posted:Aside from this, I wonder if anime adaptations suffer the same problem that video game adaptations suffer- producers feel that the subject matter itself is too niche and need to expand (in this case, get a white actress to play the Major) bowderdizing and anglicizing stuff to the point that nobody is happy; the weaboos are going to be complaining about all these little details that didn't carry over and people unfamiliar with anime are going to be gently caress, exactly what I was trying to say, but with better words. dont even fink about it posted:There really isn't an F&F movie better than a solid C+, and most of them come in far below that. Torque (2004) for example is far better than any F&F entry. I will fight you. In all seriousness, Ebert described it best when he called Justin Lin "a first-rate director in this second-rate genre." They're dopey car chase movies, but they're loving fantastic dopery car chase movies. Especially 5 and 6, and especially 6. Snak posted:I basically haven't seen any of the other ones. I saw the fourth one in the theater and liked it better than the first one, but it's utterly forgettable. That's the general consensus on 4. It's not interesting enough to be Tokyo Drift (which is really just a drama that involves car racing) but not crazy enough to be 5, 6 or 7.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2017 03:01
|
|
even at the most watered-down presentation.
|
Tenzarin posted:drat, Boss Baby won? Maybe this movie will be fiendishly remembered like Dredd and kept alive with dvd sales. hahahaha Dredd was made with care. Snarkiness aside, Dredd loving owns. This...this exists.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Yeah, you're loving crazy. In no way is this a run of the mill kind of effects movie. The visuals are some of the best put to film and while the story is a little weak, it gets by and makes sense. This seems like a massive overstatement. It's not even the prettiest cyberpunk film.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
This is a film with nothing for everyone. It's not nearly clever or bizarre enough to gain any sort of cult sci fi audience, but it's not nearly streamlined or fun enough to be a genuine blockbuster. It's full of shots and scenes from the anime, but it also tries to do its own thing plotwise, while working around those scenes and shots from the original. There's a ton of great design, but the film still relies on expositional dialogue to explain what and who everything is, while forgetting to explain why anyone is going anywhere. So we have a film where a bunch of characters without a single distinguishing characteristic between them go from one yakuza hangout to another for compelling reasons like 'that's where the signal is coming from' Also the action scenes are bad, but I had very low expectations for those going in. Still, when every gunfight is people in different shots shooting off screen or slow motion kicks that were played out in the late 90s, I'm extra disappointed.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2017 00:22
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:For someone indifferent towards banal checklist-criticism, this is film of the year. If you want to dismiss my criticism towards it, you should have dismissed it as 'compare/contrast' not a 'banal checklist'
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Looking for something fun? I recommend a blockbuster. Yes, films set out to accomplish things in terms of audience reaction. Some would argue that this is the basic purpose of art. Sometimes those things are mutually exclusive, but not necessarily. Ghost's issue is that it didn't know what it wanted to accomplish, or did, but didn't know how to, or, trying to accomplish multiple things, those objectives cancelled each other out. The end result is a film that accomplishes nothing in terms of audience reaction. It is not exciting, or fun, or scary, or thought provoking, or even especially nice to look at. It could very well have been one or all of those things, but it was none.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:So it's a bad movie because it has a low score on Rotten Tomatoes? Is there an invisible post where somebody brought up Rotten Tomatoes?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:What I got from your post was that, regardless of if you or I found the film to be "exciting, or fun, or scary, or thought provoking," the film still failed because it failed to accomplish that reactions from some separate audience. No, the audience I'm referring to is myself. I am an audience, as are the people I watched it with. I was describing my/our reaction/s. True, in this case, my criticisms seem to broadly align with the consensus (even in this thread, the nicest thing almost anyone said was 'it looks nice and it runs okay), but that's not the foundation of my argument. The foundation of my argument is that I watched it and didn't like it, nor did I hate it. It provoked absolutely no strong reaction or strong feelings. I suspect it's a 'design by committee' issue, though that is, of course, speculation.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
Paolomania posted:I'm not really sure since anime typically has tremendous amounts of clunky expository dialogue. Oh, it does. It's just annoying because Ghost is one of the few that doesn't. Sure, there are long, philosophical monologues, but there's very few instances where you wonder "why are they saying this to each other? surely they both already know that."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2017 06:40
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:I thought it was pretty good. Far from perfect but I just watched it and liked it. I'm not sure why it's been such a hate receptacle. It hasn't. It's just a really loving dull film. If people hated it, that would mean it had provoked something in them. It didn't, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
an skeleton posted:You don't think this, of all movies, has been a hate receptacle? I probably wouldn't have said what I did if I thought it was. Hate is a strong word. It requires enthusiasm. This film discourages enthusiasm.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2017 07:43
|
|
|
an skeleton posted:I mean, no. People hated this movie from the moment the narrative about ScarJo and whitewashing began. Whether that is or isn't warranted is another debate, but I can think of few other movies from the past 5 years that compete with it in terms of pure hate. Is it possible that some people saw it without those notions and thought it unremarkable too? Yeah, sure. Considering very few people saw it, it seems like there were probably other films that garnered far more dislike, and definitely more by intensity. BvS, Man of Steel, Ghostbusters and American Sniper off the top of my head. Transformers 5 had multiple online critics vocally refuse to watch it or review it. No one cared about GitS enough to boycott. Because why would you? Milky Moor posted:You only need to look at this very thread to see how people were angrily accusing anyone who said anything positive about the film in the lead up to release as justifying horrible racist whitewashing. I've been looking at this thread, and I've seen disinterest, dislike, and the occasional 'it wasn't that bad' alongside several very long, detailed discussions on the racial issues raised by the movie. I must have missed the ones you're referring to.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:The point was that both movies got a lot of negative press before they were even released, regardless of anyone's feelings about casting or the legitimacy of complaints. Ghostbusters didn't get negative press, it got an organised hate campaign.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Lol, I would not call that organized. It absolutely does matter. A bunch of racists and misogynists coordinated their efforts and ended up driving one of the cast off of the internet by leaking her nudes and constantly harrassing her, because women were in the movie and one of them had the temerity to be black while doing so. That is so much worse that it's weird that I'm having to tell you this. The Alt-Right/rebranded neo-nazis made the film and its cast their targets for more than a year. Ghost in the Shell got a few think pieces and then no one watched it. That's why it's weird that you're comparing them. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 02:00 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:You are completely missing the point. One of us definitely is. People decided this movie wasn't worth their time from when it was announced, and nothing from the film makers or the film convinced them otherwise. People decided that Ghostbusters was a threat to their masculinity, the natural racial order and the very fabric of our culture.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 02:10
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
I'd rather not watch that. Or anything else involving RLM.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 07:29
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
You're a lot more engaged with correcting other people's lack of engagement with this film than you are with this film. Come on, dude, be the change you want to see in the world.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
The most telling thing is that, while you can criticise 'tweet my meat' for forgetting parts of the film, no one has actually put together a compelling reading. On CineD. A forum which had a multi page discussion on the racial politics implied by the Barbershop movies. At this point, we are spending more time on the critical reaction to the film than the film.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2017 00:09
|
|