Ghostbusters Reboot

[Nefaro]

Rotten tomatoes consencus is pretty ok

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ghostbusters_2016/

Its not going to measure up to the original buts it reads like it's not going to be the dreck that everyone was forecasting for it as well.

Con

Rottentomatoes...


Where the critical acclaim regularly features children's animated movies near the top.   ::)   

Gives an idea of where the reviewers' tastes lean.   Not surprising, in the case of Ghostbusters, such a sophisticated audience gives it a decent rating what with all the generic slapstick humor involved.  Which does seem to be made for tweenies and probably foreign crowds.

[mirth]

That was almost a Pratt-like response  ;D

[JasonPratt]

I was thinking more of questioning whether the RT score was salted by media outlets who would feel nervous criticizing the merits of this bold move in gender equality or something like that.

[mirth]

Too short. Please expound.

[Gusington]

Sorry this is as expounded as I get.

[mirth]

Sorry this is as expounded as I get.

Foolish Took.

[JasonPratt]

Too short. Please expound.

THE POWAH OF PAIN COMPELS ME! -- not to. 

[Sir Slash]

I hear this movie's so bad the ghosts are threatening a lawsuit to have their parts removed from the film. The ghost of Johnny Cochran is representing them. In a statement he said, "If this movie's shit, then we have to get". I like that better than, "Booooooo"!

[MetalDog]

This could have been posted before, but, I thought this thread might could use some REAL Ghostbusters:


https://www.yahoo.com/movies/15-things-you-never-knew-about-the-original-174803908.html

[mirth]

This could have been posted before, but, I thought this thread might could use some REAL Ghostbusters:


https://www.yahoo.com/movies/15-things-you-never-knew-about-the-original-174803908.html

I knew pretty much all of that. Sorry it coalesced into one of the greatest movies of all time.

And I'm not sorry at all.

[mirth]

We all need to watch this

[BanzaiCat]

I've heard some preliminary reports that the movie isn't mind blowing, but it's not bad. I heard also that Leslie Jones is not nearly as bad as the trailers make her out to be (stereotype, loud, etc.).

But after a quick Google search, I found a lot of bad reviews, too.

IMDB is rating it 3.8 out of 10. I thought that could be due to people posting negative comments about it before it was even released, but going through the reviews shows a lot of people saw it and still hate it.

Rotten Tomatoes rates it a lot higher - 77%. 75 positive reviews versus 23 negative reviews.

The New York Times of course takes a totally supportive view of it (and completely misses the point as to why people whom haven't seen it, hate it in the first place - no, it's NOT misogyny, it's a bad script, an obvious cash grab, ignoring the original two films but paying a confusing lip service in the trailers to them, and Feig, whom is bad at his job). The NYT's title alone is infuriating. However, the comments are pretty much tearing the review apart:

Is it possible to find a positive review of this movie that doesn't belabor the fact that it stars four women? I mean, all the reviews that say "meh" or "it was bad" are pretty much treating the cast like any other cast of mixed genders and races, but the positive reviews are bold enough to even title their reviews with "deal with it!" or "girl power!" as if the gender of the four primary actors is the only thing that matters. Who's the sexist one here? The reviewer who can't seem to stop talking about girl power and how haters must be misogynists, or the fan who says "I just didn't want a reboot of a movie I loved."?

This review is an embarrassment. The agenda is clear. I'd be willing to bet Amy Pascal's money is in the reviewer's bank account, too.

The Chicago Sun-Times calls it a "horrifying mess."

I think in general, this movie is a completely mixed bag. Some will likely find goodness in it, while most will not. There will still be a dividing line between those that love this movie and sing its praises because it is four women, and others that say it's terrible - not because of the gender role reversals, but because it's yet another Hollywood lazy-as-shite reboot with a mediocre director. (Feig was decent enough in directing U.S. Office episodes, but his movies are decidedly average - Spy was a pretty great idea but I really didn't like Melissa McCarthy at all in it).

Sources like the NYT are not going to help things with their "girl power, deal with it, women are funny" title. Yes, there are some awesome female comedians and actors. Kristin Wiig is pretty much the only decent one out of this group while the others - well, I guess I'll have to see it myself to pass final judgement.

But there's no way in Hades I'm going to give a movie theater money to see this. I'm happy to wait.

[mirth]

The Chicago Sun-Times calls it a "horrifying mess."

Bad acting.

Uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music.

Cheesy special effects.

A forgettable villain.

A terrible script.

Pass.

[BanzaiCat]

If there's too many more reviews like that, I'll probably pass on it too.

The Fall Out Boy/Missy Elliot re-do of the Ghostbusters theme SUCKS. So much so that I'm not even going to post a link to it here.

[bbmike]

If there's too many more reviews like that, I'll probably pass on it too.

The Fall Out Boy/Missy Elliot re-do of the Ghostbusters theme SUCKS. So much so that I'm not even going to post a link to it here.

Yeah, I made the mistake of listening to part of it. It's really bad.