Ghostbusters (2016)

[MightyHypnotic]

Officially, now, not a flop.

http://www.houstonpress.com/arts/ghostb ... op-8622080

[Lurkndog]

I'll go with the Hollywood Reporter over the Houston Press:

'Ghostbusters' Heading for $70M-Plus Loss, Sequel Unlikely
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/g ... uel-918515

[Mr. X]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMmZ8Gu556k

[Femina]

Did anyone ever really think this was going to work though? I mean, Ghostbusters is like twenty years old at this point with near as much of that time spent in idle. It was never going to have the interest GB3 could have had a year after GB2 left theaters. The only people who would have been jazzed to run out and see it were lingering ultra fans of the originals, who expected (rightly so) the original cast to return to the gig and did NOT get that. Ignore even all the social gender controversy laden politics, ignore it all. The film was destined to fail on my first point alone. We wanted to see Ghostbusters 3 'the now years' with Ray, Egon and the gang, and we didn't get that, it was doomed for failure on that reality alone. Everything else just compounds on that failure.

[Heroine Addict]

You can blame Bill Murray for Ghostbusters 3 never happening. With Ramis dead and Murray not interested, we would have been left with Ernie Hudson making an effort while Dan Ackroyd tries to promote his Crystal Skull Vodka in every scene.

Plus let's remember what happens when Ackroyd makes a sequel to an 80s classic with a key cast member dead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82z0pw0iPgk

[sugarcoater]

If you didn't like the new Ghostbusters, just wait for the Ocean's 11 reboot with an all-female cast. "Ocean's Ocho". Smh.

[Heroine Addict]

If you didn't like the new Ghostbusters, just wait for the Ocean's 11 reboot with an all-female cast. "Ocean's Ocho". Smh.

Hopefully, that will be a proper movie from WB. Sony appears to be going down the shitter.

[KnightsofGotham.com]

Did anyone ever really think this was going to work though?

It does work though because of the way hollywood operates. currently the biggest market for consumption of movies is China.
They didn't exactly have access to the amount of movies we do now, or even in the 80's

The new Hollywood game revolves around foreign markets, China being the crown jewel.
This is also why you're most likely not going to see a Suicide Squad sequel unless it makes bak three times what its currently made because China won't let the film into their country so Hollywood is looking at a major loss after distribution and promotion costs

So in short Hollywood thought it would work because every other lame reboot is made for non-american audiences

[Femina]

Did anyone ever really think this was going to work though?

It does work though because of the way hollywood operates. currently the biggest market for consumption of movies is China.
They didn't exactly have access to the amount of movies we do now, or even in the 80's

The new Hollywood game revolves around foreign markets, China being the crown jewel.
This is also why you're most likely not going to see a Suicide Squad sequel unless it makes bak three times what its currently made because China won't let the film into their country so Hollywood is looking at a major loss after distribution and promotion costs

So in short Hollywood thought it would work because every other lame reboot is made for non-american audiences

Well there's also that Suicide Squad just wasn't very good.......

[Dogfish]

If you didn't like the new Ghostbusters, just wait for the Ocean's 11 reboot with an all-female cast. "Ocean's Ocho". Smh.

It's got Rihanna in it so it works for me.

[Dogfish]

Did anyone ever really think this was going to work though?

It does work though because of the way hollywood operates. currently the biggest market for consumption of movies is China.
They didn't exactly have access to the amount of movies we do now, or even in the 80's

The new Hollywood game revolves around foreign markets, China being the crown jewel.
This is also why you're most likely not going to see a Suicide Squad sequel unless it makes bak three times what its currently made because China won't let the film into their country so Hollywood is looking at a major loss after distribution and promotion costs

So in short Hollywood thought it would work because every other lame reboot is made for non-american audiences

This is very true, and goes beyond what you're saying here. The movie did perfectly well by US standards and would have been expected to take a decent chunk of cash in China except that it was banned in China. Just, NOPE. So no China money.

Apparently they didn't think it should appropriate respect for the dead (y'know, because is GHOSTbusters) so it was straight up banned. Do not pass go, do not collect however many millions of dollars.

