Ghostbusters movie by Paul Feig

Not to rehash the "we have valid arguments" vs "sexism" debate; but the fact that we are still discussing it pages later demonstrates that there's an underlying issue that warrants discussion.

And, what the real point of the feminist criticisms of Bridesmaids is, is that having a "leading woman," or women isn't necessarily the same as portraying a feminist viewpoint (i.e.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bechdel_test )

edit to add:

ANYWAYS....

I was looking back over the email timeline post, that was linked a few pages back, and conspicuously absent from that re-telling of the story was the "Paul turned it down 3 times" part. Does anybody have a link to those emails?

I'd like to read the context for myself.

CelticRuins said:

And lastly, since I talked about this with a friend of mine last night....if you want to see strong females in leading roles, there's nothing wrong with that! I do as well...clearly. I aspire to be a bad ass when I can.

But DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT act like we haven't had a good run from time to time. You can't expect the world to change over night. It never will. That's wistful thinking.

Start showing your kids the same movies/tv shows with leading women...here I can name a few:

1. ALIEN ANTHOLOGY - If you cast out Ripley and refuse to show future generations one of the original bad ass females in Sci-Fi history...you have no honor.
2. Mad Max: Fury Road - A sequel that got it right. AND it wasn't in your face about it. Perfection.
3. Princess Leia
4. Agent Carter
5. SARAH, FRIGGIN' CONNOR.
6. Lt. Uhura and Capt. Janeway
7. Firefly - Zoe. Kaylee. River. Inara.
8. Farscape - Need I say more, or do I have to list like I did with Firefly?
9. Dana Scully
10. Michonne from Walking Dead
11. Mako from Pacific Rim

I could go on for an hour here...but seriously, stop excluding the past and refusing to show new generations these amazing stories that got it right. Sure they had male counterparts, but that's called BALANCE. It's called being human instead of labeling one thing one way. It is proven that original concepts and sequels done correctly will kick all sorts of ass. Reboots, by and large, either fail or might be half decent, but not enough to be REMEMBERED.

And if you say that any of those movies aren't something you can show your kids....please remember that Ghostbusters wasn't exactly a kid film. We just so happened to be able to watch it when we were kids and took it over. Venkman says "Make 'em hard!" for cyin' out loud. Didn't even realize that 'til I grew up, amoungst many other slipped in things for adults.

So there it is. Final post on this. I'm resting my case.

Click to expand...

I don't think you and I disagree, but I do have an issue with the list you provide (namely #3,4,6,9 and 10). And my problem with it is the typical thing that happens in movies. The bad ass woman is established only to become the guys side kick or be constantly rescued by him. What's called the Trinity Syndrome

"For the ordinary dude to be triumphant, the Strong Female Character has to entirely disappear into Subservient Trophy Character mode. This is Trinity Syndrome à la The Matrix: the hugely capable woman who never once becomes as independent, significant, and exciting as she is in her introductory scene"

A lot of the characters you mention are subject to this, and that is the problem in Hollywood.

1. Strong badass woman, sure, but like terminator is overshadowed by the Alien
2. Cant argue here Mad Max: Fury Road got it right.
3. Princess Leia? really? I cant believe she makes the list. She is literally being rescued throughout the entire 3 films. She is a prime example of the supposed strong woman in Hollywood. One minute firing guns and being a bad ass and the next she needs to be rescued from Teddy Bears by the guys. When she tries to rescue one of the guys, she gets captured and wears the skimpiest outfit ever. The movies only take place because she needs to be rescued...think about it...Obi Wan and Yoda were apparently perfectly fine letting the empire rule the galaxy until oh man lets go rescue the girl.
4. Agent Carter, Meh. I didn't watch the show, (which is not set in a great time period for women) but in the movie she was the bad ass until the real Hero (Guy) shows up. Then is relegated to a dance partner.
5. SARAH CONNOR, yeah strong woman, over shadowed by the Machine.
6. I dont remember Lt. Uhura as a bad ass, She is the communications officer, basically a space secretary. Capt. Janeway a TV show, but she was less of a bad ass the longer the show went on. She was basically in love with Chakotay when I stopped watching.
7 and 8 Never watched it.
9. Dana Scully was literally Mulder's side kick, He even has to save her from cancer.
10. Michonne from Walking Dead, Yeah a bad ass but again the more the show goes on the more she becomes Ricks sidekick. Is it following the comic, yeah. But she could/should be the Daryl of the show, instead she is becoming tame. Shoot Carol is starting to become more of bad ass then her.
11. Mako from Pacific Rim Like #2 I couldn't agree more with this one also.

