Firesprite, our very cool and very talented author! Hope you are doing well.
Yeah, so, last night I was with a group of close friends that I haven't got to hang out with in months. 1 guy out of 5 has a very opposite political view than the rest of us... But you know what? We talked briefly... Heard each other's points and went on having a great night! I can see 2 sides and LISTEN. (Very rare!) just like I can here!
I think this movie was a bad idea for not being a continuation FIRST AND FOREMOST. I don't care if they are men or women or both!!! Should've been a continuation! They could've EASILY been the 4 daughters of the original GBs!!!!
This just is what it is in my eyes... A crafted agenda using a popular franchise!
And I don't think ANYONE thinks it's better than the original... Do any of you???
I'm angry I didn't get a true GB3. NOT because I'm a masoginistic, racist, man baby *****.
And I resent being told that I am.
D Osborne I respect how you are handling your obviously strong feelings, and I've heard and see some of your perspectives on this ISSUE.
But, you guys ARE talking about an issue...
The anti crowd are most 98% talking about the movie in THIS THREAD.
Aww, thanks, Ken! Doing great, thanks for asking.
I, for one, was not thrilled about the prospect of the reboot. I didn't think it was necessary, nor did it seem like there was a huge yen in the world for more Ghostbusters to begin with (the fact that we haven't yet gotten the third movie should, I think, have been a clue to people). However, the movie went forward and after hearing from people I know and trust that it was not that bad, I went and saw it myself.
It wasn't that bad, IMO. Was it as good as the original? No. I'd say it was roughly on par with 2, however, which was a definite step down from the first. Just like 2, the pacing was weird in places, and there were definitely gags that went on long after they ceased to be funny (for me, specifically the scene with the Patrick Swayze references went on WAY too long). There is also the continued insistence that the only black person in the main cast has to be a blue collar worker as opposed to a scientist (even the assertion that Jones was originally supposed to be playing McCarthy's character is, to me bull**** because McCarthy's Abby is ridiculous and would not even remotely be taken seriously by the scientific community). I would, frankly, have rather seen her kick ass in the role that went to Wiig.
However, there were also nuggets of awesome in there as well (Holtzman's entire character was a whole barrel of fun for me and invariably, I found myself smiling when she was on the screen, for example). Jones was great, and Hemsworth had WAY too much fun playing both the vapid eye candy and the over-the-top villain.
I think where the movie stumbled hardest (for the most part) was when they tried to address social issues in the film. Aside from the part about reading Youtube comments (which made me snort-laugh), it was way too heavy-handed in its approach. Where the movie was at its best was when it loosened up enough to remember that it's supposed to be a comedy and let people just have fun with it.
The fact that GB2016 exists doesn't extinguish the movies that came before, just as the prequels didn't extinguish the existence of the Original Trilogy or, (shudder) JJ-Trek eliminated real-Trek. People saying that somehow these things destroyed their childhoods is a little ridiculous. Wrecked the future of the franchise? Certainly, in the case of GB or Transformers, or those of us hoping to get a more intelligent version of Star Trek any time in the near future. But what came before will always be there, comforting as the woobie you grew up with.
Anyway... my point here is that both sides have valid points and if people would maybe listen to one another on occasion, things wouldn't have devolved this far. But isn't that always the way?
.
