Edwardowan
Sr Member
LOL! who says the terrible exec isn't a woman!? I love the all girl idea. just wish a couple of the original actor/characters were in it to even if just for cameos.
Ghostbusters movie by Paul Feig
- Thread starter ghostryder
- Start date
LOL! who says the terrible exec isn't a woman!? I love the all girl idea. just wish a couple of the original actor/characters were in it to even if just for cameos.
Yeah, that's right. I believe his dream cast was Wiig, McCarthy, Emma Stone & Linda Cardelinni.
Of course if that had happened, the non-diversity issue would have almost many squeaky wheels whining.
Endless Wonder
Sr Member
I just.........ugh. When you say you're not being sexist but then you go on rant about everything you dislike about what's being done and then at the very last second you just have to get in a jab at the fact that the film is starring women.....I don't get it. :wacko
Endless Wonder
Sr Member
I literally got chills and a huge smile across my face when I saw it. For a brief moment, I didn't care it was a reboot, I didn't care that it didn't take place in the same continuity. All I saw were GHOSTBUSTERS. I was a little kid again.
Yes, I'm still upset that this isn't a direct, or even an indirect, sequel or continuation. But one photo made me feel like I did when I was 3 years old watching Ghostbusters for the first time in my grandmother's living room. Will the whole film bring that back? Doubtful. But I'm just going to stay open minded and hope for the best.
EDIT:
Also, I saw a video on Instagram of the Ecto-1 pulling out of the garage and taking off down the street with the lights going. Not going to lie, I loved it.
Edwardowan
Sr Member
and those following late It wasn't me... its the post by Endless Wonder
Sr Member
Yes, sorry! I should have clarified.
Just consider it an alternate universe like JJ Trek.
That's the ticket. Everything is ok.
That's the ticket. Everything is ok.
jlee562
Sr Member
That's two in one day from Neil....
- - - Updated - - -
I just don't get wrapped up in the "replacement" of the old Ghostbusters, because there is literally no way that the new film can do that. And I literally mean "literally."
Fair enough, but you have to concede that it's something that really taints some people's view of how this is developing. Myself included.
At the very least in my case I'm consistent though. Hate that they did it with Trek and there are many other franchises I'd feel the same way about regardless of casting.
Sent from my SGH-I317M using Tapatalk 2
jlee562
Sr Member
Oh, of course I'd concede that.
I should work on my phrasing, re-reading what I wrote, I can see how that last comment comes off snarkier than I intended it to.
I just see two different films. The fact that the new film exists in a new continuity, but uses the same themes, doesn't make the old film disappear in my mind. It just doesn't process for my way of thinking when some folks say that this film is "replacing" elements of the old continuity. I mean, it's not like you're going to pop in the original film and all the new proton packs have been CGI'ed in or anything.
It's funny that you brought up TREK. I was thinking about that myself in the GB context the other night.
If the Nerada had come through the wormhole, destroyed the Kelvin with Kirk & family on board, then proceeded to destroy Vulcan with Spock & family still there, then use that as the catalyst to tell the story, would that have made the detractors accept that film better?
KrangPrime
Master Member
oh cry me a river. one mention of women in anything and here comes the sexism card.
which one of these movies used, in it's first few months, the hash tag #fourfunnywomen to promote itself? when the only word anyone should have focused on was 'GHOSTBUSTERS?'
How did the original movie promote itself? on the strength of the brand (unknown then), star power (bill murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver, Annie Potts etc)....and logo being seen all around town. From the very start, they've been using the hash tag #fourfunnywomen to promote this thing, and that vanished as soon as the cast got finalized and it became obvious. grand girl movie stands in my opinion... it seems someone wants to make it a point that 'hey, they are women'..yeah, we know.
and again, all this would go away, and I could care less if it where A SEQUEL.
so, I guess in this case, damned if you do, damned if you don't no matter what. The 'for the movie' people are taking over now that all the things are getting out there....so this thing will be a hit no matter what. twist this around however you all want.
KrangPrime
Master Member
no, because then it would have entered the realm of too different where as the previous one some would say is too similar. hence reboot dilema. if they used your idea, they could have just as easily started it 20 years after picard, with the enterprise F and moved on from there. in my opinion, reboots are too easy a way out and keep you from thinking up new fun ideas. or be creative with an old one as it is.
-edit and for the record I'd HATE this reboot idea if it where all new men characters and no peter and ray.