I would put forward that one can agree this treatment of female characters in movies is a problem with out liking this GB movie. So there is no need to excuse it, say things that are clearly not true like that women are respected to much to be the funny lead (don't remember who said that). Just go on not liking this GB movie, and also recognizing that this is a problem in Hollywood.

Now, none of this has really anything to do with this GB movie So I'll just let it go after this post.

Chief Brody, Matt Hooper, Captain Quint - three strong male characters who are completely overshadowed & overwhelmed by the charisma, star power, and sheer bad-assery of the shark. Not one of those guys even made it onto the friggin' movie poster.

So I guess JAWS is not an example of strong male leads?



BTW, which one is the strong male badass lead in the sausage-fest that is the original Ghostbusters? Ray? Egon? Venkman? Zeddmore?

Louis.

oh dan aykroyd. I know you are a huge cheerleader and just want to see the property you, ivan and harold created survive. but this.....a thirty second scene doing a bad throw away joke....


It's a shame sony over powered you guys to move this crap forward.

Ok lets set that straight right now. Sony didn't over power Dan. He is getting paid.

A cab driver? They couldn't at least put him in Ray's bookstore? Ray Stanz reduced to cabbie with grammar issues?

Friggin' get over the sex issue. Only a small handful of dumb, trolling fan boys made it about that. They're the same idiots that ruined the Killing Joke homage Batgirl cover for the rest of us.

Click to expand...

If you can't see the reek of mysogony emnating from from many posters in this thread, I don't know what to say to you. If this were truly just about displeasure at the movie being rebooted, this thread would be half as long. I seem to recall one of the most prolific posters here having a thread closed before for slating 'fake' female cosplayers. Yuk.

Not to rehash the "we have valid arguments" vs "sexism" debate; but the fact that we are still discussing it pages later demonstrates that there's an underlying issue that warrants discussion.

Click to expand...

Ya hah.

dbalschi said:

Ok lets set that straight right now. Sony didn't over power Dan. He is getting paid.

Click to expand...

yes, I realize that... and he probably would have gotten paid even if he hated the idea. but from this whole process, it seems to be that sony had more power to get things done this time around somehow, where as 20 years before that, it was development hell..


in other news, I hate this idea too.. http://comicbook.com/2015/07/15/the-last-starfighter-tv-reboot-in-the-works/

If you can't see the reek of mysogony emnating from from many posters in this thread, I don't know what to say to you. If this were truly just about displeasure at the movie being rebooted, this thread would be half as long. I seem to recall one of the most prolific posters here having a thread closed before for slating 'fake' female cosplayers. Yuk.

Click to expand...

"Many" posters? I don't think so. A few but not many.



It's right to expect everyone to give an all-female GB reboot a chance.
But it's not realistic to expect ZERO disappointment on the part of the guys when a change like this is made.

You can't change a whole cast's look without at least a little bit of disappointment from that crowd. Black, white, latino, english, American, male, female, etc. Everyone identifies with something a little more when the protagonist(s) is closer to themselves. We pretend not to feel this way but we all do a little bit.

Yeah, I know, white men get far more than their share of protagonists to identify with. But that's using logical reasoning to resist an emotional reaction, which is a hard battle to fight (even within yourself). The bottom line is the principle still applies for the male GB fans. And in GB's case, it's a much-loved franchise where the scientisty nerdy types got to be the cool heroes. That was pretty unusual 30 years ago.

IMO the fact that the change in GB is ALL female drives up the reaction a lot. If the change had been 2 & 2 then I suspect the backlash and discussion would have been a small fraction of what it is now.

I dunno but to me my problems are this:

Fegine or however you spell his name says "I don't care for this but I'll make my own take on it" then I see that Ecto one is almost the same,the packs are almost the same,the uniforms? again almost the same,I take it it's even in NYC,but the BIG change? they're all women...and in fact look like a gender bent version of the original.

That folks smacks of pandering to me,he knows women's rights are the latest,greatest hip thing so he's tripping over his man bits to cover it,if the film was made a little later I suspect the guy would have made the cast all gay.

Women should be a little insulted,like others have said if you want to support women go make something new not change things that are already there.

If you wanted to make it so I could support this? two ways.

Ether make it so someone from the original pulls these gals together,Ray or as I said Janine,hell the one who looks like Egon could be his and Janine's kid fer gawd's sake.