So other than a capricious bit of Chinese censorship it actually did pretty well but I don't imagine they'll make a sequel, for the simple reason that if you can't show it in China what's the point?

[Dogfish]

It's kind of sad in a way because although so much of it is really properly shit, a lot of it really spoke to a lot of people. It's not as bad as the Robocop or Total Recall or Get Carter or Italian Job or Point Break or whatever remakes that nobody complained about.

[sugarcoater]

The excessive criticism probably comes from the pandering way the movie was made into an all-female cast for the sake of an all-female cast. It comes across as contrived and overly-PC. Why not a mixed gender version? Males aren't always evil mysoginists.

[KnightsofGotham.com]

I think Comicbook girl 19 did a fantastic job of explaining it perfectly.
She is a youtube who makes her own movies, lives in hollywood, and actually has an inside presence in the industry.

Ive been watching her for years now and when she says something a few years before an event it usually ends up happening so i trust her opinion on the matter.

The good stuff starts at about 4 minutes but its all worth a watch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sn_vAcFGTJU

[sugarcoater]

An excellent take on the movie, but could she possible say "like" less? I get that she's portraying a character in the vlog, but perhaps she might cut back just a bit. She seems quite intelligent and rational otherwise, and her points are right on.

[KnightsofGotham.com]

yeah thats not an act. its just the way she is. Oddly enough I have noticed that many of the younger women from out west speak this way a lot now. I must go through like 10-15 California models every year and the ones that don't talk this way are the older ones.
I won't mention any names but there is a fairly large Model from LA who actually has several doctorates but still speaks like this. Its a cultural thing

[patmac4]

If you didn't like the new Ghostbusters, just wait for the Ocean's 11 reboot with an all-female cast. "Ocean's Ocho". Smh.

It's got Rihanna in it so it works for me.

anyone remeber her in battleship.

[Heroine Addict]

yeah thats not an act. its just the way she is. Oddly enough I have noticed that many of the younger women from out west speak this way a lot now. I must go through like 10-15 California models every year and the ones that don't talk this way are the older ones.
I won't mention any names but there is a fairly large Model from LA who actually has several doctorates but still speaks like this. Its a cultural thing

It's contagious. You'll be using an erroneous simile in every sentence by the end of the month.

If you didn't like the new Ghostbusters, just wait for the Ocean's 11 reboot with an all-female cast. "Ocean's Ocho". Smh.

It's got Rihanna in it so it works for me.

anyone remeber her in battleship.

She's playing Marion Crane in the final season of Bates Motel. So maybe she's had a few acting lessons if TV and movie roles are rolling in?

[Dogfish]

If you didn't like the new Ghostbusters, just wait for the Ocean's 11 reboot with an all-female cast. "Ocean's Ocho". Smh.

It's got Rihanna in it so it works for me.

anyone remeber her in battleship.

Nobody remembers Battleship. And it's not an accident.

[Dogfish]

The excessive criticism probably comes from the pandering way the movie was made into an all-female cast for the sake of an all-female cast. It comes across as contrived and overly-PC. Why not a mixed gender version? Males aren't always evil mysoginists.

How is it pandering when they know going into this thing they are going to boil the piss of literally millions of nerds? Pandering implies fan service, and Ghostbusters was if anything the complete opposite of fan service.

[tallyho]

Males aren't always evil mysoginists.

Most of the ones on this forum are....BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! which is why we like our heroines to suffer!

[sugarcoater]

Dogfish,
The pandering isn't for the fans of be original. The pandering is for the sake of having more female roles in Hollywood for the sake of more female roles, not because a female makes sense for the part. It's a contrived PC action, and any criticism can then be chalked up to mysoginy rather than accurate criticism.

[lionbadger]

I think Comicbook girl 19 did a fantastic job of explaining it perfectly.

Ive been watching her for years now and when she says something a few years before an event it usually ends up happening so i trust her opinion on the matter.

What KoG said

[Mr. X]

Ghost Busters couldn't be remade anyway. If it wasn't this cast it would have just been an Adam Sandler movie. Basically Pixels 2 since for some reason Sony just shits money on Adam Sandler. And the first one wasn't all that great. Was OK but not something stellar.

I can't believe this cost $144 million to make.

I also like Comicbook girl 19. Her reviews are pretty level headed.

