Ghostbusters movie by Paul Feig

I guess we could be thankful vanilla ice is nowhere near this. the only reason he was in tmnt 2 was because someone thought it needed a 'next big thing'. as if four mutated turtles battling a giant walking cheese grater with mutants wasn't enough...

speaking of odd casting, what does everyone think of EGB?

At the time, folks thought it was tremendously PC in terms of casting. but, once you got past that, where you able to enjoy the show? that also tried to go a little more for the scare factor. hence extreme in the name.

there where some episodes I liked more than others. The Irish episode where the mayor got kidnapped by a leprechaun . the Ghostmaker episode, where their spirits got ejected by possessing ghosts. on the whole, it felt like ghostbusters for the most part. The only thing I could have done without was Garret being in a wheel chair. in the real world he'd get killed on day one in that job. Also, upgrading the equipment. The design was lackluster for the most part. thrower was OK, but pack not so much. and the reason for upgrading the packs was forgotten past the first episode. they even brought back the old equipment when janine went on a rescue mission.

but I think it was a valiant effort to try to revitalize the franchise. all the characters where LIKEABLE (minus when the OGB's came in and they went the standard 'conflict' route for when an old team meets a alternate team).....I'd like to see a new series done by Aykroyd and Reitman that follows the events of the second movie, personally. even better if they can get everyone but murray back voicing. one would think that would be easier than doing a new movie
 
Man, screw continuity, screw the emails and screw this "only for the money" schtick. I'm actually flattered that a movie like this is being made where everyone sees money making potential in it, because this is a film that stars a group of talented women who aren't cast for the male gaze or reduced to secondary roles. If there was a method of blindingly making a Ghostbusters movie with only money in mind, I can think of so many ways they could have done it. So many ways.
 
Man, screw continuity, screw the emails and screw this "only for the money" schtick. I'm actually flattered that a movie like this is being made where everyone sees money making potential in it, because this is a film that stars a group of talented women who aren't cast for the male gaze or reduced to secondary roles. If there was a method of blindingly making a Ghostbusters movie with only money in mind, I can think of so many ways they could have done it. So many ways.

So the fact that the primary cast is all female trumps all then? So, you're saying that a crappy reboot/remake of Star Trek with an all female cast would be awesome then, and maybe they should do it with Raiders and Star Wars as well? Hell, let's remake Saving Private Ryan with an all female because it's never been done before and that having all women in the cast will trump everything and automatically make it a good movie/
 
So the fact that the primary cast is all female trumps all then? So, you're saying that a crappy reboot/remake of Star Trek with an all female cast would be awesome then, and maybe they should do it with Raiders and Star Wars as well? Hell, let's remake Saving Private Ryan with an all female because it's never been done before and that having all women in the cast will trump everything and automatically make it a good movie/

mousetrap-GETTY-444947.jpg
 
Alright....so I might have a little more to say than "Die in a fire." I'm one of the few girls out there that hates this with a fiery passion.

I've been basically told that I'm not "feminine", "not up for women's rights" and not part of the "movement".

It's ridiculous. The fact that I've been a fan of Ghostbusters since I very young is beside the point. The fact that I had a Ghostbusters costume, meaning I WAS a female Ghostbuster, is beside the point. The fact that I've kept up with this back and forth script pitch debacle for the past several years...you guessed it!

There's a contingent out there that literally doesn't give a **** if the movie is absolute balls. What do these particular people NOT get?! You do realize that a crappy movie, a rehashing of something that never needed rehashing...does absolutely ZERO for any kind of women's movement or representation in entertainment. It, in fact, makes it look worse.

You know what's good? Original concepts. Go out and make something new with a bad ass female cast. But rehashing something? You're opening yourself up as a huge target.

Growing up, watching the originals over and over until the tracking on the VHS was so worn out, everyone's faces were blurry...I had no problem. I didn't ask for a female lead. I guess because maybe I didn't see it as that? That I dressed up as a Ghostbuster anyway (sure my name tag read 'Venkman'...but he's my favorite...who can blame me?). That I represented for myself and was allowed to like it without any backlash. I didn't see it as male vs female; I saw it as a great, funny movie I loved with my family and friends.

It was fun. It's literally a movie I quote weekly, it's delved that deep into my life being.

But just because I don't support this un-funny woman cast, I evidently shouldn't be allowed to talk on the subject. And I also don't like "fun". And I'm "not a true woman".

No, actually just because I have a vagina in between my legs, doesn't mean I'm going to mindlessly walk into something that looks VERY unappealing from the start. Especially after keeping up with this back and forth Ackroyd, Ramis and Reitman all did for so long. Then the immediate scramble to get something out there after Ramis died. These guys are all getting a cut whether it flops or not. They just desperately want the cash flow. Ramis did an interview in 2009 where he literally said: "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was terrible! But Harrison made something like 65mil?....Money is money." And Ackroyd has been notorious to say he doesn't "live in the past", but has been pitching a damn Ghostbusters script for over 10 years. And Murray said when asked about this new one, "Yeah I hear it'll be all girls...It'll be hot."