Last edited:
I think the method that NuTrek used to continue the franchise was far more lazier than any reboot I had seen up to that point. All of a sudden Star Trek became a story about fulfilling your "destiny". I loath "Destiny" stories with a bloody vengeance because it introduces grand expectations within the context of the story itself that takes away from any natural course of character development. That whole scene with Spock telling NuSpock about how his friendship with Kirk will define him as a character was just bad story telling.
This Ghostbusters reboot? I don't think there's going to be any of that. No previous team to look up to, no dealings with ghosts that they can reference and no expectations on how the story will unfold. The only way that can be lazy is if they literally copied everything from the previous ghostbusters word for word.
jlee562
Sr Member
Like I said, if you don't want to be called out for "sexism," stop making sexist comments. It's pretty simple really.
Here's a large problem with things today. Can we never mention that they're 4 ladies in this without being called sexist??? You can't mention someone's ethnicity without being racist???
I've personally dealt with this crap in the past, & it's getting worse!
I once sold shoes in SEARS. I was in my early 20's & worked with 7 other college students that were all black. A lady called & had me check on a size for her, & when she said she was coming for them, she asked how she would know who I was.
I said that I was the white guy.
I was suspended for 2 weeks for making 'Racially Insensitive' comments.
Sorry to rant, but I have no time for any group, person, or agenda to have itty-bitty feelings, & use feigned outrage & perceived oppression to further themselves over all.
Sorry for the rant, & even though I quoted jlee, it was NOT directed at him. Just the tightrope we seem to have to walk to keep from having words put in our mouths, & ideas put in out heads.
jlee562
Sr Member
I hear ya.
I'm at that weird age (31) where I'm starting to "feel old," but still young enough to scoff at the "old timers." When I first started hearing people talk about how this generation is so narcissistic, I dismissed it as nonsense. Mostly because if the younger generation isn't pissing off the older generation, something's gone horribly wrong. But then I started hearing stories from young academics (so, people around my age) being really resentful of the learning environment of "trigger warnings" and the like. For lack of a better term, "political correctness." One college professor was eventually fired for making a sexually tinged joke, which somehow became "sexual harassment."
Stuff like that infuriates me.
But hey..uhh...orange stripes, huh? :lol
I'm at that weird age (31) where I'm starting to "feel old," but still young enough to scoff at the "old timers." When I first started hearing people talk about how this generation is so narcissistic, I dismissed it as nonsense. Mostly because if the younger generation isn't pissing off the older generation, something's gone horribly wrong. But then I started hearing stories from young academics (so, people around my age) being really resentful of the learning environment of "trigger warnings" and the like. For lack of a better term, "political correctness." One college professor was eventually fired for making a sexually tinged joke, which somehow became "sexual harassment."
Stuff like that infuriates me.
But hey..uhh...orange stripes, huh? :lol
Kerr Avon
Master Member
Yeah, it's wrong on the "car" too. The red lines are too thin.
Kerr Avon
Master Member
I like McKinnon's look being similar to the RGB Spengler, but the rest look like crap still, and that car looks the worst I have ever seen in even the lamest fan films which this is. Even though Feig isn't even a fan of the movie. The red lines are out of proportion on the no ghost sign, that big assed yellow light looks stupid to the point of being entirely too distracting, the chrome over the ghost sign is just really ****ing lazy, and the rest of the car is so bad I've had bowel movements that are more fun to look at.
If you wont, I'm perfectly happy to direct it at him. The fact that the cast is women is the ENTIRE gimmick of the movie. It's the point harped on from day one till now. But someone mentions that it's a female cast and you get your panties all wadded up. Give it a rest.
There actually ARE people saying that women can't star in movies (which is baffling, since last time I checked, it's not 1940..it actually HAS been done now. Many times, in spite of the trolls insistence that Paul Feig invented putting women in films). Haven't seen them here, but they are out there. Why don't you go find some of them and rant for a while?
~~~~~
As for sequel vs remake: both have issues, both can be good. Ideally a sequel is when you have a way to take the story further. A remake is when you think it was decent, but that time, or money, or inspiration can enable you to take it to new heights unavailable to the earlier version. Star Trek is actually an interesting example: they had the money and technology to do effects that were not possible in previous movies. I actually don't remember all that many people having a problem with the concept. A bigger problem was the plot holes you could drive a starship through.
Where it goes wrong for BOTH, is when it simply done because they want more money. Then it usually ends up being just forced. Get the poster first, then design some toys, line up some hot young singer for the sound track, bankable cast...and the script...ah just bang that out over the weekend.
That last sentence has become a cliche for a reason: because it happens A LOT.
Similar threads
