Ghostbusters (2016) (Post-release)
- Thread starter Lear60man
- Start date
- Status
Grigori
Active Member
I saw it today and really enjoyed it, I'd take the chance to see it again even if it came up. The original movies came out when I was a child and they were favourites of mine, so there is a lot of nostalgia attached for me. I thought this measured up really well. The characters/cast were good, I enjoyed Melissa McCarthy and Chris Hemsworth's roles especially. I found it a little slow to start, but quickly picked up and once it started moving was all good. It was really great to see Ghostbusters creatures with contemporary special effects, and there were a few frights as well as laughs because of that. The creatures were more menacing and credible as threats/frights than the original movies which worked really nicely. I liked the nods to the previous films, both the cameos and bits of the story arc and situations, and thought it worked great in a reboot. I would have liked if Sigourney got a more meaningful spot though, or something that fed into the story as it developed as she seemed a bit too much of an afterthought to me.
Beginning to think we may be a small minority who thinks this sucks,I haven't seen it yet mind but from what I have seen...naw,however if it is well liked and given praise I'll just say "meh" and walk away you can't fight the masses and if they approve just let it go.
For me I'll wait until I see it to say more but I haven't a hope it'll be even remotely good.
Westies14
Master Member
Also irrelevant to the (non-sexist) criticism. I said from the beginning that they might just manage to make a decent movie, but it wouldn't be for lack of trying to blow it on Sony's part. If this film is a success, all the wrong lessons will be reinforced from a studio perspective.
Also, it looks terrible. Can the movie really be THAT much funnier or compelling than all of its trailers and TV spots? I'm gonna have to assume the 55% of viewers who didn't like it are my kind of audience.
This.
I find myself wanting this movie to fail just because of the way it's been handled. I don't mind seeing McCarthy & friends get a hit, let little girls all over the country have a GB of their own, let the angry sexists be refuted . . . but please, don't let the studio handle a project like this and get rewarded for it. It frustrates me almost as much as seeing Michael Bay getting paid a fortune to wreck Transformers & TMNT for a decade straight.
d_osborn
Sr Member
I always thought it was a goofy thing to complain about. A sequel would probably have been really close to the reboot. They were after Feig to direct ALIVE AGAIN, and I'm sure he would have stuck with the same comedic sensibilities.
niennumb1
Master Member
I think the general movie audience are detached moviegoers who just want to go see a movie and aren't passionate as we are about the material. A lot just don't seem to care about any of the elements that go into making a great film so aside all that goes on the internet they just go anyway.
Seeing the advertising and quality of the content in the trailers we are definitely heading toward a future of this eventual audience draw:
Idiocracy A** movie clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE5aKNAcU2I
Seeing the advertising and quality of the content in the trailers we are definitely heading toward a future of this eventual audience draw:
Idiocracy A** movie clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE5aKNAcU2I
KrangPrime
Master Member
If anyone doesn't see that wigg photo as ANYTHING but publicity...i've got bridges to sell them.
and that first statement. Apart from having to deal with all the feig fanboys who suddenly think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread now that he's associated with ghostbusters........who probably would not have bothered with him before.... Now we'll have feig thinking ' I did it. I insulted the fans and got away with it. the chosen few praised me as god, and the rest? well, screw 'em. and i can say that all i want now, because the movie made millions..'
I just find it funny how in 2016 it's still PERFECTLY ok to look down on those nerds who take film seriously. want to be a full grown man dressed as a baby and live in a crib? ok. Live your life dressed full time as a mascot? you got it. take a movie seriously? not so much. and that's pretty much what feig and others are doing here, because that is all they can do to defend a movie that, lets face it, to my sensibilities, it just is not good or funny. it just isn't. I've seen two feig movies..i can't imagine this one being much better based on the trailers..
sigh. like i said...i feel sorry for humanity that this is what they want. fart jokes and dick shots.
oh well. we'll see what it does this and next weekend. i'll just have to be happy that i'm not one of the millions that fell for it.
not surprised, just dissapointed.
Last edited:
goldenhawk
Well-Known Member
The picture is a Sony setup. This Rubies costumes aren't widely available to the public yet. Sony bought them and gave them to those girls for free. Well, at least the girls got something out of Sony.
KrangPrime
Master Member
huh.. thank you for new info.
you know, there is no doubting the movie is making money. yet, even I, the movies biggest detractor, have to begin to doubt all these empty theater reports. even if some are being reported by movie supporters. something is not adding up. you can't have that many empty theaters and still be making money. unless these are still all from the uk this week.
jettajeffro
Active Member
Sometimes girls can get excited about meeting non celebs too and see them as role models. That's what I talk about in Ghostheads, anyone can be a Ghostbuster and anyone can be a role model. So being able to be a role model while being a Ghostbuster is icing on the cake. We've had female members on our team since day one in 07 and girls have always been excited to see them.
Attachments
KrangPrime
Master Member
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=ghostbusters2016.htm
if it only made 17 million total....in two weeks, i'd be happy with that. i'd consider it a major failure and feel like the fans won after being beaten to death by the cast.
but, $17 million x 3 = 50 million for the weekend, and even that is way too much.
of course, if it drops off to almost nothing next week with ice age and pets, i guess ican learn to live with that, but the studio will probably hail it as a success. a sequel will probably radically have it's budget cut if one comes out. i can't see them spending that much if it needs to earn $500 million back to turn a profit.
even so, i guess if $500 million is the budget number, and it barely eaks past even $60.....I guess the haters shouldn't feel too bad.
supposedly, they dragged the new and old cast back on kimmel again last night. by the wording, it seemed like a new segment and not a repeat.
come on sony. either give us what we want or stop trying.