[Heroine Addict]

Ghost Busters couldn't be remade anyway. If it wasn't this cast it would have just been an Adam Sandler movie. Basically Pixels 2 since for some reason Sony just shits money on Adam Sandler. And the first one wasn't all that great. Was OK but not something stellar.

I can't believe this cost $144 million to make.

It's possible that years of scripts and development for the abandoned Ghostbusters 3 are included in that. Superman Returns has an official budget of $204 million because all the development costs for Superman Lives were added on, including Cage and Burton's huge pay-offs for not making the movie.

[Mr. X]

Ghost Busters couldn't be remade anyway. If it wasn't this cast it would have just been an Adam Sandler movie. Basically Pixels 2 since for some reason Sony just shits money on Adam Sandler. And the first one wasn't all that great. Was OK but not something stellar.

I can't believe this cost $144 million to make.

It's possible that years of scripts and development for the abandoned Ghostbusters 3 are included in that. Superman Returns has an official budget of $204 million because all the development costs for Superman Lives were added on, including Cage and Burton's huge pay-offs for not making the movie.

True. They could have just folded costs in. But still GB3 was planned decades ago. Can't imagine they spent that much money in development. It could be these projects are toilets for lost money on other projects so they can write the losses off somehow. I know this happens in video game development where some unrelated project cost is rolled into a project that's a stinker to at least offer some write off.

[Dogfish]

Must factor in the the promo stuff, no way it could cost that much.

[xxxwarriorxxx]

So glad this flopped! Can't wait until the new Ben-Hur flops as well!

[Conveyor66]

So why exactly is this movie so reviled?

Haven't seen it myself,not sure if I want to?

[Heroine Addict]

It's not particularly offensive. Just a typical mediocre Sony comedy with whore-ish product placement in almost every scene.

Sony pretty much manipulated the situation to get a tantrum from a tiny minority of genuine misogynist weirdos and then pretended those guys accounted for 100% of the criticism. It was designed to shame people into being positive about a lazy and unremarkable movie.

[Mr. X]

So why exactly is this movie so reviled?

Haven't seen it myself,not sure if I want to?

It isn't. Its a mediocre movie. The controversy was when the studio billed it as some all female movie and "If you don't like it you're misogynist". Was about the only press it was going to get.

Kind of sort of similar to that N. Korean movie where they fakes some threats from NK to get publicity for the movie.

GB itself is just mediocre.

[lionbadger]

So why exactly is this movie so reviled?

Haven't seen it myself,not sure if I want to?

Partly because they are playing with romanticised films that audiences saw when they were 8 years old and unsophisticated. Studios are then surprised when adults don't see anything amazing now that they're in the 30s.

Same thing happened when they did the star wars prequels

[Conveyor66]

So why exactly is this movie so reviled?

Haven't seen it myself,not sure if I want to?

Partly because they are playing with romanticised films that audiences saw when they were 8 years old and unsophisticated. Studios are then surprised when adults don't see anything amazing now that they're in the 30s.

Same thing happened when they did the star wars prequels

oh yeah the prequels. I could some up those movies like this. A lot was spoken but little was said.

in force awakens a wordless scene of a young woman walking up to a old hero and handing him his long lost weapon said more to me than over half the exposition that was spoken in the prequels

[shevek]

Of course an alternative newsweekly like Houston Press is going to staunchly defend the new Ghostbusters with a piece that's still way more opinion than it is facts (how do sales of old Ghostbusters prove people liked the new movie? maybe people are going back to watch the original to see how it's better?) because the staff of those papers are rife with progressive third-wavers. But nobody cares what alternative newsweeklies say at this point. We've got one in my town and it has zero cultural impact on anything anymore, and it really seems like nobody reads their articles. This isn't the 90s anymore. The internet is paramount, not the outmoded boxes on street corners giving out free papers filled with ads for cigarettes, alcohol, strip clubs, casinos and lots of overpriced artisanal yuppie shit nobody wants to buy.

I am interested in how they'll treat an all-female Ocean's Ocho (is it really all-female? all I heard is that the crew had "female members" which it never really did before). If the ladies are hot and there's lot of exciting action, I'm all for it. I hope that cast is diverse as well. Let it be everything that Ghostbusters wasn't, and then watch the internet third-wave twitterers complain about objectification or something.