Or two make it DIFFERENT set it in Chicago,use a SUV with just a no ghosts sign on the door,change the packs,and THEN make the cast all female.

I'll still see it but I can't,and won't stop saying that it seems like the guy is kissing feminist butt to make it successful.

That's my opinion and all I'll say on this,someone needs to lock this thread as people are letting their political sides taint it.

In what email(s) does Feig write anything to the effect of "I don't care for this," or any other such comment which demonstrates the supposed disdain it is claimed he holds for the franchise?

Krull said:

Women should be a little insulted,like others have said if you want to support women go make something new not change things that are already there.

Click to expand...

How are we supposed to interpret that in any way outside of "Woman have no place in established franchises that were once lead by men"? Because that's all your statement says.

Jeyl said:

How are we supposed to interpret that in any way outside of "Woman have no place in established franchises that were once lead by men"? Because that's all your statement says.

Click to expand...

Um....reading is fundamental? I said I'm all for it being an all women Ghostbusters IF it ties to the other films,if you just do it "just because women belong too" then it's stupid,same if you use gays,blacks,Asians or whatever.

Just for laughs what if you took an all women film and made a new one....with all men? equal means equal bub.

I, too, do not understand why it needs to be reboot with all women. A continuation of the story with the daughters could have been really neat. And that would have solved a lot of the current issues we have, i.e. the props being weak and watered down interpretations of the originals, just like the costumes. A female villain maybe, why no Vigo´s granddaughter or something like that? Ah well. We will see.

Jeyl said:

How are we supposed to interpret that in any way outside of "Woman have no place in established franchises that were once lead by men"? Because that's all your statement says.

Click to expand...

:facepalm

That's NOT what he said. He said that the WAY this was done is pandering. It's simply a gender bent Ghostbusters. Same basic roles, same ethnicity, just take the characters and make them female. No originality to it.

He even gave two examples of how these women could still be the inheritors of the franchise and it be alright. Once again, taking a single line out of context to play to your agenda.

Fun role play. How would you like it if they remade Alien and changed Ripley to a man? Not only that but they keep almost everything else the same, same basic design, same alien, same feel.

I'd be outraged. That is NOT the story, you do NOT replace that woman, and if you do you had BETTER make it different.

Yes, you will always have the original, but that's not the point. The point is that instead of taking the franchise and doing something unique with it, which could very well star a male lead, you've taken an original and fresh film that people hold dear and just done some tweaking to cash in on the franchise. What's worse is that eventually there will be a generation of people who when you mention Alien will have no thought of the original and that character whom you love so much.

You have every right to be offended and it has nothing to do with the gender of the actor and everything to do with how it's done.

YES there is sexism out there and YES there have been some sexist posts here. The majority here have NOT been though.

"Stupidity is genderless"

Now back to some more facepalming. The new and (pure crap) Ecto-1, how do you like them apples???

Michael Bergeron said:

It's simply a gender bent Ghostbusters.

Click to expand...

When is gender bending in and of itself a bad thing? While the characters may share some similarities in terms of looks, I doubt the characterizations will be word for word what the original Ghostbusters team were like. And for that matter, why is 'originality' held in such high standards that anything that doesn't remotely resemble an original thought is instantly chastised at face value? Being original is not some packaged deal that comes with great performances and a solid execution. An original film is just as susceptible to being the worst movie ever made as a remake/reboot/re-imagining. If this new Ghostbusters movie is well acted, funny, entertaining and brings back even the slightest sense of Ghostbusters fun, shouldn't that be enough?

Michael Bergeron said:

Fun role play. How would you like it if they remade Alien and changed Ripley to a man? Not only that but they keep almost everything else the same, same basic design, same alien, same feel.

I'd be outraged. That is NOT the story, you do NOT replace that woman, and if you do you had BETTER make it different.

Click to expand...

YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT I WOULD THINK IF ABOUT THAT?! I wouldn't care. I would still have my ALIEN and ALIENS movies which will always have Ripley in them and they will always be classics. Just as I'll always have Ghostbusters, Ghostbusters 2 and The Real Ghostbusters. Arguing about this movie 'changing things' is just not the type of thing to get overly dramatic over since it doesn't affect the original films in any way. However, films like Prometheus that fundamentally change elements within the context of the originals IS something that gets on my nerves. For me, that film took the unknown terrors of a dark universe and said "It was us the whole time! Aren't we clever?". It's like if I made a prequel to Ghostbusters and said that the entities weren't ghosts at all, but energy based aliens who sometimes take on human forms.