Just....*head desk*

I'm one woman who doesn't constantly seek for female representation where I know it's silly or a tired place to even put it. And I'm not old and crotchety like some like to believe. I just think classics should remain classics. Reinventing a wheel that was never broken will never do any good. And I know this one will make money....Paul Blart made money. People will see it and think it's great, especially if they were never a fan of the old ones, or thought there actually was something wrong with the old ones. But, I like to think I have better taste, and I've seen the works of most involved in this, and I am definitely not a fan. So, chalk it up to what you will.
 
Last edited:
Thank you. someone else who admits that they put this through AFTER ramis died. and not very long after either.

Although I don't think Reitman and company did it for the money. I think the death of Harold really DRAINED everyone. and then they knew this project as it was was probably really officially dead. Sony just wore them down to the point of 'it's this, or nothing'....and I don't think they told them the truth of what they where getting either...just to get them to agree.

This is all purely on Sony as far as I think...

but thank you for being a breath of fresh air. I think most women think like you do if they are a fan of the franchise. it's the ladies that say 'come on now, girls get the time to play too, take a back seat boys' that are reasons why this is being made at all.. if you think that way, you are liking this remake for the wrong reasons.
 
nope. instead, you get told you **** and moan alot if you don't like something that's changed from what worked ;o).
reading some of the comments elsewhere on the web.. I also don't get this 'give women a chance to shine' comment. it's not like there havn't been leading women in the history of film for the last 90 years. why are people acting like this have never been done before? in tv or animation?
sigourney weaver and ripply might have something to say about that.

I'm sorry, but just because there have been leading lady's (which is another term for damsel in distress) in Hollywood since the beginning of film, Its not the same as making Women's characters be the hero's of the stories and be strong female characters. Heck the ONE you named was only 36 years ago, some would argue its the exception that proves the rule, and we all know the most interesting character in that film was still the ALIEN.

Now this is an argument that isn't isolated to this movie (which I am by no means dying to see) but more so to Hollywood as a whole. I just don't like it dismissed as if its not a problem in Hollywood, because we have allowed women to be the pretty/sexy one that needs rescuing in movies since film started.
 
There's a contingent out there that literally doesn't give a **** if the movie is absolute balls. What do these particular people NOT get?! You do realize that a crappy movie, a rehashing of something that never needed rehashing...does absolutely ZERO for any kind of women's movement or representation in entertainment. It, in fact, makes it look worse.

Paul hasn't stated anywhere that he intended this movie as a push for some women's movement. What it does for representation in the entertainment medium will fall on those who react to the final product. He just wants to make a movie that features an ensemble cast of female women. And if you genuinely think this movie hurts the representation of women in the entertainment industry, well, why aren't any of the women who are playing the actual title characters saying anything? You'd think that as women they'd care about how they're represented, or are you implying that they don't know any better?

You know what's good? Original concepts. Go out and make something new with a bad ass female cast. But rehashing something? You're opening yourself up as a huge target.

Target of what? Criticism? That's actually a business in the entertainment industry, and surprise! It applies to everyone whether the artist is making something original or not.
 
Paul hasn't stated anywhere that he intended this movie as a push for some women's movement. What it does for representation in the entertainment medium will fall on those who react to the final product. He just wants to make a movie that features an ensemble cast of female women. And if you genuinely think this movie hurts the representation of women in the entertainment industry, well, why aren't any of the women who are playing the actual title characters saying anything? You'd think that as women they'd care about how they're represented, or are you implying that they don't know any better?


That's the thing; there's no final product yet and people are already using it as a flag to fly under.

I don't know about some of the cast, but the women from SNL and Melissa McCarthy aren't really going to say much of anything. They're also getting paid. McCarthy for SURE isn't going to say anything...have you seen her track record with movies/tv? She's type-casted as the Chris Farely woman. That doesn't say much. Sure it's a gag...but it doesn't go much farther than that. All I can see them doing is putting out the similar one-liners from the original and kinda looking at the camera with a,

"Huh *elbow knudge*...HUH! Yeah...We said the thing!"

And with the fact that Feig has a track record of completely getting women wrong...I have no idea why in the hell people are using this as a banner of movement. This is one of MANY reasons as to why I am not supporting this dumb idea for a cash grab.

And it IS in fact, a cash grab. Nothing more. Nothing less. So all these people thinking it's some sort of "movement", can go blow steam up something else's arse.

As for targets, yes it's a huge target of criticism, sure. But it's more so if you're trying to reinvent the wheel, when no one asked the wheel to be anything different than what it was.

Please show me a place where people asked for this nonsense? I'm quite sure that place doesn't exist. I don't mean people asking for a sequel, but a complete reboot. People just saw it and immediately jumped on it as a good idea. Pointing, "YEAH! YEAH! GOOD! THAT'S GOOD! GO WITH THAT! I didn't know I wanted this garbage until now! WHOOPEEEEE!"