[xxxwarriorxxx]

Remakes are really what is wrong here. Originality is dead.

[Lurkndog]

So why exactly is this movie so reviled?

Haven't seen it myself,not sure if I want to?

Firstly, it's not very good. Not even as good as Ghostbusters 2, IMHO. The script is weak, and a lot of the jokes fall flat, and the third act is lame and nonsensical. Someone mentioned Adam Sandler and Pixels? It's not even as good as that.

Secondly, it isn't a sequel, it's a reboot. In the 2016 version, the original movie never happened. The new movie is a lot like the old movie, but not an actual remake. But it steals all the good parts of the original, and then makes them kind of suck. They also got most of the surviving original cast to do walk on cameos as the cab driver or the guy in the street. Most of these are nice treats for the audience, but Bill Murray is clearly not happy to be in the movie. He looks like someone was holding a gun to his head the whole time. All in all, it doesn't do any justice to the original Ghostbusters.

Thirdly, there's the stunt casting that makes the Ghostbusters all women. I don't really care about that. I just wanted the movie to be funny. I will probably check out the next thing Kate McKinnon does, because she played an amusing Harpo Marx type character as Holtzmann.

Lastly, there was a lot of political posturing that went on outside the movie, and created kind of a toxic climate. So there has been some backlash from that.

[Heroine Addict]

Remakes are really what is wrong here. Originality is dead.

I'm not sure that's strictly true. More films are being produced now than at any other time in history, both original screenplays and adaptations/sequels/reboots.

Recycling of ideas is almost as old as cinema itself. It's necessary to have a certain percentage of films with a trusted pedigree to prop-up risky loss-makers such as Nice Guys.

Of course, Ghostbusters wasn't a profit-maker either. But it stood a better chance on paper than an unknown quantity.

If Sony need a review for the DVD box, I will volunteer "It's not utter shit. A lot of it is rather shit, though."

[Mr. X]

Of course, Ghostbusters wasn't a profit-maker either. But it stood a better chance on paper than an unknown quantity.

I don't agree. I think the excuse of "well no one will let us make original stuff - or - original stuff doesn't sell" is just a cop out.

Sure there are plenty of movies released but most are not prime huge budget movies with original ideas. Most of the original material is now so forgotten that most people don't know what it is cause they weren't even born back then.

[KnightsofGotham.com]

Remakes are really what is wrong here. Originality is dead.

Over generalize much? is that wide brush you're painting with heavy?
lol I kid though, mostly.

There is a place for reboots.
For example take Rob Zombies Halloween

As a kid watching that movie I always wondered what the hell happened to michael to push him over the edge. and while I understood crazy I never understood why he chose that day and year to break out to kill people. what was his end goal? it was just a mystery.... then Rob Zombies version hit.
While agreeably its not an excellent movie it does really well when you add it to the original as a background into the mind of a child who just was born with the wrong wiring and was terribly effected by external life around him.
it added to the official mythos.
I think it did well as a reboot. So the assumption that all are is flawed because the moment you find one that isn't it ruins your entire argument.

[xxxwarriorxxx]

When did I say all remakes are bad? I said remakes, not all remakes, and new original movies are far and few between.

[sugarcoater]

Lol, if someone is going to deconstruct someone's argument, shouldn't they at least use apostrophes properly to show possession (Zombie's, as there is only one Rob Zombie and it is his production being referenced)? They should also add the apostrophe to "it's"'for "it is"'(as "its" is possessive), and there is a key difference between "affected" and "effected".
But I kid, mostly

As for reboots, Oceans 11 was a good reboot. Casino Royale would be another (if that counts). And there are others to be sure, but I would say the majority of reboots in the last 20 years have been bad. In short, I agree with both your points.

[Dogfish]

I think there's a good case for saying that remakes are bad by default. If you try to name the top ten worst remakes I guarantee, when you really get to thinking about it, you'll find ten is not nearly enough. There are dozens of really profoundly shitty remakes out there, often pretty big movies too.