Philly
Sr Member
Wasn't the budget $140-ish mil? A third of the way there
Ice Age and Pets is already out over here. I'm taking the family to watch it tomorrow, will see how it goes.
Ok so going by how GB16 is trending now, its set to make $48m opening weekend. Traditionally, solid movies suffer 50% loss in traffic weekly due to various factors such as theaters dropping shows for new releases, people already seeing it, new competition etc. If you run the numbers out to say 2 months, it comes in at roughly $116M. Now mind you, you have to deduct a percentage of ticket sales to pay the theater owners. That cut starts at around 25% and increases how long the movie is in the theater. But if we keep that figure at a 25% Sonys cut is $87 million. Traditionally a studio will double the production budget for marketing. This brings GB16 total studio cost up to around $280 million.
Ill be the first to point out that BvS was widely considered a stinker by critics but puled in $800? Million. I credit this to being able to draw on two huge fan bases. GB16 is drawing from a smaller fan base of the original and a strong female audience. Females arent generally drawn to the Sci-Fi genre but are going to see this in dis disproportional numbers compared to other similar Sci-Fi films.
Some critics are focusing on comparing GB16 to other Feig movies as being his biggest hit. This might be true, but if you look at production costs: Bridesmaids, The Heet, Spy cost $32M-$43M-$65M respectfully. They were all relatively cheap to produce and paid off well for the Feig and the studios. GB16 is a different animal because of its huge production, marketing budgets and smaller fan bases. But lets not forget that Feig made $10M and McCarthy hauled in $14M for their roles in GB16. They are going for the fence on this one and might only make it to third base. They had the momentum, they had the popularity to make another summer smash hit (popularity wise), I just think they chose the wrong vehicle to bring it all home.
Remember, there is a rumored Ghostbusters 2017 movie in the pipe being produced by Sonys spin off production company called 'Ghost corps'. This is the movie they are sitting on and if/how it gets produced will play off of how well GB16 does. My Spider senses say that if GB16 is a run away hit, GB17 will be another Mcarthy/Wigg movie. If GB16 tanks I think Sony will kill any GB sequels for the short term. BUT, BUT, BUT.....if GB16 breaks even, I think Sony might pull a Spiderman and reboot the reboot. Rumors have been swirling about an all male GB franchise with Chris Pratt and Channig Tatum.
Given China (second largest movie audience worldwide) has busted access to GB16, Ill make the guess of GB16 doing $140M worldwide. That puts GB16 in the Reboot file for Sony.
Ill be the first to point out that BvS was widely considered a stinker by critics but puled in $800? Million. I credit this to being able to draw on two huge fan bases. GB16 is drawing from a smaller fan base of the original and a strong female audience. Females arent generally drawn to the Sci-Fi genre but are going to see this in dis disproportional numbers compared to other similar Sci-Fi films.
Some critics are focusing on comparing GB16 to other Feig movies as being his biggest hit. This might be true, but if you look at production costs: Bridesmaids, The Heet, Spy cost $32M-$43M-$65M respectfully. They were all relatively cheap to produce and paid off well for the Feig and the studios. GB16 is a different animal because of its huge production, marketing budgets and smaller fan bases. But lets not forget that Feig made $10M and McCarthy hauled in $14M for their roles in GB16. They are going for the fence on this one and might only make it to third base. They had the momentum, they had the popularity to make another summer smash hit (popularity wise), I just think they chose the wrong vehicle to bring it all home.
Remember, there is a rumored Ghostbusters 2017 movie in the pipe being produced by Sonys spin off production company called 'Ghost corps'. This is the movie they are sitting on and if/how it gets produced will play off of how well GB16 does. My Spider senses say that if GB16 is a run away hit, GB17 will be another Mcarthy/Wigg movie. If GB16 tanks I think Sony will kill any GB sequels for the short term. BUT, BUT, BUT.....if GB16 breaks even, I think Sony might pull a Spiderman and reboot the reboot. Rumors have been swirling about an all male GB franchise with Chris Pratt and Channig Tatum.
Given China (second largest movie audience worldwide) has busted access to GB16, Ill make the guess of GB16 doing $140M worldwide. That puts GB16 in the Reboot file for Sony.
rocketeer25
Sr Member
Saw it today in a mostly empty theater. I went in with very low expectations and ended up liking it more than I thought. The start was slow and some of the characters seemed a bit forced in the beginning but seemed to settle in over the course of the movie. Not a great movie, but solid. I'd give it a 6.5 out of 10. I think the last line of the movie summed up the whole movie for me:
"That's not bad... that's not bad at all"
"That's not bad... that's not bad at all"
Wasn't the budget $140-ish mil? A third of the way there
More like $280 if you include marketing. Historically a studio will spend the same amount as production on marketing for a summer blockbuster so 140 + 140 = 280M. Word of mouth will give GB16 legs or cripple it on the second week. Studios are looking for home runs like Deadpool, Bridesmades etc. Movies that were cheap to produce/market but doubled or tippled costs.. Since sequels rarely top the originals, studios can green light them but with smaller budgets anticipating smaller returns.
I doubt they spent that much on marketing. Weren't people in the other thread complaining because of the LACK of marketing and how that proved Sony was trying to make the movie go away? Now they've spent 140 million on it?
Maybe if we can find a link where someone official gives a estimate I'll believe it.
Maybe if we can find a link where someone official gives a estimate I'll believe it.
your anger has blinded you. You really think people are okay with baby men? Bronies and furries Are mocked all the time.
Plus Feig made a show dedicated to being who you are and being passionate about nerd culture... And got cancelled for it.
- Status
Similar threads