Sure Ghostbusters isn't a transcendental experience for the ages...but again...it's the wheel that didn't need fussing with. There in lies the idiocy. There in lies the reasoning as to why the majority of people are pissed off. Not because it's women....the only reason as to why most are bothered by that is because people are crawling out of rocks and acting like this is some HUGE idea, without doing any research into it to see that it is a cash grab for all of the people behind it. No one cares about it being a political movement.

And making a fun franchise into a political movement is killing it. I realize the people behind the actual movie aren't doing it, but the audience.

Movies are meant for entertainment value, and sometimes things should just be left alone in their values. You start disrupting the "force" when you muck with something no one asked to be mucked with.

But hey, no one's stopping people from seeing it. It just means I have a wwaaayyy different taste in movies than some people.
 
Last edited:
Erm, I don't mean this to be snarky at all, but; who is this audience that's making this into a political movement?

I'll admit flat out that I haven't followed discussion threads on this on other boards, so I'm asking out of my own ignorance of the situation, because I personally haven't seen what you're talking about.

In fact, what I saw today was quite the opposite:
http://io9.com/stop-calling-it-the-all-female-ghostbusters-1717423271
An all-male group is just a regular bunch of people. But when the group is entirely women, suddenly it seems REALLY noticeable, as if the Ecto-1 were a clown car packed with so many women that it’s mindboggling. People talking about the film can’t get it through their heads that these are just four women, out of thousands of people who have starred in thousands of action comedies. And yet, given that over half the population is female, statistically it has to happen that you’ll get four leads who are ladies once in a while.
The other problem with calling it the “all female Ghostbusters,” though, is that it’s simply a bad description. It doesn’t matter that the main characters are female. As I said earlier, this isn’t a chick flick about girl problems, or a story about what it means to be a woman. There is no reason to call attention to the lead characters’ gender other than to make it seem like some kind of excess or special exception.
 
There are quite a few people out there (and I've been at the brunt of it), that are in fact using it for feminism and berating all who dislike the movie just for the face value of not liking reboots, as not being for the cause.

I was literally told the other day that "just because I have a vagina, doesn't make me a lady."

That was through Tumblr, so I set myself up for that I guess. They're bred special over there....

Granted it's a smaller set of people...but it's still silly for them to do this with a movie like this. I get that as a female, I deserve representation. But as I've told others, I tend to look for it in the real world more so than anything. I know Hollywood will get it wrong anyway it's sliced, because of their track records.

And the sad fact is, people are still gonna see an all female cast up against the original cast of all males. What most people see with that? Female vs male.

Cats and dogs...living together....

YOU KNOW THE LINE.

Anyway...it's literally turned into silly garbage at this point and I'm tired of coming off as selling my point. I know most are just generally excited for the movie going experience of it all. My main problem doesn't even have anything to do with the any movement or anything of that sort...it's honestly the fact that reboots and remakes are so over done, it's mind numbing. I know it won't stop, I just have an opinion like many others.
 
Anyone feel free to burn me for this because it's something I've pondered recently but not really researched so
maybe I am wrong.


Look at the top horizontal scroll list here for a search of
top comedy films of all time
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=top+comedy+films+of+all+time

Where are the majority female leads comedy hits?

I am intentionally stirring the pot here. Booohooohahahahahahahahaha.


I have some thoughts but I want to see how bad I get zapped for breaching this.
 
Last edited:
Box office, schmox office. I dare say all-male comedies have had more opportunity to score big over the years.


I'd rather see the all-female superhero movie that Feig was working on before he got the GB project.


I agree with the comment that if this GB movie sinks, it's unfortunate that the all-female change might take the blame for it. Feig & the studio have already pushed the female angle too much in the media for it to escape unscathed. Truth is, the female cast won't ruin it just like a male cast won't make it good. (What it really needs is that little "quality" thing that some movies have.)
 
And with the fact that Feig has a track record of completely getting women wrong...I have no idea why in the hell people are using this as a banner of movement. This is one of MANY reasons as to why I am not supporting this dumb idea for a cash grab.

Would you mind elaborating on that 'completely getting women wrong' statement? It's a pretty damning charge especially when you consider the fact that three of his four movies, Bridesmaids, The Heat and this new Ghostbusters movie have female writers on them. And since Spy is Paul Feig's most successful film in terms of ratings where he shares sole writing credit, you're pretty much accusing women for failing to write women simply for being women. Seriously, what do you got?

I don't know about some of the cast, but the women from SNL and Melissa McCarthy aren't really going to say much of anything. They're also getting paid. McCarthy for SURE isn't going to say anything...have you seen her track record with movies/tv? She's type-casted as the Chris Farely woman. That doesn't say much. Sure it's a gag...but it doesn't go much farther than that.

So because she's an overweight comedian, that automatically means she's a Chris Farley knock off. I've seen Bridesmaids, The Heat, Spy and St. Vincent. No disrespect to Chris Farley, but she has a lot more acting range than Farley ever had. Most of her comedic moments in Paul Feig's work have little or nothing to do with her being overweight. So what gag are you talking about?
 
This thread is more than 8 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top