I would suggest that maybe, if you're lucky, maybe one remake in ten isn't a complete steaming turd. Could easily think of ten shitty remakes for every one that was worth making though.

With that in mind the Ghostbusters remake was above average by remake standards, tried something new, bits of it worked, most didn't. That's the right approach to a remake, twist the formula, make it different*. That still puts it way above about 80% of other remakes. You can reach above average for a remake and still be way short of making something actually good.

*Best examples of this are The Thing, which took a 1950s scary movie and turned it into a bloody awesome gorefest and The Magnificent Seven, which took Samurai and made them cowboys.

[Disciple]

I think there's a good case for saying that remakes are bad by default. If you try to name the top ten worst remakes I guarantee, when you really get to thinking about it, you'll find ten is not nearly enough. There are dozens of really profoundly shitty remakes out there, often pretty big movies too.

I would suggest that maybe, if you're lucky, maybe one remake in ten isn't a complete steaming turd. Could easily think of ten shitty remakes for every one that was worth making though.

With that in mind the Ghostbusters remake was above average by remake standards, tried something new, bits of it worked, most didn't. That's the right approach to a remake, twist the formula, make it different*. That still puts it way above about 80% of other remakes. You can reach above average for a remake and still be way short of making something actually good.

*Best examples of this are The Thing, which took a 1950s scary movie and turned it into a bloody awesome gorefest and The Magnificent Seven, which took Samurai and made them cowboys.

I don't disagree with that in principle, but I think it's worth remembering that most of the really good remakes are now remembered as the "original" movie, with their predecessors quietly forgotten.

See: The Maltese Falcon, Casino Royale, The Wizard of Oz, Scarface, Invasion of the Body Snatchers...

[Dogfish]

I think there's a good case for saying that remakes are bad by default. If you try to name the top ten worst remakes I guarantee, when you really get to thinking about it, you'll find ten is not nearly enough. There are dozens of really profoundly shitty remakes out there, often pretty big movies too.

I would suggest that maybe, if you're lucky, maybe one remake in ten isn't a complete steaming turd. Could easily think of ten shitty remakes for every one that was worth making though.

With that in mind the Ghostbusters remake was above average by remake standards, tried something new, bits of it worked, most didn't. That's the right approach to a remake, twist the formula, make it different*. That still puts it way above about 80% of other remakes. You can reach above average for a remake and still be way short of making something actually good.

*Best examples of this are The Thing, which took a 1950s scary movie and turned it into a bloody awesome gorefest and The Magnificent Seven, which took Samurai and made them cowboys.

I don't disagree with that in principle, but I think it's worth remembering that most of the really good remakes are now remembered as the "original" movie, with their predecessors quietly forgotten.

See: The Maltese Falcon, Casino Royale, The Wizard of Oz, Scarface, Invasion of the Body Snatchers...

Definitely, but it's worth noting that almost completely without exception those are remakes of either bad or average films. When you've got people coming in saying we're going to remake classics, that's borderline impossible to do in a worthwhile way. Even things that have worked like Seven Samurai remade as Magnificent Seven or Battle Beyond the Stars are more retelling the story rather than remaking the movie.

I can think of plenty of movies I'd love to remake so they weren't shit, but when you start with a great movie it's mostly just an exercise on standing on the shoulders of giants and trying to mooch free PR and good will.

[Mr. X]

The Thing was a whole different movie. All it did was borrow the name and the location. Everything else was different. even the alien was different. As an example the later prequel sucked pretty bad. Carpenter's version introduced a virus vs some carrot monster.

[tallyho]

^^^ But the original Thing did have the brilliant exchange-

'Hey I just thought of something - what if it can read minds?'
'Well then its gonna be really annoyed when it gets to mine'

[Lurkndog]

I don't disagree with that in principle, but I think it's worth remembering that most of the really good remakes are now remembered as the "original" movie, with their predecessors quietly forgotten.

See: The Maltese Falcon, Casino Royale, The Wizard of Oz, Scarface, Invasion of the Body Snatchers...

Invasion of the Body Snatchers? I don't think the 70's remake holds a candle to the original. I found the San Francisco yuppies in the remake to be completely unlikeable. I didn't care if they got replaced, or just hit by a bus, so long as they were gone somehow.